Is Health Care a Constitutional Right?

Featured

A Constitutional Right to Health Care?

The assertion that we have a right to medical care is one of the pillars supporting the Affordable Care Act.  Not the sole pillar, but one of them.

Photo Courtesy Blue Ridge Community College, NC

As with all of our rights, it has to be built up from some source that is part of the foundation of the national edifice.  Being a democratic republic, as I understand it, we in the United States have two sources.  One is the Constitution, and the other is the statutory authority given the various levels of government both federal and state by the Constitution.

Do we have the Constitutional right to medical care?  Read More…

The Supreme Court and the ACA: The Ultimate Death Panel?

Featured

I started Extreme Thinkover in the fall of 2008.  The presidential race was in full swing.  Universal health care was one of the major topics that the candidates, media, and the public were debating.  One of my primary motivations for creating the blog was to have a forum in which to express my ideas about the health care debate.

I’ve worked in the health care industry for nearly 16 years and have daily contact with patients and families in the hospital.  I hear their stories, good and bad, about what these hospitalizations are doing to their lives.  Yes, what the hospitalization is doing to their lives.

Here in America, going to the hospital is not just about getting medical treatment; it’s also about entering a very broken and extremely expensive system. It nevertheless tries to limp along: In all fairness to the medical professionals who work very hard on behalf of their patients, in most cases, if you find yourself hospitalized, you get reasonably good medical care.

However, in the middle of this is an ongoing battle with the major health care players (hospital systems, health insurance, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment providers, etc.) all wanting to maximize their profits in an economic power race that too often is at the expense of the quality of care delivered to the patients who pay for their services, as well as forcing ever-increasing demands on their care givers to do more with less.  Admittedly, it doesn’t happen everywhere, but it is far too pervasive in Rube Goldberg “system” that passes for health care in America.

I wrote in fall 2008:

Here’s the question: What kind of treatment and medical care is needed so that all Americans can be healthy, or as healthy as possible?

That perhaps is not the question you expected to hear. The national conversation has focused on how much will it cost to provide all Americans with health insurance, how will the spiraling costs of health care be brought under control, will taxes have to be raised to pay for it, what will the roles of the health insurance industry, and the medical industries, and most of all the federal government be? Tough questions all around.

That question, “What kind of treatment and medical care is needed so that all Americans can be healthy, or as healthy as possible?” remains the key to a successful national health care program.  It also remains almost totally ignored by politicians, lobbyists, and, sadly the American public, none of whom have yet realized that without answering this question first, in my opinion, the debate about the cost cannot be resolved.  I contend this is why the health care law polls low for national support.

The current law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, passed in 2010, nibbles at the edges of what I think is essential, but it, also, is far too focused on trying to control medical costs.  And in case you are wondering, yes, I’ve read the law cover to cover.

Beginning Monday, March 26, the Supreme Court of the United States is going to hear arguments for and against the PPACA.  The primary question before the Court is whether Congress overstepped its authority regarding the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution by mandating all Americans (sort of) be required to purchase health insurance.  The debate is guaranteed to be rancorous, even in the sedate and forcibly polite setting of the Supreme Court.  The debate, though, once again is all about the money.  A healthy America will likely never even come up. The pundits will have a field day with this, without question, but I doubt any will see the fundamental flaw in all the arguments, based on my point of view.

Will the justices see past the smoke screen of political ideology, special interest group pressure, and inflammatory rhetoric that is fueling these proceedings?  If they do, and declare the law constitutional, there is hope that the ACA can continue to be refined, actually moving toward being a mechanism to support a healthier America.  If they don’t, by striking down all or parts of it, the Supreme Court will, for all intents and purposes, become the Ultimate Death Panel, condemning tens of millions of Americans to poor health, premature, and in some cases, an agonizing death because they will have been denied the right to even the most basic level of health care.  And that, tragically, just months before a law already on the books would have given them the care snatched away by the Supreme Court Death Panel.

Now we wait to see how this court rules on the fate of Americans’ health for generations to come.

The Thinkover:  When Patrick Henry uttered those iconic words, “Give me liberty or give me death!”  he wasn’t suggesting that death was preferred outcome of that stand for patriotism.  So far, the opponents of the ACA have been clueless to this obvious distinction in demanding “liberty” from the ACA mandate.

Extreme Thinkover Reaches 40,000-View Milestone

Featured

On March 7, 2012, Extreme Thinkover reached a great milestone by crossing the 40,000 views mark.  I want to express my appreciation to all my readers and subscribers, along with those who just happen to stop by and check out the blog.  Last year was an eventful year for me and I didn’t post as many articles as I have in past years.  But to those of you who have hung in there with me, I extend my special thanks!  So keep checking on the blog site.  There are some new plans in the offing that should not only generate more posts but also provide some great reading.

All my best,

David

P.S., Just for fun here are three photos of my vacation at Mt Wilson Observatory, near Pasadena, California.  And thanks to Bruce and Mimi for the invitation!

I'm standing next to the 60" Hale Telescope. It's over 30 feet tall. Photo Credit: John Bogen

When the Hale saw first light in December 1908, it was the largest telescope in the world. George Ellery Hale, who later financed the 200 inch Hale Telescope on Mt Palomar near Pasadena, named the telescope after himself.

This is the chair Albert Einstein sat in when he visited Mt Wilson on January 29, 1931. Note the hair. Photo Credit: John Bogen.

Einstein and the Senior Astronomers (Edwin Hubble is standing directly behind Einstein. Jan 29, 1931. Photo Courtesy of Mt Wilson Observatory.

A Memorial Tribute to My Mother

Featured

In Memoriam

Pauline Ann Waggoner

October 16, 1928 – January 26, 2012

Pauline "Polly" Waggoner

Pauline Ann (Polly) Waggoner, a native of Boise, Idaho, beloved mother, grandmother and friend, died on January 26, 2012.

Mom with Her Parents, Carl and Lucile Vocu. Photo taken about 1929.

Mom was born on October 16, 1928 to Carl and Lucile Vocu, and lived in Boise most of her life. She met her life-long love, Earl, at Boise High School. After graduating in 1946, she High School Graduation, 1946attended the former Boise Junior College. On September 21, 1947, she married J. Earl Waggoner. In those early years, she worked for the Retail Credit Union Company in Boise and then also in San Francisco while dad attended mortuary college. He graduated in 1952 and they returned to Boise. They lived briefly in Twin Falls, Idaho. After they returned to Boise, dad went to work for McBratney-Alden Funeral Chapel, which later became Alden-Waggoner.

Polly and Earl, Married 21 September, 1947.

They were baptized together in 1956 at the former Boise First Christian Church, now University Christian Church. They remained active members until their deaths, dad having passed away on August 14, 2006.

Mom and dad had three children: David, Scott and Beth Ann.  She also has four grandchildren, with a fifth on the way.  It breaks our hearts that that child will never have the chance to know mom in person.

The Waggoners, Easter, Probably 1966.

When we were growing up, mom was a homemaker, but after dad had a heart attack, she went to work with him in 1967 where she served as the Chapel’s office manager and bookkeeper. Both of our parents were very service-oriented.  Her interest in giving back to the community led to volunteering for many years on the Idaho State Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Advisory Board. She worked alongside dad at the chapel until her retirement in 1990.

Polly & Earl at the Funeral Chapel, 1973

During our elementary school years, mom volunteered at church, our school and in the community. She was past president of the Franklin Elementary School P.T.A. and Boise Jay-C-Ettes. She worked with Cub and Boy Scouts while dad was pack leader, as well as a church youth sponsor and chaperone for choir trips. Later on, she also served as a Deaconess, Church Clerk, Membership Department Chair and more recently, part of the Welcome Committee.

One of mom’s life’s joys was her Birthday Club, which started in 1961.  This group of ten women, since then, have held a monthly lunch-time gathering sharing their birthdays. It was one of the most important activities in her life and she rarely missed meeting with them. This loyalty was so typical of her personality and we see it as a tribute to the value of life-long relationships.

Mom and Beth on the Great Wall of China.

Mom and dad loved to travel, especially road trips. They regularly drove to California, Utah, and Oregon to see relatives, and from those visits we have a lifetime of cherished family memories (and nearly as many pictures–Mom and her camera were rarely separated).   On her first international adventure she flew to China while Beth was teaching English at a university in Shanghai.  It was a dream come true; she had wanted to

Mom & David Mazatlan, 2008

visit China all of her life. Scott, and his wife, Brenda, accompanied her on that expedition. Her second big international trip was a cruise to the Mexican Riviera to celebrate her 80th birthday.  The cruise’s staff gave her a delightfully special birthday party. David, his wife, Lorette, and granddaughter, Bethany, sponsored that trip.

Polly, With Her Ubiquitous FILM Camera, in Mazatlan, 2008.

Once dad retired, they took advantage of their new-found freedom. They bought a 5thwheel RV and and hit the road.  No short day-trips for them! Over several years of three-month-long treks, they visited every state in the continental US as well as several provinces in Canada, documented in mom’s extensive photo albums.  It would be remiss not to note that mom firmly resisted making the transition to digital photography.  She liked film, and had a fairly good eye for getting nice shots (We have been bemused over the fact mom passed away and Kodak declared bankruptcy within a month of each other). During the winter, mom and dad escaped the cold and sometimes harsh climate in Boise at a sunny and warm RV park in Cathedral City, California.

Mom and Scott at the Mariners' Stadium in Seattle

Besides traveling, mom was a voracious reader and sports fan.  It has been an ongoing joke in the family that while some people read books, she consumed them.  It was nothing for her to read three books a week, and that is perhaps a conservative estimate.  Do the math on that for over 70 years!  She also loved sports, although there was not an athletic bone in her petite frame.  Some of the earliest memories Scott and David have is her watching Monday night boxing announced by the inimitable sportscaster, Howard Cosell. Later, her sports interests shifted to football, baseball and golf. This was not idle time for her, however.  She could multitask with ease.  While watching the games she would knit, tat, or make one of dozens of afghans using the Swedish weaving method, which then she gave away.

Mom’s death closes a chapter on an amazing life that touched countless others across many decades.  She was a lady in the truest sense: gracious, gentle and patient. As a friend, she offered commitment and caring to essentially all of those she encountered. (She was aptly suited for that Church Welcome Committee!).  We, her children, find it easy to sing her praises and can’t imagine a better mother – and her grandchildren join in the song.

It is as a wife, however, that mom shone brightest and in that light we can learn from her on so many levels.  Don’t, however, think she was anything close to “the little woman.”  Nothing could be further from the truth.  She had a mind of her own and occasionally asserted what she called her “Bohemian stubborn streak.” (The Vocu family came to the United States from what was then Bohemia–now The Czech Republic–in the 1880s).

Polly & Earl...Really. About 1947.

Mom and dad, though, were a complete package when it came to their marriage.  To put it simply, they were crazy in love with each other for all 59 years they had together.  Through the storms of life, trials and triumphs, years of dad’s heart troubles, her own battle with breast cancer, and wherever the road might take them, their love remained strong and true.  On every anniversary or birthday, they signed cards to each other, “all my h.b.s.” (heart, body and soul).  Without question, her life and marriage stands as a testament to the epitome of what married life can be and model to all of us of what unwavering love can be–in all of our relationships.

Thanks, Polly—mother, grandmother, and friend—for  showing it is possible. We love you and miss you.

David, Scott, Beth Ann, and the rest of the Waggoner Clan.

∫ ∫ ∫

In Memoriam

This post was adapted from Polly’s obituary published in the Idaho Statesman.

Extreme Thinkover Protests SOPA/PIPA

Featured

I invite all of my subscribers and readers to visit Extreme Thinkover today to read the special text and view the video prepared by WordPress protesting passage of the pending SOPA/PIPA legislation.

Extreme Thinkover, like Wikipedia and thousands of other web and blog sites worldwide, will be blacked-out January 18, 2012, between 8:00 a.m and 8:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (that is 5:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m, or 05:00 and 17:00 Pacific Standard Time) as a part of the global protest to this egregious attack on the freedom of speech we enjoy through the Internet.

After you have looked at the material, I urge you to contact your legislators and ask them to defeat the SOPA/PIPA bill.  I will be contacting mine!

2011 In Review…And Thanks to All My Readers! Happy New Year!

Featured

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2011 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

The concert hall at the Syndey Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 10,000 times in 2011. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 4 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.

Click here to see the complete report.

Longest Night—An Introit For the Winter Solstice

Featured

Photo: Winter Country Road Mac Wallpapers

From eons past, upon the gathering gloom

And shade of this one evening, we tightly grasp

That three-strand cord held by our ancestors

From every shore and mount and plain

Upon this oceaned rock, who held in awe

The great fiery orb, which coursed above their heads;

Its light of such great concentration

No person dared stare into the brilliance

Of its face, for human eyes cannot bear

A moment’s glance into its searing countenance.

And yet…

From whose womb has come the ice?

And the frost of heaven, who has given it birth?

Water becomes hard like a stone,

And the surface of the deep is imprisoned.

(Job 38:29-30, NAS)

 A battle eternal seemed waged in the heavenly sphere

For the chariot of light and warmth and life

Did not cross the sky each day unchallenged, inviolable.

Some unseen hand pulled at its reins, with what intent?

What mystery was at work as day cascaded into night,

Warmth dissolving to coldness, light extinguished

By the dark, new lights piercing the growing shade,

A pale swath spilt cross the arch of the heavens, with

Streaks flashing across the heavenly vault, or ominous wraiths

Appearing unbidden with tails stretching across the vastness of the night?

One great traveler of the night, too, its crescent visor

Ever revealing and concealing its expression immutable, but for

Those nights when shining bright, it darkened to a mask blood red

The mountain is dark, the shadows cast over it,

All the sunbeams of eventide are gone,

With head held high the Sun has gone

To the bosom of … his mother.

(From “Gilgamesh and Huwawa”, circa 18th Century BCE; Trans: A. George)

As twilight turned to dawn—and dawn to day—

Our ancestors saw the blessed light of their abundance

Ever southward creep lower into the sky as one condemned.

The hand upon the rein, invisible, pulling down its midday transit,

Held, too, unyielding through the night, with what intent?

Earth’s breath chilled, life’s too, and with it, the embers

Of the human heart dimming with each shortening day.

Very day and very life faltered, trudging in the darkening mists,

Forced march toward the valley of the shadow of death.

The darkest day of mortals has caught up with you,

The solitary place of every mortal has caught up with you.

(From “The Death of Gilgamesh”, circa 18th Century BCE; Trans: A. George)

 Those shadows, too, cast longer as the

Light of day growing ever shorter, while

Night’s mantle weaving on a heavenly loom

Impenetrable to any ray of light or hope of warmth

A veil sweeping away the final rays of light

Into the absolute darkness of our sepulchered fate.

“I will cover the heavens and darken their stars;

I will cover the sun with a cloud,

And the moon shall not give its light.

All the shining lights in the heavens

I will darken over you

And I will set the darkness on your land,”

Declares the LORD God.

(Ezekiel 32:7b-8, NAS)

From eons past, upon the gathering gloom

And shade of this one evening, we tightly grasp

That three-strand cord held by our ancestors

From every shore and mount and plain

Upon this oceaned rock, who held in awe

The great fiery orb, which coursed above their heads.

In their wisdom, charting those celestial journeys,

The shadows not the light divulged the hand’s loosing grip of the solstick reins.

Out of the mysteries of the Sky’s inconstancies there yet

Was a music of the spheres, a great symphony of the heavens:

The great darkness of this longest night is a singularity.

Light has not been quenched, its warmth’s ember ne’er burned out

By Death’s chill, unchallenged. For upon the Dawn of morrow

With warming hearts and upturned faces we greet the Light reborn!


The Middle East: Once the Cradle, Now the Grave

Featured

The Cradle of Civilization.  Mesopotamia.  The Middle East.  I love its history.  I’ve read about it since I was a teenager.  My first trip to Europe in the summer of 1971, I was 18 years old and just graduated from high school.  Part of a Boise State University music tour, we visited the British Museum in London.  I headed right to the exhibition of the Royal Tomb of Ur.  I could have stayed there all day.
One face of the Standard of Ur.  British Museum, London

One face of the Standard of Ur. British Museum, London

(I have a neck tie with this motif woven into it I bought from the British Museum in 1995.  Beats the heck out of Paisley for my taste.)

Part of my fascination is grounded in my interest in biblical history in general.  My bachelor’s degree is in Biblical Studies, as well as having earned a Master of Divinity degree.  There are, however, many regions around the Holy Land and the Mediterranean in which I might have been attracted to.  For me it was Mesopotamia.  I’ve studied their ancient history, their pantheon of gods and goddesses.  Gilgamesh is my favorite hero-myth (who, by the way, was a historical figure, an actual king, ca. 2700 B.C.E.).  I’ve read it numerous times and have two of the most recently published translations on my bookshelf.

Gilgamesh and Enkidu slay the Bull of Heaven. Image from cylinder scroll.

Gilgamesh and Enkidu slay the Bull of Heaven. Image from cylinder scroll.

Today, what was ancient Babylon and Sumer sits in Iraq and Iran.  I have no illusion that I will live to visit either place in a time of peace.

The Cradle of Civilization has become a grave.

5000 years of nurturing the very essence of what it means to be human is being crushed by a simmering slag of hatred and revenge, a cycle of violence like magma pushing to the surface that may erupt erupt with the force of an atomic mushroom cloud.  Literally.

Roger Cohen, New York Times columnist, captured this virulent culture of revenge:

History is relentless. Sometimes its destructive gyre gets overcome: France and Germany freed themselves after 1945 from war’s cycle. So did Poland and Germany. China and Japan scarcely love each other but do business. Only in the Middle East do the dead rule.

Their demand for blood is, it seems, inexhaustible. Their graves will not be quieted. Since 1948 and Israel’s creation, retribution has reigned between the Jewish and Palestinian national movements.  (NYT, 7 Jan ’09)

Cohen’s insight is so deeply troubling in its truth.  The violence, this time between Israel and the Hamas-controlled Palestinians, defies all reason for common, everyday living; it defies everything the three Great Religions, which were born in this Cradle, teach about peace and how to treat one’s neighbors; and it defies the very essence of what it means to be human.   And that essence is that the living rule, not the dead.

Gilgamesh grieves over the death of Enkidu (whose demise was decreed by the gods) like today’s Middle East hard-liners and jihadists who wail and beat themselves over those killed by the godless.  Gilgamesh is so distraught he weeps by the corpse until maggots begin to crawl out of Enkidu’s rotting body, then vowing vengeance against the gods who robbed him of his most beloved companion, he sets out to bring them down from heaven itself. . .

Except that is not how the epic reads.  Gilgamesh is not bound forever in his grief over Enkidu’s death.  He does not engage in unending vengeance against his enemies. Given strength by the gods, he begins a quest for eternal life, and journeys to the home of Uta-napishti, the “Noah” of this Sumerian flood story, who with his wife, were the only two humans to survive.  And though Gilgamesh does not achieve physical eternal life, by the end of the quest he arguably is Homo sapiens modernum, Modern Man.  The dead do not rule his life.

(Homo sapiens modernum is my literary creation, not a paleontological species name.)

How then, do we understand the Rule of the Dead in the lands that gave us Gilgamesh?  How can that cycle be ended?  What will it take for the sword of atrocities to be broken, the blade shattered and unsalvageable, replaced by the Rule of the Living?  Gilgamesh lives in his myths, but his story, his true legacy to his living descendants has been lost.

Do not blame Moses, Jesus, or Muhammad.  Do not cite their words, writings or teachings as justification for these atrocities.  Unnamed millions have already been butchered over the course of 4000 years, in the name of and by the hand of followers of all three.  The LORD God Almighty/Allah weeps that even today, millions who call on his name, do so as they kill, destroy, and ravage the innocent.

As long as the Death rules the living in the cultures of the Middle East, be it national, religious, political, or an aggregation of all three,  Homo sapiens modernum, that great rock of civilization, is being blasted away by relentless, unforgiving sand storms of dogma and loathing. One day all that will be left of Gilgamesh’s legacy will be featureless desert, devoid of all life, of all humanity, the howling winds oblivious to the countless millions who once tried to live just one day up to the potential of humanness he achieved.  It will be all in vain.  On the fields of massacre the blood they shed will be blown into nothingness.

Homo sapiens modernum will be extinct.   The Middle East will be perfect.  Sinless.  An unspoiled holy land.  No desecration of sacred laws.  No infidels to attack.  No punishment for the reprobates.  No honor to be defended.  No vengeance to be paid.  No revenge to be meted out.  No need for forgiveness.  No God to be avenged.  Empty and dead.

No amount of oil will change the outcome.

The perfect war will be over.

And the fate of those who followed the rule of Death?  Perhaps it shall be this chilling image, recounted when Gilgamesh  goes to the Netherworld in search of Enkidu.

Gilgamesh: Did you see the one who cheated a god and swore an oath?

Enkidu: I saw him.

G: How does he fare?

E: He cannot get near the places in the Netherworld where the libations of water are made, he drinks in thirst.

G: Did you see the citizen of Girsu at the place of sighs of his father and mother?  (Girsu was a city-state in what is now Iraq.(1))

E: I saw him.

G: How does he fare?

E: Facing each man there are a thousand Amorites, his shade cannot push them off with his hands, he cannot charge them down with his chest. At the places in the Netherworlds where the libations of water are made, the Amorite take precedence. (2)

G: Did you see the sons of Sumer and Akkad? (3)

E: I saw them.

G: How do they fare?

E: They drink water from the place of a massacre, dirty water. (1)

This fate for the desert people of the Middle East who endlessly kill to proclaim the rule of the dead, to be denied water, the very stuff of life–first, for one’s blasphemy, second, to have to wait subserviently while foreigners drink first, and third, to be forced to drink filthy water in a place that is ritually soiled and impure for all eternity–is indeed the deepest level of Hell.

Gilgamesh is speaking.  Are we, all Homo sapiens modernum, capable of listening?

Gilgamesh and King Akka of Kish, ca. 18th Cent. B.C.E.

(1) Text: “Bilgames and the Netherworld,” in: Andrew, George (1999) The epic of Gilgamesh. New York: Barnes & Noble. p. 190. [Note: "Bilgames" is one variant of Gilgamesh.]

(2) This is a bit spooky–The Amorites are associated with the West, and their kingdom, ca. 2000-1600 B.C.E. encompassed  modern Syria, Jordan, Israel, the Palestine Authorities, Lebanon and NE Egypt.  Source: Wikipedia.

(3) Sumer, one of humanity’s most ancient regions dates from at least the 6th Century, B.C.E., and was clustered around the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, that flow through modern Turkey, Iraq and Iran. Its most famous city is Ur (in Iraq).  Akkad was a Sumerian city but later established Babylon (in Iraq) when its empire rose to power.  Source: Wikipedia.

God: Darwin got it right.

Featured

Update:  A day ago, I posted this blog with the title, “Perfect Scripture, Perfect Belief, Perfect Answer–A Parable.”  The more I thought about it, the more I realized I had come up with the perfect example of obscurity.  Obscurity can be intellectually satisfying at times, but, you know, if nobody gets it, as an author, I’m not getting it either.

The controversy between science and religion over evolution has been filled with a century and a half of heated debate.  It has been as contentious as any ideological issue in human history, a cultural war of biblical proportions. So I changed the title to one appropriate for Extreme Thinkover.

I got your attention, huh.  I dare you to read on!

There lived a people in a time in which the sky was constantly clouded.  The sun and the moon were never visible at all.  They knew nothing of the stars.  They were prosperous and devoted to God, who they believed had created all things.   The people studied the Scripture and found great comfort in the words.  For generations they taught their children that those words had been given directly to them by God, and that its description of the world was perfect.

One day a band of travelers came to the land and told of climbing to a place so high that the clouds became thin.  They described the sun and the moon as having light of unimagined beauty.  They claimed to have caught a glimpse of the sky by day in which there appeared a blueness beyond the clouds and by night a sprinkling of lights in velvet darkness.

The elders of the land called the people together and for many days they discussed what the travelers had told them.  Opening the scriptures, they studied what God had said about the earth and sky.  Daily they questioned the travelers, arguing with them, challenging them in every detail which they had reported.  The travelers, excited about what they had seen, retold their story over and over, and in the debate suggested that the Scriptures did not reveal everything that was possible about the world and the sky.

These words were received with shock and dismay by the Elders and the devout.  The idea that the Scriptures were not perfect in every detail was looked upon as being unthinkable.  God had given the writings directly to the people so they might perfectly understand what and how to believe.  And those words declared that the sky was cloudy and no other description of the sky was possible.

Finally the Elders and the people gathered to make a decision about what to do about the story the travelers were telling.  A few of the faithful wanted to go with the travelers to the high place and see for themselves, but this idea was met with great consternation by the Elders and the faithful because it gave assent to the notion that the travelers might be right and that would be in direct contradiction of the Scriptures.  Some left the assembly, however, and joined the travelers.

After long discussion the Elders and the faithful came to a decision.  They must live their lives in such a way that there could never be the remotest chance that they would have to deal with heretical unbelievers again.  So, the people began to excavate huge caverns under the hills in which to live.  Being very clever, they built cities and farms to sustain themselves into the future.  The Elders were pleased with this because they knew that now they could teach the scriptures perfectly that the sky was always cloudy, for in their great caverns, their “sky” would never change and they could say with complete honesty that the only sky any of the faithful had ever seen outside the cavern was cloudy.  This was the word of God and it would remain perfect.

So, with great celebration the Elders and the faithful marched into their caverns and sealed the entrance, confident that they had defended their faith and their God against unspeakable heresy.

^^^^^^^^^^

Today is the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth.  This year, 2009, is the 400th anniversary of the official invention of the telescope, in 1609.  2009 is also the 30th year since my ordination to ministry.

I actually wrote the Parable in 1998, a point in time when various fundamentalist Christians were attempting to force school boards (in Kansas, if I remember accurately) to teach “scientific creationism” or “intelligent design” as scientifically equivalent alternatives to evolution in biology, geology and astronomy.  Although some of those battles are still going on (Texas being in the news most recently), the higher courts have refused to rule in favor of the creationists.

That is good. The brilliance of God’s ultimate cleverness in creating the universe is not a topic for the scientific method, scrutiny and modification.

Discovering the mechanisms of that cleverness, however, is.  I recommend my readers visit the website for the American Scientific Affiliation which is devoted to dialogue among people of faith regarding science and religion.  The views below, although linked to ASA, are mine alone.

Scientific creationism is wrong because astronomy, astrophysics and quantum mechanics have discovered the mechanisms of the universe are very old and very large.

Intelligent design is wrong, because of not only what astronomy has taught us, but when integrated with geology and molecular biology and genomics, the mechanisms of the universe are based on explaining simplicity not complexity.

Both are wrong in insisting Biblical scripture is the final word on understanding God’s ultimate cleverness in creation, because if that is so, then every “scientific” discovery of those natural mechanisms, by which this universe operates from that cleverness, can lead to only one conclusion: God lied to us by creating a universe that we cannot perceive.

What does that leave us with?  After 150 years of debate since Darwin published, Origin of Species (which, yes, I have read), the concept of evolution, of change through time, the evolution of the universe, the evolution of galaxies, the evolution of stars and solar systems, the evolution of matter and energy, the evolution of atmospheric and geological forces on our planet, correctly describes the forces and the physical nature of what we perceive.

And life?  What turned on life?  And did life turn on only here on Earth?  Those are honest questions with no definitive answers.  Yet.

But once life appeared, it participated in the evolutionary engines that run the universe.  We find life folded into the evolutionary record of our planet into the past for at least 3.5 billion years.  Comings and goings.  Expansions and extinctions.  Changes and setbacks.  Life in the fossil record is always made of the same stuff.  Star stuff.  Carbon based life forms.  From the microscopic to the huge.  Complexity out of simplicity.  Changing size, changing form.  Cleverness out of cleverness, ever adapting.  Made of star stuff; feeding on star stuff; living on star stuff.  Dying.  Dying?

Then, us.  You.  Me.  All of us.  Apparently late in the process.  No, not late, just recent.  Recent by the way we regard the universe.

Now, that’s clever.  We regard the universe.  Even if life is seeded throughout the billions of galaxies we can now see with our telescopes, as common as ants are here, there is nothing apparent in the structure of the universe that predicts one species of that life would be able to regard the universe.  We can think about thinking.  That self-awareness that there is “I” and “Not I” and I can tell the difference, and here’s the really clever part, “I” can think about what “Not I” means.  Okay, I know I’m beginning to sound like Martin Buber.

What then, do I believe about creation?  First, I believe that God did not lie to us and create us unable to accurately perceive the universe he created for us.  Second,  being Ultimately Clever, I believe God expects us to pay attention to the universe he created, since through whatever mechanism embodied in his Word, we have the consciousness to believe in God and ask the question, where did we come from?

In the contemporary debate over creation and evolution, a new perspective is emerging in this century and a half old debate.  The term (which, I don’t find all that attractive, but it will do for now) is “theistic evolution.”

The most articulate proponent of theistic evolution is Dr. Francis Collins, former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute.  Dr. Collins and his team mapped the human genome, and revolutionized our understanding of both life and human life in particular.  I share his comments from a Time Magazine interview, February 12, 2009, reprinted on the website, Beliefnet.com:

I see no conflict in what the Bible tells me about God and what science tells me about nature. Like St. Augustine in A.D. 400, I do not find the wording of Genesis 1 and 2 to suggest a scientific textbook but a powerful and poetic description of God’s intentions in creating the universe. The mechanism of creation is left unspecified. If God, who is all powerful and who is not limited by space and time, chose to use the mechanism of evolution to create you and me, who are we to say that wasn’t an absolutely elegant plan? And if God has now given us the intelligence and the opportunity to discover his methods, that is something to celebrate.

I lead the Human Genome Project, which has now revealed all of the 3 billion letters of our own DNA instruction book. I am also a Christian. For me scientific discovery is also an occasion of worship.

Nearly all working biologists accept that the principles of variation and natural selection explain how multiple species evolved from a common ancestor over very long periods of time. I find no compelling examples that this process is insufficient to explain the rich variety of life forms present on this planet. While no one could claim yet to have ferreted out every detail of how evolution works, I do not see any significant “gaps” in the progressive development of life’s complex structures that would require divine intervention. In any case, efforts to insert God into the gaps of contemporary human understanding of nature have not fared well in the past, and we should be careful not to do that now.

Science’s tools will never prove or disprove God’s existence. For me the fundamental answers about the meaning of life come not from science but from a consideration of the origins of our uniquely human sense of right and wrong, and from the historical record of Christ’s life on Earth.

The parable I wrote in 1998, ended with the Elders and the faithful closing themselves up in the great caverns they had constructed to protect their absolute beliefs from ever being challenged again.  What I failed to do was write the ending to those who followed the travelers:

The travelers led the faithful remnant to the place where they had seen the clouds part.  They mostly walked in silence.  The faithful had doubts they had chosen the right path.  Some wondered if they returned to the place they had lived if the Elders would let them in again.  A few turned back.  A few saw a road to a place that looked promising, where the land was rich with food and water, and they took that way.  Those who remained with the travelers read daily from their scriptures and pondered the stories.  Each night they asked the travelers questions about how such a thing could be.  The travelers shared what they knew and admitted what they did not.  Each morning they walked higher into the wilderness.

They arrived at the place, a small plateau, late in the afternoon and made camp.  The sky was cloudy.    Below them in the distance they could see a blanket of clouds covering the land from which they had journeyed.  But the sky above them was solid grey.  That night around the fire, the faithful questioned the travelers hard and long.  Had they been deceived?  Had they given up their very lives for a lie?  The travelers’ urging for patience, that they too had been at the place for some time before they saw the sky, was little consolation.  Weary from their trek, they agreed to wait, to rest a week, as was their custom, and if nothing happened they would leave.

The first two days, the rains came.  The whole party sat huddled, chilled in their tents, trying to nurse their fires to keep burning for a little relief from the wet.  Few words were spoken.  The faithful and the travelers kept to themselves, the mood dismal, the day, gloomy.

Then the wind came up, strong, biting, whipping at the tents and all had to scramble to secure them from being ripped from the lines and blown over the edge of the plateau.  The gusts seemed to grow stronger with every passing minute.  One tent caught fire from embers blown into it.  Faithful and travelers alike rushed to beat it out and rescue the people caught inside.

Without warning, the wind calmed.  They stamped on the burning tent to kill the flames.  And then, a brilliant flash erupted, driving everyone face down into the mud. For an eternity, it seemed, blinding silence.  The smell of smoke gone.  A growing warmth upon their backs.

The voice of one traveler broke the silence, “The sky, look at the light in the sky!”

Universal Health Care: An Asinine Idea?

Featured

In today’s Sunday Edition of the Register Guard “Letters to the Editor,” Mr. Oral Robbins of Eugene, Oregon writes,

It is amusing to read some of the stuff that these ideological, philosophical people write — at least it is to this stupid old codger, who has lived through most of what they write about.

Fair enough.  Mr. Robbins, who states he is 77 years old, has seen a lot of history and has a lifetime of experiences from which he can reflect on.  He goes on to say “…we approve a project of public need that a private enterprise cannot supply, then by consent of the electorate we supply the funds needed.”  Okay, so he’s not quite the “stupid old codger” he claims.  Give him a point for literary irony.

His next statement, however, is chilling:

The idea of universal health care is one of the most asinine ideas being promoted by those in political power today, that and the bailing out of those individuals who borrowed money to purchase items they never had any intention of ever paying for.

As a hospital chaplain, I wish it were possible for all the Mr. Robbins in the country to spend one day with me and meet his neighbors who do not have health insurance, to hear their stories of how that  lack has in countless ways created barriers or has denied them their right to live as healthy, productive, hard-working, taxpaying Americans. It’s not amusing.

Mr. Robbins makes no differentiation between the Economic Stimulus programs and the need for universal health care.  In his mind it is all “tax and spend.”  I deliberately reversed the order in which he stated his objection.  His equation of the two “ideas” is a huge problem, not only because millions of Americans believe exactly the same way, but because as an issue of human, and dare we say constitutional rights, I assert the two are distinct.

Mr. Robbins, through the tunnel vision of his own ideological philosophy, fails to realize that he contradicts himself with regard to universal health care.  The fact is, private enterprise cannot and has never been able to supply the public need for medical insurance.  And he is probably a perfect example.  I am certain that, being retired and at age seventy-seven years, he is on Medicare, America’s universal health care plan for seniors and the disabled.  Without it, he and his wife would not be able to afford private health insurance.  To deny him and his wife that care would be truly asinine.

The benefit of universal health care in the modern era would have produced a very different America: Trillions of dollars in medical debts would have been avoided.  Trillions of dollars in uncompensated care by hospitals would have been avoided.  Trillions of dollars in unnecessary and wasteful medical expenses created by the broken health care system would have been avoided.  Trillions of dollars of lost productivity to private enterprise companies would have been avoided.  Trillions of dollars of wages would have been created and sustained.  Trillions of dollars for appropriate public state and federal projects would have been paid through the taxes of a healthy America.

I wish it were possible for Mr. Robbins to spend just one day with me talking to his neighbors who have no health insurance.

Amputating the Soul

Featured

This post has been redacted and censored to comply with my employer’s Social Media Policy as of Nov. 1, 2010.  All references to my place of work and the system it is part of, as well as photos have been removed.  This action appears to be only recourse I have to preserve my Constitutional rights to free speech and the free expression of my views on Extreme Thinkover.

A letter I sent to Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), chair of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee and advocate for universal health care.  His health care plan is available by clicking on the header “Call to Action” above.

Dear Sen. Baucus,

This week the Clinical Pastoral Education Center at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy fell victim to the economic recession.  CPE centers nationwide, accredited by the Association for Clinical Pastoral Education (ACPE) are the training sites for chaplains for hospitals, the military, prisons, hospices, and other institutions.  ACPE certification (which includes the Association of Professional Chaplains, National Association of Catholic Chaplains, National Association of Jewish Chaplains, as well) is almost universally required for employment for these important ministries.

ACPE accreditation is not easy to get.  In fact, the state of Montana does not have a certified CPE training site at this time.

I was part of the team beginning in 2001 that worked for over two years to get Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy accepted as a CPE training site.  We began our program six years ago.  The first two years we were on probation, but were then granted full accreditation in 2005.

Our center quickly became recognized as the new place to train.  The past two years we have been able to be selective, turning away more applicants than our program could handle (which is six students per unit), and even had international students work in the program.  We had applicants already applying for the 2010-2011 school year.

On Monday (March 9) our administration announced, along with other major cuts, that the CPE program would be eliminated.  As of now, our budgetary shortfall stands at $17-20 million for FY09.  Our uncompensated care last year (FY08) was $66 million.  We are over $1.4 million ahead of that pace as of the end of February.

Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy. County’s unemployment rate hit 12% this month (Monaco RV was one of our major industries).  South of us, Douglas County is reportedly pushing 16% unemployment.  Tens of thousands of newly unemployed people no longer have any health insurance.  Only a tiny fraction will have the resources to afford COBRA.

Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy in southwest Oregon south to the California border are making huge cuts in staff and programs. (Portland’s situation is somewhat better, but deteriorating, e.g. Oregon Health and Sciences University is making draconian cuts to survive).

Every day, hundreds of newly unemployed, now newly uninsured Oregonians face the frightening reality of trying to access America’s terminally ill health care “system.”  Just like Montana.  Just like, well, everywhere in America.

They’ll come to us.  We’ll treat them.  Everyone who comes through our door.  But what will our uncompensated care come to this year?  $80 million?  $100 million?

And as for CPE?  Well, Medicare classifies it as “overhead.”  That’s good news, in one respect, because Medicare reimburses the hospital for each Chaplain intern based on the percentage of Medicare patients we treat as in-patients, which in our case was about 40%.  But it wasn’t enough.  We are losing three staff members, as well as the six students that worked daily with us ministering to patients on their assigned medical units.

But, when hospitals face making the most painful cuts, programs like CPE are vulnerable.  The unintended consequences are placed on the furthest burner back.  We are at war.  One of our staff chaplains just went back on to active duty.  We not only cannot replace him, we cannot train someone who might replace him.  There is a tipping point here.  Here at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy we just crossed it.  We aren’t the first hospital to face that, nor will we be the last.

Let me share something about what hospital chaplains do.  We don’t wander about the halls patting hands and saying little prayers.  We step into the shadows with our patients, those places of their darkest fears, the thin fabric of their lives, where the veil between life and death is almost transparent.  And when that veil tears, we stand in that darkness holding a light.  A light for the dying so they know they are not alone.  A light for the living to guide them on the new path they must walk.  That is spiritual care.

Calling.  Passion.  Training.  This is what chaplains are in the hospitals, the armed forces, the prisons, hospices.

And now there is one less place to train.

I remember learning in school that justice delayed is justice denied.  I now believe, too, the right to health care delayed or barred by preconditions is the right to health care denied.

Please, Senator.  We need your health care plan.  Now.

Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy
–CPE: Our Light Diminished.

This Photo is dedicated to all the staff and students who made Clinical Pastoral Education at Sacred Heart Medical Center the truest part of our mission of healing and compassionate care.  Our Light is diminished. May the Divine brighten yours!

This Photo is dedicated to all the staff and students who made Clinical Pastoral Education at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy the truest part of our mission of healing and compassionate care. Our Light is diminished. May the Divine brighten yours!

Soul’s Phoenix

Featured

This post has been redacted and censored to comply with my employer’s Social Media Policy effective Nov. 1, 2010.  This action appears the only recourse I have to preserve my Constitutional rights to free speech and free expression of my views on Extreme Thinkover.

In my post on March 12 I shared a letter that I had sent to Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) chair of the U.S. Senate’s Finance Committee and champion of health care reform, regarding the closing of the Clinical Pastoral Education Program at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy

Clinical Pastoral Education (CPE) is the national clinical ministry program that trains chaplains for hospitals, the military, prisons, hospice and other institutions.  Accreditation is difficult to obtain.  The standards for education are high, and the accountability is thorough.  CPE programs nationwide face similar uncertainty as the disaster in the economy collides with the disaster that is the American health care system.

Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy CPE program was a victim of that collision.

But sometimes very smart people with a driving sense of mission can find creative solutions.

And, this time, that sometime happened.

There’s a qualifier.  The reason the program was cut is that Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy, faced with an economy so bad our budget deficit is projected at $17 million, as well as, likely unprecedented uncompensated care expenses that could easily hit $70 million, has been forced to make acute action cutting staff and programs.  Colleagues we have worked with for years.  Programs that promote healing and compassionate care that have to be cut way back or eliminated.

The unemployment rate in Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy County where our hospital is located hit 12% percent in February, and Douglas County, just to the south of us, hit 18%.

So, nothing has changed.

Except the creativity and dedication of some very smart people (I commend them; I wasn’t directly involved).  After the initial decision was made, one key fact kept nagging at the Administration.  CPE had become so integrated into the spiritual care services provided daily by we who are chaplains, and was such a proven asset to our mission and care of patients, we just could not cut it off.  They rolled up their sleeves and went back to the drawing board.  They were able to save the program and meet the needed financial savings.

CPE will continue at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy.  Changes had to made, of course.  Our program will now be be shifted to what is called “extended units” rather than full time, 20 hours per week rather than 40.  Three or four students, not our current six.  We still lose two of our close colleagues.

And guard against the inevitable organizational hazard of a hyena or two, stalking, plotting and hoping for failure and a meal.

These are the consequences of the economic trauma, inside and outside the organization.

We are not terminal.  Our CPE program and the fine people who comprise it will regain strength, providing a superior clinical education just as we have for the past six years.  And, too, we will plan to return to a full-time program as soon as the hospital can support it.

In the meantime, our mission as chaplains is to provide spiritual support and care to the patients who come through our doors.  We have work to do.

Cheney: Violating the Code of Ethics for Retired Ministers…And the Tradition of Respect Held Sacred by Former U.S. Chief Executives

Featured

Every professional association that I have belonged to has a Code of Ethics.  It is one of the hallmarks that not only defines what the profession stands for but also guarantees to the public, whether customer, client, patient, parishioner or whomever, the standard by which that professional will act with integrity.

In light of recent comments by former vice president Dick Cheney blasting the new administration’s policies on national security, I wondered if there was a Code of Ethics that applies to the the nation’s two top executives?

In an interview on CNN (quoted in the NY Times), Mr Cheney said,cheney-snarl

“He is making some choices that, in my mind, will, in fact, raise the risk to the American people of another attack,” Mr. Cheney said of Mr. Obama in an interview on the CNN program “State of the Union.”

UPDATE:  March 29, 2009:  Today, on the CNN Political Ticker website both U.S. Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke and Gen. David Patraeus take issue with Cheney’s inappropriate comments and breach of professional ethics by spouting off about the Obama administration’s changes on national security.

UPDATE #2: March 29, 2009:  The fallout from Dick Cheney’s unethical criticism of the Obama administration continues to generate backlash.  Former President Bush made this statement in response to a question about Cheney’s remarks:

“He deserves my silence. I love my country a lot more than I love politics. I think it is essential that he be helped in office.”

I spent an evening Googling and scouring Wikipedia, but came up with, well, not a thing.  Now,  maybe I missed it; and there are laws that apply to federal employees.  Just about every state in the Union has a code of Ethics for its Executive Branch.  President Obama signed into law a new code for his administration in January.  And, of course, there is the United States Constitution, but we all know that Cheney never let a little thing like that interfere with anything he decided he was right about.

But a code of ethics that applies specifically to the president and vice president of the United States apparently has never been written. (If there is a code of ethics either historically enforced, or currently in place, not including Obama’s new one, I’d love to read it.  Send it to me!).

You might ask, “So what?”  As an ordained minister, one of the conditions of my standing with my church, the Disciples of Christ, I have to abide by a Ministerial Code of Ethics.  All major denominations have such codes.  That code is structured so the pastor not only ministers in an ethical manner during the time he or she is serving a congregation, but also after the person has left to serve another local church or retired from active service.  Pastors develop a strong rapport with their members, and when they leave to work at another church, even if it is one across town, the pastor is responsible for maintaining the professional boundaries so the new minister can work freely to develop a new trust and rapport with the church.

The same principle is true for when a minister retires.  While I was in seminary, I was the youth minister for a church whose senior pastor had retired after over thirty years at that church.  Even though the church was located in a city of nearly three million people and the retired minister moved to another part of town, he did not set up and strictly abide by those ethical boundaries.  The new senior pastor, with whom I worked, was constantly having to “defend” his actions to those members who were calling the old pastor and getting a sympathetic ear.  It was a lose-lose situation.  A year after I had graduated from seminary, the church fired the senior minister.  In all honesty, he never had a chance to succeed.

Here are the two statements that are relevant to this discussion from the Ministerial Code of Ethics:

  • supporting and at no time speaking maliciously of the ministry of my predecessor or another minister in the congregation in which I hold membership;
  • encouraging the ministry of my successor upon my retirement or other departure from a ministry position, without interfering or intruding, and by making it clear to former parishioners that I am no longer their pastor.

With these two precepts so deeply engrained in my professional life, I find Mr. Cheney’s statements inexcuseable.  Because I believe he so blatantly violated the trust of the American people in his open disdain for the United States Constituion, as well  as the Oath of Office he took as Vice President, in his retirement, he should remain silenced for the rest of his life.  He has violated the Code of Ethics by both interfering and intruding with the actions of his successors.  He is no longer our vice president and I thank God he was never our pastor.

Fiat and Chrysler Merge??!! Will NASCAR run the Mille Miglia?

Featured

Header Photo: 1960 Fiat 1100B.  Notice the “suicide” front door handles.
One May Love Beer and the Other Wine, But, Oh, Do They Love Their Automobiles!

Americans May Love Beer and the Italians Wine, But, Oh, Do We Love Our Automobiles!

Holy MOPAR, Batman!  Fix It Again Tony!  If I had been asked to guess which international automaker the Obama administration would instruct Chrysler to join forces with to survive, perhaps to one day again be profitable, I wouldn’t have guessed the legendary Italian carmaker, FIAT (I use caps here, because, it originally was an acronym of  Fabbrica Italiana Automobili Torino: Italian Automobile Factory of Turin).  Fiat has been around for a long time, being founded in 1899.  Fiat has been always been known for its small cars, even though it does have a major truck division, along with with major farm implements, etc., etc.

Over the years, Fiat has produced some fine cars of note, even if they were only known in Europe.  They withdrew from the American market in 1983.  Between 1967 and 2008, Fiat was awarded European Car of the Year thirteen times.

Of those cars, I find the 2006 Alfa Romeo (Fiat’s sport division) very attractive.  Small, but well styled:

Alfa Romea 156 Selespeed, 2006 European Car of the Year

Alfa Romea 156 Selespeed, 2006 European Car of the Year

Once word of a Chrysler/Fiat merger hit the international media, this announcement, of course, or should we say thank the Stig, did not escape the notice of the guys at Top Gear:

With operations throughout Europe, Asia, Africa and South America, Fiat has vast resources and small car expertise. The Fiat 500 is one of the hottest cars in Europe, winning European Car of the Year for 2008, and the company wants to bring the car to our shores; initial reports indicate that Fiat plans to retool existing American Chrysler plants and sell it here. We say “non vediamo l’ora” and bring us the Abarth!

Fiat 500 Abarth 2008

Fiat 500 Abarth 2008

The Abarth is a performance model of Fiat 500. The 1.4L engine with IHI RHF3-P turbocharger is rated 135 PS (133 hp/99 kW) at 5500 rpm and 180 N·m (133 lb·ft) (206 N·m (152 lb·ft) in sport mode) torque at 3000 rpm. It includes 5-speed C510 transmission, low ride suspension, dualdrive electric power steering with SPORT setting, 6.5 x 16” aluminium alloy rim with 195/45 R16 tyres, 4-wheel disc brakes (front ventilated). Interior includes turbo pressure gauge, Gear Shift Indicator, aluminium foot pedals, Blue&Me MAP with Telemetry monitoring and GPS system.  Source: Wikipedia

Okay, I look forward as much as the next gear-head to the Stig (some say that he secretly keeps a ’70 Plymouth Superbird under a tarp in his garage and that he made Jeremy promise to never call it “rubbish.”) blasting around the Top Gear track in a hot set of wheels with a Five-Point star stamped into the valve covers of it’s 5-Litre motor putting out 600 brake horsepower getting 35 miles per gallon.  Let’s just hope it does not, and I mean DOES NOT look like the Fiat 500 Abarth.

Now, it’s disclosure time.  I owned a Fiat.  Yep, Lorette and I bought a brand-spankin’ new 1979 Fiat 131 Brava while we lived in Fort Worth, Texas, my last year in seminary.  Two liter, twin overhead cam engine, five speed, and a snappy clutch.  I loved that car, especially because it replaced a 1974 Ford Pinto station wagon with “country squire” fake wood vinyl siding.  When you shifted from fifth to third, and put your foot in it, something actually happened “accelerationwise” with that pretty Fiat exhaust putter that sang all the way up to the redline.

Fiat Brava 1979 Ad

Fiat Brava 1979 Ad

The ad above was a cleverly disguised code that only the likes of Ralph Nader and Joan Claybrook believed during the dark years of the 55 MPH national speed limit.  Relaxed?  In third gear, the engine wasn’t even breathing hard when it blasted through 55.  Fourth redlined something over 80.  Relaxed, my….

Yeah, baby.  Here’s what my Brava looked like, with the “champaign” paint job:

Fiat Brava 4D 1980

Fiat Brava 4D 1980

The only difference I can discern, between my ’79 and this 1980, is the wheels.  If I actually can dig out a picture of my Brava, I’ll replace this one.  It’ll be like old times.  Replacing part after part after part, like the time the distributor cap cracked in Tillamook, Oregon on a trip with several other ministers to check out a site for a church camp.  On a Friday afternoon…but that’s another story.

Anyway, in the real world, only time will tell if this is a match made in heaven or if our esteemed colleagues in the White House should have chosen BMW, Audi, or even, believe it or not, Hyundai.  I’d love to see Chrysler survive (not to diss Ford or Toyota, by any means).  I just hate to have to watch those snooty Chevy commercials every time one of their cars wins a NASCAR race.

By the way, 30 years later I still like cars with names that are acronyms:

Vorsprung durch Teknik  audi-rings-wet-copy


Serenity Movie Revision: Saving Wash’s Life

Featured

I’ve been writing a lot of serious topics lately, so I decided to lighten up a bit…well…in this case, a lot.  I’m a fan of the unjustly truncated TV series, Firefly, and the subsequent movie, Serenity.  I bought the series on DVD, as well as the movie.  Probably have watched every episode 5-10 times.  Aside from all the unsolved mysteries from the series, in the movie, one part of the plot always has eaten at me.   The fact Joss Whedon (the series creator and producer), decided in the movie to kill off both Wash and Shepherd Book just bugs me.  Finally, one evening after watching Serenity yet again, the proverbial light bulb went on, and I had the solution.

Cast of Firefly and the movie Serenity

Cast of Firefly and the movie Serenity

Some background.  I’ve been a science fiction fan, well, just about as long as I’ve been able to read.  Started out going to the local drug store and spending my hard-earned allowance (50 cents a week!) and agonizing over which Tom Swift, Jr., book to buy.  I was sure I could solve the real engineering for the “repelatron.”  Fast forward a few years and one day I wandered by the paperback rack and one word caught my attention: “Foundation.”  I never looked back.

Serenity: A Fan’s Vision and Re-Vision

“We’re still flyin.’”-Mal

Spaceship Serenity from Firefly TV Series and the movie, Serenity

Spaceship Serenity from Firefly TV Series and the movie, Serenity

My re-vision of the Serenity plot line.  Sorry, Joss, I just couldn’t get over that you killed both Book and Wash.  One, okay. It’s a dangerous ‘verse out there.  Just not two.  It closes the end of the story too tightly.  I had to choose one or the other, so I chose Wash.  So, here’s my rewrite of the scene when Wash crash lands “Serenity” on Mr. Universe’s planet.

Wash weaves Serenity through the chaotic battle between the Alliance Forces and the Reavers.  Jayne comes to the rear of the bridge.  Mal says “No, no, no!” Wash says, “Yes, yes.”  Another piece of debris hits the ship.  Jayne is slammed against the bulkhead and is knocked out, blood gushing from his scalp.  Mal grabs the com and yells for Simon.  Simon runs to the bridge with his medkit and appears just as Zoe says, “We’re not alone!”  Simon kneels to tend to Jayne, who though dazed is trying to pull himself up.

When Serenity is hit by the Reaver’s EMP blast, Mal grabs the mike and says, “Everybody strap in,” and then he turns to Simon and says, “Doc!”  Simon says “Right away!” and rushes to the engine room to pull Kaylee away from her fire extinguishing effort.  Simon gets her strapped in, gets the others checked and then runs back to the bridge.  Kaylee and River both scream “Simon!”  Jayne is frantically using his belt to secure himself to the bulkhead and grabs Simon to the floor just as the ship begins to go into the flat spin.

As Serenity crashes, sliding down the runway, throwing sparks, slamming up and down repeatedly, Simon and Jayne are thrown about like bowling pins but somehow manage to hold on to each other.

When the ship comes to a halt, Mal looks back at Zoe and at Jayne and Simon, who are untangling themselves, splattered with the blood from the cut on Jayne’s head.

After uttering his line, “I’m a leaf on the wind,” Wash gets impaled by the Reaver’s giant spear.  Zoe rushes from her seat to Wash, telling him “We gotta go, Baby!”  Simon pushes himself up to Wash next to the distraught Zoe.  Jayne is still sitting on the deck with a bandage held to his head but starting to pull himself up when the second set of spears smash into the bridge.

Mal pulls Zoe from the bridge, both believing Wash is dead.  Simon leans forward over Wash’s shoulder and a light comes on his brilliant medical brain.  Mal yells at Jayne, “Come on!  Get your stuff!” but Jayne, still a little rattled is slow to respond.  Simon looks at Jayne and says, “Jayne, get the chainsaw!”

Jayne, not really understanding what has happened to Wash from his vantage point on the rear deck of the bridge, plus being still fuzzy, bolts down the passageway, grabs a chainsaw and is back on the bridge in just moments.  Sliding to a stop next to the impaled Wash, Jayne realizes for the first time what has happened, but Simon grabs the saw from him, yelling at Jayne to wrap his arms around Wash’s body as he cuts first the spear from the back of the pilot’s seat and then in a single motion, wheels the saw over Wash and Jayne’s head and slices through the front, leaving Wash with just a plug through his torso.

Simon yells to Jayne, “Pull him from the chair but don’t let the plug fall out!  We’ve got to get him into River’s cryochamber.  His body’s in shock but his cells are all still alive.  If we can get him into stasis fast enough, I might be able to save him!”

Jayne, with that “Jayne” look of skepticism, almost hesitates, but he looks first at Wash and then at Simon, and grunts, “Does he have to be naked for it to work?” as he slings Wash’s limp body over his shoulder and heads to the cargo hold.  They then join the others in the defense chamber.

After the fight with the Reavers, and the Operative’s order to stand down, Wash, along with the others, is patched up, though the dialogue could convey that his near-death experience has changed him.  Think of the possibilities!

Wash with Serenity.  Movie promo poster

Wash with Serenity. Movie promo poster

See, Joss, that wasn’t so hard.  And you’ve options for a sequel.

Photo Credits:  Universal Pictures (C) 2005.

Updated–Before Columbine: Remembering the Thurston High Shootings

Featured

This post has been redacted and censored to comply with my employer’s Social Media Policy as of Nov. 1, 2010.  All references to my place of work and its health care system, as well as photos have been removed.  This action appears to be only recourse I have to preserve my Constitutional rights to free speech and the free expression of my views on Extreme Thinkover.

 

UPDATE:  I did a little more research and found on Wikipedia a list of nearly every school shooting documented worldwide since the 1966 University of Texas massacre of 17 students: History of School Shootings Worldwide.

Today is the tenth anniversary of the shootings at Columbine High School, a terrible, horrific act of murder and mayhem by two students who shot down twelve of their classmates and one teacher in cold blood, wounding twenty-three others before they took their own lives.

Kip Kinkel.  Photo Credit: AP

Kip Kinkel. Photo Credit: AP

But before Columbine, in May of 1998, there was the shootings at Thurston High School in Springfield, Oregon.  The shooter, Kip Kinkel, murdered his parents the night before he went to school that morning, and in a manner of minutes killed two of his classmates and wounded 23 others.  One of those wounded wrestled him to the ground, cutting short the attack and denying him the chance to kill himself.  Kinkel was found to be incompetent to stand trial and will spend the rest of his life as an inmate at the Oregon State Hospital for the Mentally Ill.

We should never forget Columbine.  But I will always remember Thurston.  I was there at the hospital that morning.

A Wounded Thurston Student Being Assisted to an Ambulance

A Wounded Thurston Student Being Assisted to an Ambulance

What follows is my account of that horrendous day, originally presented at a regional event of my church for high school students in August 1999.  The theme was “Odysseys.”

 

Call of the Unbidden, Unwanted Odyssey: The Thurston Shootings

About a year and a half ago I was getting up at 4:30 in the morning to be at work at 6:00 a.m.  You see, hospital time and time in the real world are two entirely different things.  For reasons that are lost in the mists of ancient history, doctors, and especially surgeons, like to get started very early in the day.  What does that have to do with me?  I was the chaplain assigned to the Short Stay Unit, the place where people go to have all sorts of medical procedures.  Most will go home that day, hence the “short stay” terminology, although at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy , we also admit some people who will have major surgery and then be taken to a regular hospital room afterwards.

So each morning I was talking with people, some of whom had never been in a hospital before, who were having things like colonoscopies, bronchoscopies, myringotomies, hysterectomies, or orthopedic surgeries like total knee or total hip replacements.  And then there are the lithotrypsies where they insert a probe into your gall bladder or kidney and using high frequency sound, blast gall and kidney stones into powder.  Sounds fun, huh.  And some people were going to find out they have cancer, so I had to be ready for anything.

This goes on five days a week, averaging about 90 people per day, and I’d get to talk with about half of them for the three hours I was there each morning.

My odyssey began at about 8:00 a.m. one Thursday morning. I had no plans to begin an odyssey, and had no inkling about the odyssey that I was about to undertake.  I arrived at 6:00, made coffee in the waiting room, like I did every day.  I picked up the surgery schedule and chatted with the nursing staff just like every other day.  Patients began checking in.  It wasn’t an unusually heavy day for procedures.  A couple of kids having tubes put in their ears; a few women having hysterectomies, a bunch of lithotrypsies, since Thursday’s the day they are all done on.  Just another normal day in Short Stay.

What happened next, I remember very clearly.  I had just taken a family into the recovery area to see a patient who had come back from a procedure and was walking past the charge nurse’s desk.  One of the staff nurses was talking on the phone in a very excited and agitated way.  A couple other of the nurses had already drifted over to the desk and looked concerned.

I heard the nurse say, “Are you okay?  Where are you?  Was anybody shot?”  Another nurse said, “Her daughter goes to Thurston.  There’s been some shots fired at the high school.”

That was the call.  But to be honest, I had no idea of the odyssey that would unfold.  And it’s probably just as well.  Nobody wants to be shoved through a door like that.

After the nurse hung up the phone, and fortunately her daughter was not one of the injured, she told us what little her daughter knew of the chaos of that school shooting.  Yes, I was concerned.  I knew that there are two trauma ERs in the area.  Ours in Eugene and McKenzie-Willamette Hospital’s in Springfield, just a couple of miles from Thurston.  But I knew that at the moment I was the only chaplain in the hospital, and if there was a kid or two that had to come to us, I needed to get to the emergency room.

I excused myself from the Short Stay and headed toward the ER.  The first inkling I had that maybe things were going to get a bit hectic was while I was standing waiting for the elevator.  A trauma alert was announced over the intercom.  That is normal by itself.  Whenever a person with a life-threatening injury is coming to the hospital, there is a public announcement that says: “Trauma Alert, Trauma team to the emergency department.”  With that announcement, people from all the clinical areas converge on the ER.  And chaplains are part of that team.

But on that morning, the PBX operator announced, “Trauma alert.  Trauma team and all available surgeons report to the emergency department.”  At that moment, with the instant knotting of my stomach, I knew that when I got off of that elevator, I was going to step into a world that I had never experienced.

The next hour of that day changed me forever.  I was, purely by chance, the first chaplain in the emergency room when the first ambulances arrived.  I wish I had the words to explain to you the flow of emotions and events.  It’s nothing like what they show on the TV show ER.  Or maybe I should say what they show on TV is a pale reflection of the reality.  There was no script but there were procedures.  There was this intensity, a grim determination on people’s faces as everyone tried to prepare themselves emotionally.  It was like being in the middle of a whirlwind but experiencing it in almost a slow motion.  Over the radio there was a lot of inaccurate information coming in, but each time an ambulance called saying they were on their way, a plan was put in motion to care for that student.  First we heard two, then four, then maybe six, then, no, only four.  Then maybe as many as eight.

Wounded Thurston Student being taken to an Ambulance.  Photo: BBC News

Wounded Thurston Student being taken to an Ambulance. Photo: BBC News

There were a lot of people talking, but the ER as a whole wasn’t that noisy.  Within fifteen minutes two more of the chaplains had gotten there. And in another fifteen, three more had rushed to the hospital.  And it was a good thing, because the ambulances just kept coming and coming and coming.  Eleven in all.  In a half hour, half of the 23 wounded students were right in front of me.  At about 20 minutes after eight we heard another PBX announcement, one which confirmed that because of this event, all our lives were about to change more than we could imagine:  “Disaster Alert.  All hospital units initiate disaster procedures.”  Within moments people started coming out of the woodwork to insure that every wounded student would receive the best care we were humanly capable of providing.  And of course, we knew the media would be coming in droves and we wondered how we would survive that onslaught as well.

I remember one moment more clearly than the others.  I was helping identify the wounded students.  The look in every one of those kid’s eyes was a combination of stark fear and total bewilderment.  Stepping out of one of the trauma rooms, I saw five or six of our surgeons, all in their operating room scrubs, standing in a row, like planes lined up on a runway to take off, waiting for the next student to arrive.  And the fear in their eyes matched the fear in those students’ eyes and the fear in mine.

As I have tried to process this event in my life, I realized that everyone, the students and their families, the medical staff and the pastoral care staff were all thrust onto the path of an odyssey that no one wanted to walk.  The path was created by a person and his actions who we did not know and did not understand.  The three “what ifs” became the real questions I had to answer.  Right then.  What if the worst happened?  It did. What if I’m not up to it?  I have to be.  Others lives are in danger. What if I get myself into a situation so foreign to me I can’t even function?  I have, but I have to function anyway.

But one thing was sure by the end of that first day.  Once we were on the path, there was no exit.  Each person had to walk on his or her individual path until the end is reached.  No one got to stay the same.  Everyone had to change.  Some may have finished their odysseys already.  Some will take years and for others it will take their entire life.  As for me, I do not yet see the end.

^^^^^^^^^^^

Over a decade later, I still do not see the end.  Thirty school shootings have taken place since Thurston in the United States, five in Canada, ten in Europe (Germany alone accounts for five of those shootings, totaling 35 deaths) and seven others around the world.   Hundreds of children, college students and adults have died, been wounded, families thrown into tragedies for which there are no exits.  See: Wikipedia.

Ben Walker.  One of Two Students Murdered at Thurston High School

Ben Walker. One of Two Students Murdered at Thurston High School

And guns were used in virtually every incident.  I am waiting, as I have been since May 1998, for just one executive from the gun manufacturers, or an organization like the National Rifle Association to call me on the phone and say, “Yes, Dr. Waggoner, enough is enough.  I take responsibility for the lethality for this object I produce, or I take responsibility for the lethal potential of this object I promote, and I am going to do everything in my power to stem the tsunami of violence tearing apart our nation even if I have to …

I’m waiting, but I’m not holding my breath.   The murders will continue unabated.  The weapon of choice of the murderers will be guns.  Children will be murdered in their schools or churches or wherever by murderers using guns.  The right to own a gun and the availability of those guns is the secondary issue.  The primary issue is the unfathomable and defiant willingness of the weapons industry and the NRA to accept the carnage as normal.  And to pay handsomely to lobby every single politician in the United States to ensure that normalcy continues in perpetuity.

A Rifle Similar to the One Kinkle Used to Shoot His Parents and Classmates.

A Rifle Similar to the One Kinkle Used to Shoot His Parents and Classmates.

Swine Flu: The Most Effective Way to Protect Yourself

Featured

This post has been redacted and censored to comply with my employer’s Social Media Policy as of Nov. 1, 2010.  All references to my place of work and the system it is part of, as well as photos have been removed.  This action appears to be only recourse I have to preserve my Constitutional rights to free speech and the free expression of my views on Extreme Thinkover.

 

This Information about protecting yourself from Swine Flu was issued today by Employee Health at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy .  These are the guidelines we are following as hospital staff–I urge all my readers to take to the same precautions:

Prevention is the best defense against infection. Protect yourself by following good health habits such as:

· Frequent hand washing with soap and water or use of alcohol-based hand gel.

· When you cough or sneeze, cover your nose and mouth with a tissue or use your sleeve (if you don’t have a tissue). Throw used tissue in trash and wash your hands.

· Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth – germs are often spread when a person touches something that is contaminated with germs and then touches their eyes, nose or mouth.

· Avoid close contact with people who are sick or keep your distance from other people when you are sick.

· DO NOT GO TO WORK IF YOU ARE SICK. Consider your co-workers. Contact your health care provider.

Symptoms of swine flu in people are similar to the symptoms of seasonal flu in humans and may include:

* Fever (greater than 100.4ºF)
* Sore throat
* Cough
* Stuffy nose
* Chills
* Headache and body aches
* Fatigue

Stay well!

P.S.: Don’t go out an buy a box of dust, respirator, or even medical facemasks.  They will NOT protect you.  The Centers for Disease Control is currently recommending the use of the above precautions rather than a facemask.  Click here for the link.  Currently the only approved facemask for respiratory illnesses is the “N-95,” which is available only to professional health care personnel and must also be correctly fitted to be effective.  If the CDC determines the Swine Flu is spread through the air, they will issue appropriate guidelines at that time.

Communities of Fate: Read the Abstract to my Journal Article

Featured

I have added a page to my blog that provides the abstract to my journal article and the ERIC citation, co-authored with Paul Goldman, PhD (my doctoral adviser) “Universities as Communities of Fate: Institutional Rhetoric and Student Retention Policy” published in the Journal of Educational Administration in 2005.  Just click on the “Communities of Fate” link below the header.

I remain deeply grateful to Paul for his support and guidance, both during my doctoral studies and for encouraging and shepherding me through the publication process!

Thank you Paul, and I miss our long sessions drinking very strong coffee, the great discussions about organizational and educational policy, and the hours working on yet another draft of the article!

Archbishop Desmond Tutu: He Stared Down Apartheid

Featured

Archbishop Desmond Tutu.  University of Portland, May 4, 2009.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu. University of Portland, May 4, 2009.

He stood there, eyes often closed, telling a story, or was it an anecdote, or was it a parable?  How could he talk about the brutality and oppression of apartheid, and seemingly in the next breath, break into giggles?  How, indeed?  Because he had stared into the face of apartheid, knowing with certainty that this monster might strike him down.  Dead.  Like so many before him.  He stared and he did not blink.

The world noticed and wondered.  Then the world, in a most uncharacteristic act, joined his quest.  Far more from the bottom up than the top down.  People of faith–many, many faiths–joined.  Institutions and corporations, much to their complete surprise, joined.  It was called Divestiture, slamming closed the headgate on the financial pipeline to the government of the Union of South Africa.  Governments, some stunned into silence, others electrified into action found themselves in this ever gathering cloud of witnesses as this one man, although not alone among his people by any means, stared at the beast.

Unwavering, he held fast to the assurance of his faith.  Then, as he would say, the Spirit moved.  The monster blinked, then dissolved.  The predicted bloody civil war never occurred.  The backlash of black on white, or white on black never materialized.

Nelson Mandele walked out of prison and the Republic of South Africa was born.  This was no magic transformation, wherein all of South Africa’s problems evaporated like morning mist.  Poverty, AIDS, and a hundred other social disasters still had to be addressed.  And still do.

Tutu, Archbishop of Capetown, stands at the podium, his eyes closed, as the many reels of his long life are projected in his memory.  He laughs.  He giggles.  He does little dances.  He doesn’t do it because he won the stare-down with the apartheid beast; he does it because he forgave the men who were the apartheid beast.  He is reconciled with them and they with him.  This is why he giggles.  There is no hate, no grudge, not the most minuscule desire for revenge.

I sat in the hall, filled with people of many, many faiths, and I think I honestly can say that for those brief moments everyone of us felt hope, that the religious boundaries of our everyday lives had dissolved, just like the apartheid monster.

And by the end, we, too, were daring to giggle.

I am a Christian, a faith I share with Desmond Tutu, and I left with just the smallest inkling of what it might have been like to sit on a dusty hill in Galilee and listen to One who taught forgiveness and reconciliation.  Perhaps it was the giggles.

Credit Cards are Not Guns: Strip the Coburn Amendment from the Credit Card Legislation

Featured

On May 12th, the Senate passed the Credit Card reform legislation that President Obama asked for, 67-29.

Attached to this critically important bill to reign in the usurious abuses of the giant Credit Card companies, is an amendment submitted by Sen Tom Coburn (R-OK) that would authorize carrying guns in America’s National Parks.

The House bill, passed earlier, does not contain a similar amendment.

Apart from all considerations of the merits of Sen. Coburn’s amendment, it must be stripped from the final bill.

The Gun Lobby, according to the New York Times, got 66 senators to sign onto the amendment.

Again: The amendment must be stripped from the final bill before it goes to the President’s desk.

From my perspective, if the Gun Lobby believes they can get this legislation allowing the carrying of firearms in the National Parks passed, they should have the integrity of true American honesty to support it as a bill that will  stand by itself.

Anything less is an act of subterfuge and cowardice.  Evidently, this action to put one over on the American people with the credit card bill is proof you are guilty of both. And that you know you don’t have the votes to get it passed.

In doing so, you mock our Constitutional right to bear arms.

The Gun Lobby needs to take notice that this attempt at sleight of hand did not work.  Just like it’s no longer working for the financial industry and the health care industry.

America’s no longer willing to be bullied by your big money and threats of catastophe if you don’t get your way.

On the 30th Anniversary of My Ordination to Ministry

Featured

May 20, 1979, I was ordained into the ministry in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) at Rosemont Christian Church in Dallas Texas.  It was a day I shall always cherish.

Laying on of Hands Cermony--David Waggoner's Ordination, May 20, 1979

Laying on of Hands Ceremony--David Waggoner's Ordination, May 20, 1979

Pictured, Counter-clockwise from the left front:

  • Earl Waggoner, my father
  • Polly Waggoner, my mother, just visible in white skirt
  • Dr. Marcus Bryant, Professor, Brite Divinity School, TCU
  • Rev. Robert Minshall, Senior Minister, Rosemont
  • Rev. Sydney Carnes, Senior Minister, Oak Cliff Christian Church, Dallas
  • Dan Bates, Rosemont Elder
  • Hal Morris, Board Chair for Rosemont, just visible in green choir robe
  • Rev. Robert Allen, Associate Regional Minister, Christian Church in the Southwest
  • In the background: Skip Pendley, youth group member, and the Rosemont Senior Choir

One of my colleagues looked up what feast day is celebrated on May 20.  It is the Feast of Alcuin of York, (c.735-804) Deacon and Abbot of St Martins of Tours, A.D. 804.  The Collect for the Feast is:

Almighty God, in a rude and barbarous age you raised your deacon, Alcuin to rekindle the light of learning:  Illumine our minds, we pray, that amid the uncertainties and confusions of our own time we may show forth your eternal truth; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit.  Amen.

It is amazing to realize this prayer is 1205 years old; it could have been written today.  I hope and pray that I honor Alcuin’s commission to rekindle the light of learning, and illumine minds amid the uncertainties and confusions of our own time.

In Memoriam: Pastor Gary H. Wells, 1932-2009

Featured

Gary Wells, beloved husband, father, grandfather, and Pastor Emeritus of Northwood Christian Church in Springfield Oregon, died peacefully under hospice care, yesterday, May 30, 2009.

I will add to this post later today.

For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.  But if I am to live on in the flesh, that will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose.  But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better.  (NAS, Phil 1:21-23.

Tribute to Rev. Dr. Gary H. Wells, D.D., 1932-2009

Featured

It was my great honor to present the obituary tribute to my dear friend and colleague, Gary Wells, at his memorial service today at Northwood Christian Church in Springfield Oregon:

Gary Hale Wells was born Jan. 4, 1932, in Boise to E.H. and Ruth Williams Wells.  He died May 30, 2009 in Springfield, Oregon at the age of 77.

Gary grew up in Boise and his was active at Boise First Christian Church, which is now named University Christian Church.  Gary graduated from Boise High School in 1950.  Early in his high school years he met the love of his life, Hallie Morris.  They dated throughout high school and were married on April 22, 1951.

Gary and Hallie moved to Eugene, Oregon, where he attended Northwest Christian College, (now University) graduating with a Bachelor Degree in Theology in 1955.  Their first daughter, Linda, was born during their time at NCC.  While a student, Gary served at Pleasant Hill Church of Christ, co-ministering with the late Rev. Sam Anderson.  He also pastored at Irving Christian Church.

Gary had a passion for both ministry and education all his life. After graduating from NCC, they moved to Clarksburg, Indiana, which is near Indianapolis.  He earned his Master of Divinity degree from Christian Theological Seminary, followed by a Master of Science in Speech Communication from Butler University, both in Indianapolis.  At the same time he served as the minister of Clarksburg Christian Church.  The three boys, David, Timothy and Jonathan were born during their time in Indiana.  The family shared that Hallie typed all of Gary’s papers.   With all of that work, Hallie probably deserved an honorary degree, as well.

After having earned three degrees, and with six years in Indiana, the Wells prepared to enter full time ministry.  As all of you know, Gary and Hallie always approached each decision in their life with prayer.  At this important moment they were ready to serve God anywhere in the country.  Well, with the exception of California.

So, as you’ve already probably guessed, they were called to Oakdale, California.  Gary plunged into his new work.  In six years the church had grown to 150 members, built a building and the congregation was debt free.  Janet, daughter #2 and child #5 was born in Oakdale.

Gary’s next ministry was in Santa Cruz, on the California coast, at Garfield Park Christian Church (now named The Circle Church).  He served there for fifteen years, developed a successful small group model, and was known as a compassionate and skilled pastor and counselor.  It was also at Garfield Park that Gary pioneered the program called Associates in Ministry, which he continued after he came to Northwood.  Over 25 individuals have gone into the ministry as a result of Gary’s mentorship and that program’s impact, including our own pastor, Barry Lind.

In 1981, the Wells decided it was time to try a new road on their journey.  They moved to Eugene.  Northwood was looking for an interim minister at the time, and Gary and Hallie agreed to accept that call.  What no one realized that it would end up being a 13 year interim.  All right, not really, because the church called him to be the senior minister.  During his ministry here, along with his pastoral leadership, Gary helped Northwood grow from a small neighborhood congregation transitioning into its second generation to a church positioned to grow into a significant community presence.  He continued the AIM program offering NCC students the chance to explore ministry.  Gary also began his very popular “Walk Through the Bible.”

At the same time, true to his love of higher education as well as ministry, Gary became the chaplain at Northwest Christian College.  That is where our lives intersected, because I was the Vice President and Dean of Students at NCC while Gary served NCC students as chaplain, counselor, and taught on the faculty in speech communications and pastoral ministries.  He was a wonderful colleague and we spent many hours working together.  Gary retired from NCC in 1993.

He continued his pastoral work for another two years, retiring in 1995 from Northwood.  NCC granted him a richly deserved honorary Doctor of Divinity Degree in 1996.  His citation stated:

Gary Hale Wells, (NCC ’55), minister, retired, is awarded the doctor of divinity, honoris causa, in honor of distinguished leadership within the church and the community.  Twenty-seven men and women, most of them Northwest Christian College students, have participated in a ministry training program designed by Gary.  The internship combines mentorship with academic requirements and practical aspects of ministry, and result in highly motivated and capable ministers early in their careers.

Gary and Hallie spent the years of their retirement active in the lives of their children, as well as the life of the church.  As pastor emeritus, Gary served with the same integrity that he had served throughout his ministry.

That is a brief walk through the life of Gary Wells, lover of Christ, husband, father, grandfather, greatgrandfather.  Pastor, educator, leader, man of integrity.  One who lived the fruits of the Spirit and dedicated his life to help others find that Christ who gives those same fruits to all who love him, too.

For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain.  But if I am to live on in the flesh, that will mean fruitful labor for me; and I do not know which to choose.  But I am hard-pressed from both directions, having the desire to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better.  (NAS, Phil 1:21-23.

The Fight of Our Lives for the Fight For Our Lives

Featured

Here it comes: the fight of our lives for the fight for our lives:  Universal health care.

Despite the incredible amount of evidence that health care in America is a disaster, a terminal disease on a social scale unprecedented in history, that annually millions of lives are ruined, physically and financially by lack of access or restricted access to health care, what I call the Hegemony of Profit Before Health is preparing to attack without mercy.

Listen carefully to the rhetoric that the Hegemony will blast at you in the coming days and weeks.  It will not be about health.  It will not be about solutions for the common good.  It will not be how to create the healthiest America possible within a generation.

No.  The rhetoric will be  about frightening you into resisting changing the status quo.  The rhetoric will be about confusing you what the real issue is:  denying your inalienable right to be as healthy as possible.  The rhetoric will be about preserving a diseased system that holds you in its grip to the enrichment of a few–and sustains a diseased population to guarantee that enrichment flows in perpetua.

This is the fight of our lives.  This is the fight for our lives.  This fight will likely determine if America remains pre-eminent among the nations: more important than the fight against terrorism, more important than saving the economy, and just as important as protecting the environment.

The fight for universal health care will determine whether or not you, your children, and your children’s children will be among the healthiest people in the world with America as its strong and sure leader, or relegated to third world status, of ever declining health, a land held hostage like cattle in a factory farm, weakened by design to sustain the Hegemony of Profit Before Health.

My life is at stake.  Your life is at stake.  I choose life.  I choose a healthy America, strong into the future, the standard for health care in the World.  I choose universal health care.

Senate Democrats’ Plan for Universal Health Care: The First Look

Featured

The Senate Democrats have released their first look at a Bill that would provide universal health care.  Subtitle B, which I’ve copied below really provides the crux of the plan.  Sorry about the line numbers–they didn’t copy consistently but the text is converted from a PDF file.  Read down at least to the section titled, “Sense of the Senate,” and you will see what is the goal for the act in general (it’s in bold face).

I did a quick scan of the 615 page document (and I do mean quick).  What will now be really interesting is how much of it survives, or survives intact.

Get ready for the Republican Buzz Saw Crowd to come out screaming, and the anti-universal health care lobby will unleash their version of the Hounds of Hell to howl about impending  apocalypse if it’s passed.

I suggest ear plugs.  There are some really good things in this act.  I feel healthier already!

Here’s the link: Affordable Health Choices Act

Subtitle B—Available Coverage for

2 All Americans

3 SEC. 141. ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING MEDICAID.

4 (a) ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING POLICY.—The Com

5 mittee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the

6 Senate assumes that the provisions of the Affordable

7 Health Choices Act will be considered by the Senate as

8 part of legislation that amends title XIX of the Social Se9

curity Act to implement the following policies:

10 (1) All individuals currently eligible for Med11

icaid will remain eligible for Medicaid.

12 (2) All individuals will be eligible for Medicaid

13 at income levels up to 150 percent of poverty.

14 (3) Improvements will be made in processes to

15 facilitate enrollment in Medicaid.

16 (4) States will be required to maintain levels of

17 eligibility with regard to beneficiaries currently en18

rolled in Medicaid.

19 (5) Criteria utilized to establish income levels

20 for eligibility for premium credits in a Gateway may

21 also be used to determine eligibility for Federal pro22

grams operated under titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI

23 of the Social Security Act.

24 (6) States will received a Federal medical as25

sistance percentage of 100 percent until 2015 for

38

O:\BAI\BAI09A84.xml [file 1 of 6] S.L.C.

1 additional costs of enrolling beneficiaries who are de2

scribed in paragraphs (2) through (4).

3 (7) Beginning in 2015, the Federal medical as4

sistance percentage for the costs of enrolling individ5

uals described in paragraphs (2) through (4) will

6 phase down to the percentage otherwise applicable

7 by 2020.

8 (8) An increased Federal medical assistance

9 percentage will be applicable to States that have in10

creased eligibility for individuals described in para11

graphs (2) through (4) prior to the date of enact12

ment of this section.

13 (b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—The provisions of

14 title XXXI of the Public Health Service Act (as added

15 by section 143) shall be construed, for purposes of the

16 consideration of the Affordable Health Choices Act by the

17 Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of

18 the Senate, as if the amendments described in subsection

19 (a) have been enacted.

20 SEC. 142. BUILDING ON THE SUCCESS OF THE FEDERAL

21 EMPLOYEES HEALTH BENEFIT PROGRAM SO

22 ALL AMERICANS HAVE AFFORDABLE HEALTH

23 BENEFIT CHOICES.

24 (a) FINDINGS.—The Senate finds that—

39

O:\BAI\BAI09A84.xml [file 1 of 6] S.L.C.

1 (1) the Federal employees health benefits pro2

gram under chapter 89 of title 5, United States

3 Code, allows Members of Congress to have afford4

able choices among competing health benefit plans;

5 (2) the Federal employees health benefits pro6

gram ensures that the health benefit plans available

7 to Members of Congress meet minimum standards of

8 quality and effectiveness;

9 (3) millions of Americans have no meaningful

10 choice in health benefits, because health benefit

11 plans are either unavailable or unaffordable; and

12 (4) all Americans should have the same kinds

13 of meaningful choices of health benefit plans that

14 Members of Congress, as Federal employees, enjoy

15 through the Federal employees health benefits pro16

gram.

17 (b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the

18 Senate that Congress should establish a means for all

19 Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit

20 plans, in the same manner that Members of Congress have

21 such choices through the Federal employees health bene22

fits program.

40

O:\BAI\BAI09A84.xml [file 1 of 6] S.L.C.

1 SEC. 143. AFFORDABLE HEALTH CHOICES FOR ALL AMERI2

CANS.

3 (a) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this section to

4 facilitate the establishment of Affordable Health Benefit

5 Gateways in each State, with appropriate flexibility for

6 States in establishing and administering the Gateways.

7 (b) AMERICAN HEALTH BENEFIT GATEWAYS.—The

8 Public Health Service Act ( 42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is

9 amended by adding at the end the following:

10 ‘‘TITLE XXXI—AFFORDABLE

11 HEALTH CHOICES FOR ALL

12 AMERICANS

13 ‘‘Subtitle A—Affordable Choices

14 ‘‘SEC. 3101. AFFORDABLE CHOICES OF HEALTH BENEFIT

15 PLANS.

1,935,960 Minutes Later: The Free Market’s Failure to Uphold the Right to Health From Day One

Featured

Correction: Bad math strikes again.  Please read the comment  submitted by Tyler, he correctly points out that my math in the title is wrong.  The number of minutes should be 116,157,600.  I decided to leave the post title as is (so this correction comment will make sense), but change it in the text.  And I have to admit, 116 million minutes is way more dramatic to the point! Now, on to this serious topic:

The United States Constitution will celebrate its 221st Anniversary on June 21, 2009.  It was ratified on June 21, 1788.

The Preamble of the Constitution declares,

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

On June 21st, 116,157,600 minutes will have passed since it became the law of the land.  That is how long the Free Market System has had to figure out how to create a health care system so that every single American can live the healthiest life possible, out of which directly flows ”the general Welfare, secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” for each individual citizen.

At the time of the official first census in 1790, the population of the United States was 3.9 million people, of course, not counting all the people they didn’t count.  Health insurance did not exist, although it had been conceived by an English doctor in 1694. Health care, prior to the modern age had been almost exclusively fee-for-service.  Today, after 221 years, the Free Market System has sucked up such huge chunks of the health care market into its for-profit maw, 50 million Americans cannot only not afford the fee-for-service for a visit to the doctor, they can’t afford insurance either.  And that appears to suit the aims of the Free Market System just fine.

In their minds they have succeeded.  They are the American Disease Industry.  Pain, suffering, disease, chronic medical conditions, a public clamoring for relief.  Pills, pills, procedures, tests, pills.  Newer, always newer.  Cutting edge–procedures must always be cutting edge.  Americans grows unhealthier by the year.  That’s the growth part of the plan.  It makes no difference that millions can’t afford care.  That’s a problem for the non-profits to handle.  How they must smirk in their Board Rooms at the not-for-profits.  Unfettered by any meaningful regulation of their industrial juggernaut, they know they are the medical messiahs of the modern age.  They have the advertising campaigns to prove it.  The drugs must flow.  All hail the Free Market System.

So, 116 million minutes later this system is anything but free.  It is an engine for unfettered greed exercised by a few, distorting every good potential of free enterprise into power for themselves, privilege for themselves, and domination over all others.

It is a great business plan.  With one exception.  The American Disease Industry made one critical error.  They cured too many diseases.  And over the past forty thousand days or so, here and there, now and then, individuals realized they could be healthier.  And Americans have this thing about talking to each other.  Freedom of speech and all that.  But more importantly communications technology, advancing at a rate unprecedented in history.  Radio.  Television, Telecommunications, Satellites, computers, cell phones, fiber optics.  The Internet.  All over the world, people just like us were figuring this out.  They got healthier as we got sicker.  That had to change.  It’s not the American way.

We the People figured it out.  We could be healthier.  We wanted to be healthier.  And we didn’t want to continue to be the serfs of the American Disease Industry.  And we realized:

The Unfettered Market System, led by those who duplicitously espouse it as the purest manifestation of the Ideals of this Preamble, has failed utterly to fulfill its demands, to ensure without exception the rights it promises to every citizen to live in this “more perfect Union.”   These rights are not mere constructs of a clash of cultures in which Capitalism and Socialism battle for supremacy to the destruction of the other.  These rights are virtually what define us as human.

The Unfettered Market System has driven us back to the epoch of tyranny, to that moment before the Constitutional Clock began, not for the blessings of Capitalism, where profit flows like a great current feeding the abundant life in the ocean of time, but to a new and insidious feudalism, crushing the very People for whom that Preamble was written, the ones whose blood was shed in sacrifice for the Blessings of Liberty, under an economic millstone of debt, disease, subservience and corruption.

The Constitutional Clock still runs, no longer the notch of gears, but with the seething quantum foam of Cesium atoms.  So, too, We the People no longer will tolerate our rights being ground away by the Houses of Greed, old and festering, oppressing us as they did to untold generations for under the banner of the Divine Right of Kings, Robber Barons or faceless Global Megacorps.

We are people of the Light, riding the very photons that power the universe, shrinking our globe’s girth to micronic seconds, a web of bioluminescence that no tyrant of institution or government can control.  We the People, knowing we are the stuff of stars, knowing we are of a Most Splendid Spark, knowing within our minds is the brilliance of a pulsar, knowing within the form that makes me, me, and you, you, that our right to Life is the right to Health.

116,157,600 minutes into this great constitutional experiment called the United States of America, we claim our right to health.  And this minute is as great a victory over tyranny as the very first one!

Universal Health Care Confronts the Nuclear Option

Featured

The Nuclear Option (just for those of you who are stilled mired in Bush-speak, it is pronounced “new-klee-ur” not “new-cue-lar”).  In this case I’m not talking about the U.S. Senate rule called “reconciliation.”

No, in this case I’m wondering what is going on in the minds of those who have so adamantly and vociferously have opposed Universal Health Care in the United States.  Yesterday, Paul Krugman New York Times columnist, wrote in his blog,

Yes, we can

Get more or less universal coverage, that is. The CBO scoring on an incomplete bill sent everyone into a tizzy — and also led to an avalanche of bad reporting, with claims that it said terrible things about the public option. (There was no public option in the bill.)

Now the real thing has been scored — and it’s OK. Something like 97 percent coverage for people already here, at a total cost somewhere in the $1 trillion range. Bear in mind that the Bush tax cuts cost around $1.8 trillion over a decade. We can do this — and have no excuse for not doing it.

In the minds of the opponents of UHC, however, nothing has changed.  That’s what worries me.  In fact, as the evidence mounts that assuring every American has access to health care can be a reality and not doom the economy (as they have so desperately hoped), the opponents are realizing the End-Game is upon them.  They are losing.  Not only has every traditional method of obstruction not worked, or not worked well, the vast majority of Americans are solidly against them.  Heard any good anti-health care spin from Rush, Karl, John Boehner, or Mitch McConnell in the past couple of weeks?  If they were gaining ground with their argument, neither the election in Iran or Michael Jackson’s death could drown them out.  Not even South Carolina Governor Sanford’s adventures in Wonderland would diminish their clarion call for Big Medicine.

Their voices have faded to background static.

Do not assume for a micro-second they have given up.  They are preparing the Nuclear Option.  One all-out attack on universal health care, with no regard for collateral damage, just the health of America.  In the Board Rooms of the Insurance Megacorps, Big Pharma, Corporate Hospitals, and dozens of other stakeholders firmly anchored in the Status Quo, they are planning to bring this down.  Once and for all, to obliterate the very notion of universal health care so completely, that  it will never threaten their companies and profits again.

Am I paranoid?  Well, even if you are not paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you anyway.

I’m not paranoid, actually.  I’m well read in organizational theory (it was the corner stone of my doctoral dissertation in educational policy and management), and I understand how organizations respond in unstable ecologies and economic turbulence.  When resources are threatened, the people running the organization will tend to react in predictable ways.  When the operational environment changes more quickly than expected, or in ways unanticipated, the predictable management responses are more and more stressed.  If those responses lack the ability to guide the organization through transformational change (like, oh, General Motors), the likelihood of the company failing is very high.

Keeping all that in mind, when the entire global environment, e.g., the country’s health care system, begins to collapse because of a rapid set of ecological changes so powerful the only way to survive is to change transformatively (an analog of the evolutionary concept of “punctuated equilibrium”), only those institutions that have the capacity to change at the same rate and direction required for survival will likely survive.

How, then, does the Nuclear Option fit in this model?  Organizations use their resources to influence and improve their ability to survive in the existing ecological conditions, and eliminate competition for both the resources they need to exist and to improve their chances for greater access to those resources.  But here’s the rub: Organizations are “communities of fate.”  They are actually aggregates of individuals whose investment (personally and professionally) in the success of the organization varies from person to person.  In a corporation, those who have have highest investment are typically the Board of Directors and the Shareholders.  But they have to rely on managers and workers, to both produce and protect their investment.

The managers and workers have a much different perspective on the degree to which they consider the company their community of fate.  When the organization encounters increasing turbulence in its environment, the willingness of the people actually doing the work to cast their fate to ensure its success is much less certain.  If the situation worsens to the degree the survival of the company is in question, the confidence the managers and workers have in the Board’s decision making ability to, specifically save their jobs, can change very quickly.  Some workers will leave the company and look for more stable employment.  Others will stick with it until the bitter end, if it comes to that.  But if you work for an Enron, the house of cards can collapse on top of you regardless of your loyalty.

The pressure on the Board and the managers to keep the organization both alive and solvent can increase rapidly, especially in the situation where the environment and resources are changing at a rate unprecedented in history.  Even organizations that survived earlier transformational evolutionary changes may not survive the current one.  Because of the anxiety generated by the environmental turbulence, the shareholders put more pressure on the Board and managers to preserve their investment and continue to pay dividends.  The workers who are loyal to the company also put pressure on their supervisors to help preserve their jobs.  But loyalty to the community of fate by the worker is always much riskier, because the Board and the managers can, at  any time, cut positions that can eliminate the most loyal employees under the stated intent of protecting the viability of the organization by reducing personnel costs.  This trauma to the community of fate, however, is no guarantee the organization will survive the changing ecology.  It may, instead, guarantee its demise.

Now, here’s the part, as I build the case for the Nuclear Option, that I as an organizational theorist suggest sets the stage:  The critical decisions of the Board over time to adjust to the turbulence is a not a function of taking the most conservative stance in context, but is a function of the individual members of the Board and the Executive Managements’ ability to manage their anxiety in the midst of the turbulence, and at the same time abandon the mimetic* solutions traditionally used to control that anxiety across the organizational or industrial environment.  [*mimesis: from "mime."  A concept in organizational ecology that says Company A will observe Company B, and adopt a successful process to "avoid reinventing the wheel."  Over time this mimed process may become an industry standard.  The down side is that when the environment changes, continuing to adopt the mimed process may limit innovation and increase the chances of organizational failure.]

Therefore, if the individuals on the Board and the Executive Management fail to manage their anxiety about the turbulence and the implications of transformative change in motion, and as they realize their historical resources for influence (i.e., lobbying) are waning, they will tend to take the most conservative stance to defend the survival of the organization, and that stance will tend to be to preserve the status quo at all cost.  As organizational rigidity increases, adaptibility and innovation are stifled.

The door for the Nuclear Option is now open.  Why?  Because the real-life environment to which we are applying my theory is not  just one company; we are applying it to a multifaceted industry that has for decades successfully resisted and obstructed the move toward universal health care.  And they know that by conspiring together and pooling their resources, they can potentially create a huge wall of resistance.  This strategy has a flaw, however.  A significant percentage of companies in the industry are supportive of UHC, and are already changing the practice of their organizations to successfully ride the transformative wave.  This fact only serves to increase the opponents’ anxiety.  Who has the most to lose?

The portion of the industry that opposes UHC has powerful political and social connections.  The Republican Party, although reduced in its influence at the last election still has significant resources at its disposal, as well as a core of voters, who for numerous reasons at least state they don’t want to pay for UHC.

This set of circumstances, powered by huge finances, politics, ideology, and desperation creates the possibility that those who have the most to lose as they perceive it are going to try and “drop the bomb” on the universal health care.  Whether they make their move before the Congress acts, or, have a strategy to destroy it even after it has been signed into law, I can’t tell.  But I believe they are well into their planning and will indeed act.

A final note.  Another principle, not from organizational theory, but from psychohistory, is also undoubtedly in play in this situation.  Speaking not literally, but figuratively:  “Violence is the final refuge of the incompetent.”

Radiation Sniffer: On Alert for the Nuclear Option

Featured

In my post of July 3, I made the bold suggestion that the various Big Medicine groups could very well be planning to “drop the bomb” on the whole effort toward Universal Health Care, either before the legislation was finalized and voted on, or perhaps even after.  I called this the “Nuclear Option.”

Do not assume for a micro-second they have given up. They are preparing the Nuclear Option. One all-out attack on universal health care, with no regard for collateral damage, just the health of America. In the Board Rooms of the Insurance Megacorps, Big Pharma, Corporate Hospitals, and dozens of other stakeholders firmly anchored in the Status Quo, they are planning to bring this down. Once and for all, to obliterate the very notion of universal health care so completely, that it will never threaten their companies and profits again.

The question is, in all fairness, even though my hypothesis using organizational theory predicts the likelihood of an attempt to prevent UHC from becoming law, or destroying it after it is passed, is there any evidence to support it?  I also stated,

The door for the Nuclear Option is now open. Why? Because the real-life environment to which we are applying my theory is not just one company; we are applying it to a multifaceted industry that has for decades successfully resisted and obstructed the move toward universal health care. And they know that by conspiring together and pooling their resources, they can potentially create a huge wall of resistance. This strategy has a flaw, however. A significant percentage of companies in the industry are supportive of UHC, and are already changing the practice of their organizations to successfully ride the transformative wave. This fact only serves to increase the opponents’ anxiety. Who has the most to lose?

The political and economic environment is volatile and turbulent.  What I needed was a “radiation sniffer,” so to speak, a virtual monitor that would look for “leakage” that might be evidence of the Nuclear Option being planned.  At the same time, I needed an operational definition for “sniffing radiation” that would naturally provide boundaries against my finding “evidence” under every rock just to prove my hypothesis.

That set up two basic choices.  One would be to look for evidence that claimed outright that this group or that was planning to use their version of the Nuclear Option.  The other was to look for evidence that the players known to be facing the biggest losses were playing their game very close to the vest; in other words to look for evidence where what was not being said was more important that what was.

I chose the second.  This is why:

Therefore, if the individuals on the [Big Medicine] Boards and their Executive Management fail to manage their anxiety about the turbulence and the implications of transformative change in motion, and as they realize their historical resources for influence (i.e., lobbying) are waning, they will tend to take the most conservative stance to defend the survival of the organization, and that stance will tend to be to preserve the status quo at all cost.

And, the status quo has been for decades to work politically behind the scenes through lobbying and other forms of influence.  The job of the Public Relations department is to create a public face for the organization that oozes altruism and the common good over the corporation’s true mission to make as much profit as possible using every Machiavellian principle in the book.

Preparing the Nuclear Option requires planning, stealth, subterfuge, and sleight of hand.  In Board rooms around the country listen for the clink of glasses filled with expensive hooch, accompanied by the toast, “They’ll never see it coming!”

Am I skeptical and mistrusting of organizational motivations?  Of course I am.

Here is my first example for possible radiation, in a piece written by David Herzenhorn and Sheryl Gay Stohlberg for the New York Times, July 7th, titled “Health Deals Could Harbor Hidden Costs:”

Rather than running advertisements against the White House, the most influential players in the industry are inside the room negotiating with administration officials and leading lawmakers, like Senator Max Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee.

“The very groups we have been talking to have been the most vocal opponents of health care reform; they are now becoming the vocal proponents for health care reform,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff.

How very “chummy” of them.  Sniff, sniff.

The Radiation Sniffer is now fully operational and on-line.  Watch for more to come.  Or if you find something interesting, send to me and I’ll check it out.

Dining While the Restaurant Burned

Featured

All right, I’ll admit up front, I’m not talking conflagration here.  Neither were any babies or puppies/kitties/endangered [fill in the blank with your favorite species] rescued at the last moment from a fiery demise Bruce Willis style.

Nevertheless, the restaurant was on fire.  Firefighters showed up in full gear, while we sat and dined and watched them go about their business of putting it out.

It all started when my wife and I decided barbecue sounded better than the Chinese buffet.  It just happened that the two restaurants were in the same shopping strip.  And we made the decision as we pulled into the parking lot.

The place is called Howling Coyote Texas Style Barbecue.  It is one of my favorite haunts in Springfield and has great smoked barbecue.  I’d give you the link to the website, but they don’t have one.  However, Eugeneified!, one of the local on-line restaurant reviewers reviewed Howling Coyote and loved it. Click here to read their review.

We walked into the restaurant and the dining room was smoky.  Not the normal “we cook smoked barbecue meats here” smoky, but literally smoke was escaping from the top of the smoker cooker.  Our first impulse was to turn right around and head for the Chinese buffet, but a glance around the dining room revealed no evacuation drill was in process, so for some inexplicable reason, we stood in line and ordered.  Keeping an eye, of course, on the foot-long line of smoke continuing to be emitted from one edge of the cooker.  My wife made a passing comment about carbon monoxide, but it was our turn to order, so after another glance around the dining room, with no one showing any particular signs of distress, such as glazed eyes, acute respiratory failure, or passing out and falling face first into their side of coleslaw, we ordered our meal.

Granted, by now the room was getting pretty smoky.  Providentially, at that moment, one of Springfield’s finest, in full firefighting array walked in with his infrared heat monitor, and pointed it at the growing area of discoloration on the smoker’s wall.  I sneaked a peek at the monitor’s display over his shoulder, and, yep, it was glowing red hot.

Half expecting him to say “Folks, we need you to leave the building while we check this out,” I was glad I’d just filled my glass with Diet Pepsi so I’d have something to sip on while we stood out in the parking lot.  Instead, he walked over and propped open the door and disappeared.  Half a minute later, one of his crew appears, props open the other side of door and started a gas-powered suction fan, a good four feet in diameter, and inside of a minute, easy, the air in the restaurant was clear.  That was good, because if you’re old enough to remember a 4-engined DC-6 airliner starting up, you’ll have some idea of how loud the fan was.

Beverages in hand my wife and I seated ourselves and watched the firefighters come in and out the restaurant checking over the whole place very thoroughly.  Finally the smoke stopped coming out of the smoker, and it was somewhat of a relief to hear the manager and the fire guys discussing the fact that this was not normal.

Our food arrived, and despite the floor show, er, the unscripted drama playing out before us, the meal was its usual delicious fare.  I had the boneless ribs–fantastic! The real downside was the flies.  As soon as the doors were opened to blow the smoke from the room, the flies who had undoubtedly been willing to sacrifice their dipteric selves on the glass to get to the the glorious feast inside, made a run (a fly?) for it.  So we ate swatting at the tiny beasties who had achieved their destiny in life for a chance at real smoked barbecue meat.  For you fly lovers out there, unlike with President Obama, no flies were killing in the eating of this meal.  I’m evidently just not that fast.  One of those eye-hand coordination things.  Or so I choose to believe.

Besides, having lived in Texas for three years, and eating some pretty darn good barbecue in places that still had sawdust covering the floor to soak up the grease from the rib bones thrown under the table, flies are a normal part of the ambiance.

Turns out, there was a malfunction in the burner box of the smoker.  Way in the back, evidently, but they got it put out.  I was kind of hoping the firefighters would at least haul some hoses through the dining area.  That would have been worth getting the cell phone out and taking some video, but to no avail.

As we finished our meal and left, my wife and I agreed, eating at the Chinese buffet would not have been nearly so entertaining.

Sniffer Report: Health Care Nuclear Option Radiation Detected

Featured

To my Dear Readers: Just wanted to let you know this is the first in a series of reports.

Here is my first Sniffer report in which I suggest I have detected indicators (radiation) that the opponents of health care reform are going to try to kill it.  I call it the “nuclear option,” an all out, once for all attack that will destroy any chance of true health reform being implemented, and to ensure that Universal Health Care never becomes a reality.   As I stated in my earlier post, I assumed the opponents would operate behind the scenes as they have always done.  So to provide myself a reasonable boundary against common every-day paranoia, I decided to search for evidence of what is not being revealed by sniffing for the presence of influence not being stated, which should have a distinct “odor.”  I can’t prove I’m right, of course, but I can look for the radiation being emitted as the nuclear weapon is assembled and prepared for deployment.

My exhibit “A” is this snippet from New York Times columnist, Paul Krugman, posted on his blog on July 17:

Will the destructive center kill health care reform? It looks all too possible.

What’s especially galling is the hypocrisy of their claimed reason for delaying progress — concern about the fiscal burden. After all, in the past most of them have shown no concern at all for the nation’s long-term fiscal outlook.

One sign of radiation is applying a delaying tactic.  The opponents want more time to not only maneuver, but to try to sway public opinion.  In this case they are desperate because they know 72% of Americans support health care reform that includes the public option.

Stuart Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Political Report told ABC News on July 19,

“The deadline is artificial but it does reflect a reality and the reality is the longer this drags out, the less likely that the president will get exactly what he wants and all that he wants,” Rothenberg told ABC. “Look, there’s still a very good chance that we’re going to get a health care bill either later this year or a next year bill.”

“There’s going to be some sort of reform, I think most people believe, but in terms of the dramatic program, policy changes that the president wants, the longer this lasts the less likely that something dramatic is going to truly be passed and be signed,” he added.

Rothenberg, writing in his Report on July 16 stated,

Fundamentally, Republicans believe that while the Obama White House has been politically astute in promising that people happy with their current health care plan can keep it and that any new program won’t add to the deficit or require a major tax increase, the Obama plan will result in nothing less than government takeover of health care.

And Republicans think that time is on their side, which is why the Castellanos memo insists it is crucial for Republicans to slow down what it calls “the Obama experiment with our health.”

“Even voters who support a ‘public plan’ think Obama and Congress are moving too fast, with reckless speed, risking a huge part of our economy and our health care, when they don’t know what reform would really bring,” the memo says. “If we slow this sausage-making process down, we can defeat it, and advance real reform that will actually help.”

You can read the Republican Plan (all three pages of it) and come to your own conclusion about “reform that will actually help” by clicking here.  I thought the underlining was particularly helpful. . .

CNN reported on July 16, in an article titled “Real Battle Over Health Care About to Begin,” corroborates Krugman’s assertion:

Even some Democrats are up in arms over a recently unveiled health care reform bill in the House.

A leader of the conservative “Blue Dog” Democrats told CNN on Wednesday that he and other group members may vote to block the House Democrats’ health care bill from passing a key committee if they don’t get some of the changes they want.

Asked whether the Blue Dogs on the Energy and Commerce Committee are considering voting as a group against the bill if it remains unchanged, Ross replied, “absolutely.”

“We remain opposed to the current bill, and we continue to meet several times a day to decide how we’re going to proceed and what amendments we will be offering as Blue Dogs on the committees,” said Rep. Mike Ross, D-Arkansas.

Ross said the bill unveiled Tuesday by House Democratic leaders did not address concerns he and other conservative Democrats outlined in a letter late last week to Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The conservative Democrats don’t believe the legislation contains sufficient reforms to control costs in the health care system and believe additional savings can be found.

CNN goes on to report that the Soft Drink Industry is planning ads to oppose the legislation:

Special interest groups are also affected.

Beverage companies are running a TV ad opposing one congressional proposal that would pay for reform, in part, with a soft-drink tax.

“This is no time for Congress to be adding a tax to the simple pleasures we all enjoy … like juice drinks and soda,” the announcer in the TV ad says. “Taxes never made anyone healthy.”

This next item comes from the Insurance & Financial Advisor Web News.  They quote Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, from an interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on June 7, 2009:

“If you think the government can’t run General Motors, why would you think they can run health care?…[A government-sponsored insurance company is] just the first step toward a national health system,” he said according to a transcript of the program. “I mean, they will absolutely use that model… to destroy all the insurance companies and get to a national health system.”

And now, an introduction to Rick Scott, who is very publicly leading the charge against any form of Government subsidized health care and health care reform.  This is from Washington Post staff writer, Dan Eggen:

The television ads that began airing last week feature horror stories from Canada and the United Kingdom: Patients who allegedly suffered long waits for surgeries, couldn’t get the drugs they needed, or had to come to the United States for treatment.

“Before government rushes to overhaul health care, listen to those who already have government-run health care,” intones Rick Scott, founder of a group called Conservatives for Patients’ Rights. “Tell Congress to listen, too.”

Scott, a multimillionaire investor and controversial former hospital chief executive, has become an unlikely and prominent leader of the opposition to health-care reform plans that Congress is expected to take up later this year. While disorganized Republicans and major health-care companies wait for President Obama and Democratic leaders to reveal the details of their plan before criticizing it, Scott is using $5 million of his own money and up to $15 million more from supporters to try to build resistance to any government-run program.

The campaign is being coordinated by CRC Public Relations, the group that masterminded the “Swift boat” attacks against 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry, and is inspired by the “Harry and Louise” ads that helped torpedo health-care reform during the Clinton administration.

In this piece, from MSNBC/Associated Press, Rick Scott’s “Swift Boat” ad is mentioned as well as two more players, Art Pope and James Miller:

The ad with Shona Holmes — who says she borrowed and saved money for a crucial operation in the United States — exemplifies how groups are intent on bending the debate toward their agendas.

Its sponsor, Patients United Now, is an offshoot of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation, a privately funded, Washington-based conservative group that believes in limited government and cutting taxes. Among its directors are businessman and conservative activist Art Pope and James C. Miller, a top Reagan administration official.

Slippery slope?

The group says it has spent nearly $1.8 million running the ad in Washington, D.C., and 11 states with senators on committees writing health care bills or ones seen as wavering. Patients United spokeswoman Amy Menefee says the ad is fair because giving government more control over health care would be a slippery slope toward increasing the federal role, and because some Democrats still favor government-only insurance.

Dominating the spending among opponents is Conservatives for Patients Rights, led and largely financed by Rick Scott, who was ousted as chief of the Columbia/HCA health care company during a fraud probe that ultimately saw the firm plead guilty to overbilling charges. Spokesman Brian Burgess says the group has spent over $4.5 million on TV ads that have run hundreds of times this year, mostly criticizing public health coverage.

Incidentally, The Canadian Broadcast Company (CBCnews.ca) ran this same AP story under the headline, “Canada Again Cast as Villain in U.S. Health Care Fight.

USAToday published an article, “Advertising Wars Escalate in Health Care Fight” that provides more details of the players entering the field in opposition to  reform in one respect or another:

This week’s entries have been the most pointed so far this year. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce ran a full-page ad in Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper, opposing the employer mandate and public insurance plan. “Health care reform that punishes employers would be bad for the economy and jobs,” the ad warned.

The National Federation of Independent Business ran an ad in The Hill, a similar publication, and plans an Internet ad next week. “We need to make it really clear that a mandate will kill jobs,” spokeswoman Stephanie Cathcart said.

The GOP ad ran Wednesday on cable TV as ABC aired a town-hall-style meeting on health care from the White House. “When he says ‘government option,’ that means putting government bureaucrats in charge,” the ad intoned.

So far, insurers have kept their money on the sidelines. “It’s still early in the process,” says Robert Zirkelbach of America’s Health Insurance Plans. “We haven’t taken anything off the table.”

A group called Conservatives for Patients’ Rights, headed by former Columbia/HCA Healthcare executive Richard Scott, is launching a round of 30-second cable TV ads in 11 states next week. The ads target 14 senators who could help decide the fate of Obama’s public option. Scott’s group has spent more than $1 million a month since March, much of it his own money.

Last month, a group called Patients United Now joined the ad wars in opposition. It’s backed by Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group headed by political strategist Tim Phillips that claims more than 22,000 donors. One of its founders was David Koch of Koch Industries; two of its current directors are Art Pope, a North Carolina conservative activist and businessman, and James Miller, former budget director in the Reagan administration.

It’s clear a lot of people are ponying up a millions of dollars to oppose either the parts of health care reform that will affect their industry, or are in opposition to Universal Health Care.

Here is my Sniffer “Radiation Detected List” for this post:

  1. Blue Dog Democrats wanting to slow down the process or expressing “concern” over parts of the bill.  How much of that is genuine–the bills are massive documents–and how much of that is lobbying influence to give the opponents more time to prepare the Nuclear Option?
  2. The so-call advocacy groups, like Conservatives for Patients’ Rights, Patients United Now (backed by the conservative group Americans for Prosperity) are ramping up their ads to influence public opinion and have, in the “Shonna” ad,  even succeeded in really irritating the Canadians.  There appears to be LOTS of money coming from somewhere and it is likely from donors with big bucks who don’t want their identities ever revealed.
  3. Americans Against Food Taxes is not a grass roots organization, but a huge corporate consumer advocacy group encompassing virtually the entire Grocery Industry, their national associations , plus the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  To their credit, however, they list all their members on their web site.  Their combined lobbying influence is simply huge.
  4. But here’s the comment in this post that sent the Sniffer Radiation Detector into the alarm mode:

So far, insurers have kept their money on the sidelines. “It’s still early in the process,” says Robert Zirkelbach of America’s Health Insurance Plans. “We haven’t taken anything off the table.”

The words, “We haven’t taken anything off the table” sent chills up my spine and set off the Radiation Sniffer like a red alert on the bridge of the Starship Enterprise.  Just what are they planning?

So what’s missing here?  Big Medicine.  And, yes, I’m aware the AMA has announced it is coming on board in support.  But should I say I’m just more than a bit skeptical about their sudden conversion.  Watch for the next post!

The Sniffer at Work.  Photo Credit: Smith Detection, Inc., U.K.

The Sniffer at Work. Photo Credit: Smith Detection, Inc., U.K.

Post Script:  Sen. Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader, was on NBC’s “Meet the Press” this morning.  The New York Times reported that he said:

Mr. McConnell declared that the United States already had the best health care in the world and did not need an approach that would have the country’s hospitals and doctors “working for the government.”

Here’s the actual quote from the Meet the Press transcript:

Let me, let me just tell you what I think, David, if I may, is flawed about the whole approach. They don’t seem to grant that we have the finest health care in the world now. We need to focus on the two problems that we have, cost and access, not sort of scrap the entire healthcare system of the United States.

Sen. McConnell–If you don’t have access to the finest health care in the world, then you don’t have the finest health care in the world, regardless of cost.

Knob Heads Invade Eugene: Trash Food Pantry Delivery Vehicle

Featured

Sometimes, I just can’t stand it!  The Register Guard reported this morning on one of the most meaningless, imbecilic acts of vandalism I have ever read about.  Whoever did this was too stupid to even qualify for a hate crime.   They, and I’m assuming it was probably more than one person, broke into a RV owned by Eugene’s Relief Nursery. The Nursery uses the vehicle to distribute food to their clients:

The Relief Nursery helps parents in need with counseling, drug and alcohol recovery, parent education and other services. The food pantry dispensed emergency food and household goods such as laundry detergent and toothpaste. All families served by the pantry are extremely low income and have children age 5 or younger (emphasis added).

The knob heads smashed open the ceiling vent and proceeded to trash the interior, in an  psychotic food fight not even the likes of Animal House (which, BTW, was filmed here in Eugene) could have imagined. They attempted to start a fire to burn up the vehicle, but (fortunately) couldn’t even pull that off.  Then, evidently having vented their spleen, they left.  The idiots didn’t even steal anything.

Does any of this make even the remotest sense as to motive? Neither marauding baboons nor trash-diving bears are known to inhabit Eugene, so it had to be some form of human being.  Not even eco-terrorists would stoop so low as to destroy a RV that delivers food to little kids.  Here’s the picture from the article:

Chris Pietsch/The Register-Guard Surveying the ransacked interior of the Relief Nursery’s mobile food pantry, Executive Director Irene Alltucker looks up at the vent hole used by vandals to gain access sometime late Thursday or early Friday.

Chris Pietsch/The Register-Guard. Surveying the ransacked interior of the Relief Nursery’s mobile food pantry, Executive Director Irene Alltucker looks up at the vent hole used by vandals to gain access sometime late Thursday or early Friday. Picture Credit: Courtesy the Register Guard

In the spirit of the TV series, Connections, I also noted that the Guard published an article on the same day reporting on the result of a joint research project at Oregon State University and the University of Washington.  Testing untreated wastewater from communities in the state, the report found:

Researchers tested waste­water from 96 different cities for methamphetamine, ecstasy and cocaine in March 2008.

They found that cocaine use was higher in urban areas, while methamphetamine was present in both rural and urban areas. Ecstasy use was found at measurable levels in less than half of the communities that were tested, the majority of them in urban areas.

The Eugene-Springfield area was labeled a “high” use area among the communities that participated in the study, meaning it fell into the top third overall when it came to all three drugs.

Although I’m well aware that I’m making an assumption of correlation, I would bet that the perps had at least one of those substances running through their blood streams and wringing all reason out of their brains (probably with a blood alcohol content well beyond the legal .08% level added to the mind-altering cocktail).

One can only hope the knob headed vandals left finger prints all over the interior of the RV, and with a good chance of having priors, they can be apprehended.

In the mean time, I’m making a contribution to the Relief Nursery to help replace the food they lost.

The Myth of the Free Market Health Care Reform

Featured

I offer my readers two examples of why the “free market” system alone is systemically incapable of creating or sustaining any semblance of real health care reform:

  1. The free market requires that any product related to health care for real human beings actually is designed to make a profit for the owners/shareholders of that business.
  2. The free market requires that any product related to health care for real human beings actually is designed to make a profit for the owners/shareholders of that business.

That is not a typo.

“Hunter,” one of the contributors to the Daily Kos, wrote a letter to the President making his case for free market health care.  Here are his concluding paragraphs:

So, Mr. President, I write to you with this demand: we are not a socialist country, one which believes the health of its citizens should come without the proper profit-loss determinations. I believe that my healthcare decisions should be between me, my insurance company plan, my insurance company’s list of approved doctors I am allowed to see and treatments I am allowed to get, my insurance company’s claims department, the insurance company doctors who have never met me, spoken to me or even personally looked at my files, my own preexisting conditions, my insurance company’s crack cost-review and retroactive cancellation and denial squads, my insurance company’s executives and board of directors, my insurance company’s profit requirements, the shareholders, my employer, and my doctor.

Anything else would be insulting.

Hunter didn’t make this up.  This is, indeed, the reality of health care in the free market.  I urge you to read the complete letter.  You’ll love the part about the gold-plated utensils and its vital relationship to your health care dollar.

Paul Krugman, Nobel-winning economist and New York Times columnist, however, just puts the nails in the free market myth coffin:

There are, however, no examples of successful health care based on the principles of the free market, for one simple reason: in health care, the free market just doesn’t work. And people who say that the market is the answer are flying in the face of both theory and overwhelming evidence.

I urge you to read the complete post from Dr. Krugman’s blog.

It really comes down to this.  If you are chuckling, you understand that health care reform is about real people needing real medical care when they need it, without the cost or lack of access costing them their lives or livelihoods.

If you are experiencing blustery consternation and wanting to call me a socialist, communist, or worse (none of which apply, because I am a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist), you need to make a decision.  Do you want to live in a country that is healthy and prosperous because health care is delivered through a collaboration of the government, mission-driven non-profit organizations and private enterprise, or…

Well, do you want to or not?  The myth that free market health care reform will be achieved is dead.  As Paul Krugman points out there are many things the free market can do very well.  Health care is not on that list.

I care enough about you as a person and as an American to support a portion of my taxes being spent to ensure you can get the medical care you need when you need it, because I know in the long run we will be better off–you, me, and 300 million of our fellow Americans.

H1N1 Flu Vaccine: The CDC Gets it Right

Featured

You and I, right now, are living in the middle of a pandemic.   It’s in the news, but unless you are paying close attention above the noise coming out of Washington, D.C. on the East Coast, the media frenzy over Michael Jackson’s death on the West, or you folks in the middle of the country dodging humongous thunder storms, it may not be much on your personal radar.

But it should be.  Not at a Hollywood plague & panic mode, by any means, but H1N1 is a nasty virus.  As a chaplain, I have worked with several patients and their families who are being treated for H1N1.  Two were in our intensive care unit.  Both of these patients had developed pneumonia, and one was a pregnant woman (who had to be delivered early to save both her life and the baby’s).

In my 13 years as a chaplain, and having seen hundreds of cases of pneumonia, I was astonished–and I truly mean astonished–at how sick those two patients were (they both continue to recover. The infant did not have the virus.).   I can also say, that our patients generally match the age distribution and other physical conditions of those the Centers for Disease Control say are most at risk.

So, what’s a body to do?  First, go to http://www.flu.gov and check out the most current recommendations.  What prompted this post was this week’s announcemnt by the CDC of the priority list for who should get the vaccine when it becomes available.  Here is the list:

On July 29, 2009, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)—an advisory committee to CDC—recommended that novel H1N1 flu vaccine be made available first to the following five groups (News Release):

Pregnant women

Health care workers and emergency medical responders

People caring for infants under 6 months of age

Children and young adults from 6 months to 24 years

People aged 25 to 64 years with underlying medical conditions (e.g. asthma, diabetes)

Combined, these groups would equal approximately 159 million individuals.

You’ll see this is not the typical order for vaccination priorities, which is the elderly, people with certain other conditions that make them more susceptible, etc.  The reason for the change is very straightforward:  H1N1 infects a different set of demographics than the usual winter time influenzas.

This is where you need to pay attention.  H1N1 has idiosyncrises that we are not used to.   And the way it is spreading is one of those.  The CDC has provided a map so you can look at where the flu is having the most impact:

US Map H1N1 Flu Distribution 31Jul09.  Source: CDC

US Map H1N1 Flu Distribution 31Jul09. Source: CDC

Here is how to recognize possible H1N1 symptoms, from the CDC’s Website:

Emergency Warning Signs

If you become ill and experience any of the following warning signs, seek emergency medical care.

In children, emergency warning signs that need urgent medical attention include:

* Fast breathing or trouble breathing

* Bluish or gray skin color

* Not drinking enough fluids

* Severe or persistent vomiting

* Not waking up or not interacting

* Being so irritable that the child does not want to be held

* Flu-like symptoms improve but then return with fever and worse cough

In adults, emergency warning signs that need urgent medical attention include:

* Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath

* Pain or pressure in the chest or abdomen

* Sudden dizziness

* Confusion

* Severe or persistent vomiting

* Flu-like symptoms improve but then return with fever and worse cough

Protect Yourself, Your Family, and Community

* Stay informed. Health officials will provide additional information as it becomes available. Visit the CDC H1N1 Flu website.

* Cover your nose and mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it.

* Wash your hands often with soap and water, especially after you cough or sneeze. Alcohol-based hand cleaners are also effective.

* Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth. Germs spread this way.

* Try to avoid close contact with sick people.

* If you are sick with a flu-like illness, stay home for 7 days after your symptoms begin or until you have been symptom-free for 24 hours, whichever is longer, except to seek medical care or for other necessities. Keep away from other household members as much as possible. This is to keep you from infecting others and spreading the virus further.

* If you are sick and sharing a common space with other household members in your home, wear a facemask, if available and tolerable, to help prevent spreading the virus to others. For more information, see the Interim Recommendations for Facemask and Respirator Use.

* Learn more about how to take care of someone who is ill in “Taking Care of a Sick Person in Your Home”

* Follow public health advice regarding school closures, avoiding crowds, and other social distancing measures.

* If you don’t have one yet, consider developing a family emergency plan as a precaution. This should include storing a supply of extra food, medicines, and other essential supplies. Further information can be found in the “Flu Planning ChecklistExternal Web Site Policy.

Related Media: YouTube: Symptoms of H1N1 (Swine Flu)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wK1127fHQ4&feature=channel_page

(Sorry, I couldn’t seem to get this video to embed.  Just click on the link to view it.)

The take home on this is simple: if you are in one of the groups designated as high risk for H1N1, get vaccinated as soon as possible when the shots become available.  If you aren’t in those first groups, don’t get your dander up.  The people who are in the high risk categories really are in danger of getting critically ill if they contract H1N1.  There will be vaccine available for you, too.

But keep in mind, even if you fall into the usual categories a for seasonal flu shot, the H1N2 vaccine will not replace your yearly dose.  For most of us, we’re going to be getting poked twice, just not all at the same time.

One last thing.  Go wash your hands.

Wash 'em Hand Washing Image: CDC

Wash 'em Hand Washing Image: CDC

Granny’s Safe UPDATED: Rebutting the “They’re Killing Granny” Lie by Health Care Reform Opponents

Featured

Me, Uncharacteristically Pertrubed

Me, Uncharacteristically Perturbed

Now, they’ve gone and done it.  I’m perturbed!

One of the provisions in the health care reform bills being worked on in both the House and the Senate is an incentive, to be paid by Medicare, for doctors and other providers to have a conversation every five years with aging patients regarding what they want for end of life care.  That’s the true part.  I discuss that below in detail.

UPDATE:  Oregon  congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-Dist 3) is the author of this section of the legislation. He states that he has been so frustrated by the Republicans’ distortions and lies of what he wrote that he has developed a Myth versus Fact Sheet that can be read by clicking hereRep Blumenauer wrote in his blog:

Those with no solutions and no answers for how to reform our health care system are hijacking positive, bipartisan efforts that have contributed to a strong bill passed out of two House committees. Republican leadership has abandoned all efforts at passing needed health care reform — even turning their attacks to legislation that has been actively crafted and supported by both parties.

One of these outrageous examples is my Life Sustaining Treatment Preferences Act.

GOP leadership has been gravely distorting the truth and misrepresenting the facts about this bipartisan effort, and in the process throwing members of their own party under the bus — those who have reached across the aisle to do something that will help Americans across the nation.

The bill simply provides people with better care as they grapple with the hardest health care issue of all — their final chapter of life. See the Myths vs. Facts sheet on this. CNN reporter Elizabeth Landau does a great job highlighting the benefits of “doctors and family members having more conversations about end-of-life issues,” which my bill addresses.

This bill has bipartisan support (the main cosponsor is a Republican doctor) as well as support from a diverse coalition like AARP, the American College of Physicians, and Catholic health systems. It is an area where — no matter from a red or blue state — many have been able to bridge the divide.

The bottom line: this is a smart and just thing to do for families going through a tough time.

Indeed, it is a smart and just thing to do.  Americans are known to be among the greatest death-deniers in the world.  This is very well documented.  Physicians, as  a profession are generally not trained in medical school to talk about dying with their patients, and the cultural norm “I’m going to live forever!” is especially deeply held by our doctors.  This, too is very well documented. (One exception I have knowledge of is at Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, where medical residents are trained how to talk to patients about end of life issues.  I have seen their video and am well acquainted with the faculty of the Center for Ethics in Health Care.)

But those who are opposed to health care reform are using our fears about death and distorting them into a malicious fallacy about the legislation’s impact on our lives.  One provision is for providers to have a discussion about end of life care with her or his patients.  As I explain below, this conversation is taking place every day thousands of times.  But for the opponents, it’s another item on their list to distort and spread fear to preserve the status quo, mainly their profit margain.

As Charles Blow, New York Times columnist, stated in his latest piece, “Health Care Hullabaloo:”

I must say that this says more about them than it does about any forthcoming legislation. Belligerence is the currency of the intellectually bankrupt [emphasis added].

Trapped in their vacuum of ideas, too many Republicans continue to display an astounding ability to believe utter nonsense, even when faced with facts that contradict it.

This scare tactic is becoming ubiquitous, as expressed by a woman at a Raleigh, NC town hall meeting with President Obama, reported by ABC News reporter, Jake Tapper:

At the AARP town hall meeting last week, a woman named Mary told the president that “I have been told there is a clause in there that everyone that’s Medicare age will be visited and told to decide how they wish to die. This bothers me greatly and I’d like for you to promise me that this is not in this bill.”

“You know, I guarantee you, first of all, we just don’t have enough government workers to send to talk to everybody, to find out how they want to die,” the president said. “I think that the only thing that may have been proposed in some of the bills — and I actually think this is a good thing — is that it makes it easier for people to fill out a living will.”

After explaining what a living will is, and that he and his wife each have one, the president said, “I think the idea there is to simply make sure that a living will process is easier for people — it doesn’t require you to hire a lawyer or to take up a lot of time. But everything is going to be up to you. And if you don’t want to fill out a living will, you don’t have to…But, Mary, I just want to be clear: Nobody is going to be knocking on your door; nobody is going to be telling you you’ve got to fill one out. And certainly nobody is going to be forcing you to make a set of decisions on end-of-life care based on some bureaucratic law in Washington.”

Check out the AARP’s Myths vs Facts site here.

Here’s the text (authored by Rep. Blumenauer) of the proposed “Americans Health Care Choices Act of 2009“  (beginning on page 425), the House version, regarding advanced planning:

‘‘(hhh)(1) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), the

term ‘advance care planning consultation’ means a consultation

between the individual and a practitioner described

in paragraph (2) regarding advance care planning,

if, subject to paragraph (3), the individual involved has

not had such a consultation within the last 5 years. Such

consultation shall include the following:

‘‘(A) An explanation by the practitioner of advance

care planning, including key questions and

considerations, important steps, and suggested people to talk to.

‘‘(B) An explanation by the practitioner of advance

directives, including living wills and durable

powers of attorney, and their uses.

‘‘(C) An explanation by the practitioner of the

role and responsibilities of a health care proxy.

‘‘(D) The provision by the practitioner of a list

of national and State-specific resources to assist consumers

and their families with advance care planning, including the national

toll-free hotline, the advance

care planning clearinghouses, and State legal

service organizations (including those funded

through the Older Americans Act of 1965).

‘‘(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the

continuum of end-of-life services and supports available,

including palliative care and hospice, and benefits

for such services and supports that are available

under this title.

What got me thinking about this post was this comment by the New York Times columnist, economist Paul Krugman.  In a posting to his blog titled “Even-handedness,” he wrote:

AP: FACT CHECK: Distortions rife in health care debate:

Opponents of proposals by President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats falsely claim that government agents will force elderly people to discuss end-of-life wishes. Obama has played down the possibility that a health care overhaul would cause large numbers of people to change doctors and insurers.

So Republicans are claiming that Obama will kill old people. . .

Having just watched Bill Moyers on his PBS program interview Wendall Potter, former CIGNA executive who just testified before congress on the unconscionable tactics being regularly and deliberately used by insurance companies to deny coverage their insureds have rightfully paid for, but will dent the companies’ profits, and how they are in an all-out campaign to destroy health care reform while duplicitously endorsing it, I wrote a comment on Krugman’s blog.

Well, this time he didn’t publish it (however he had recently published my comments on 1 August 2009: “Health Reform Made Simple.“).  I, however, back up all my comments on various blogs.  Here, then, is what I wrote:

The “They’re Killing Granny” Fallacy:

For over a decade, as a hospital chaplain, I have helped hundreds of Grannies complete their Advance Directives.  Often the doctor requests this conversation take place, because Granny has a medical condition that is approaching end-stage, or is already there.  The ideal is that Granny and her physician have already had a conversation about her declining health. The Advance Directive is one tool for her to use to determine the kind of medical care she wants OR doesn’t want IF she can no longer communicate her wishes about treatment.

The purpose of the provision in the bills is to provide an incentive to medical providers to talk with Granny regarding the choice of care she wants at the end of her life.  Why?  Because Americans are the worst death-deniers in the world.  We’ll do just about anything to avoid talking about dying and death.  And physicians are just as bad as the rest of us.

Let me repeat the purpose of the provision: The Doctor talks to Granny so she has a choice to decide what she wants.  The conversation is a huge benefit not only to Granny, so she can make her wishes known, but also to remove the burden from her loved ones of having to guess about the kind of medical care she wants IF she is dying and cannot communicate by any means.

Generally, the types of extraordinary treatments being considered are:

1. Being placed on a ventilator to support breathing.

2. Being fed through a tube.

3. Being provided medications or procedures that are specifically designed to cure the disease, or to artificially prolong the person’s life.

Here are the facts (and I’m assuming most other states are very similar to mine):

1.  Any person over the age of 18 can complete an Advance Directive.  It does NOT require being notarized, it does NOT require your doctor’s signature, and it does NOT require going to an attorney and paying a fee to fill out the form.  You can download your state’s form online, or pick up a free copy at a local doctor’s office, hospital, or public health office.  Be sure to give a copy to your doctor and to take it with you to the hospital if you have a procedure (my hospital will accept a mailed Advance Directive at no charge, even if the person has never been one of our patients).

2.  The purpose of the Advance Directive is to allow Granny to decide in advance if she wants to have extraordinary medical measures should she be clinically assessed as being in the process of dying AND unable to communicate her wishes by any means.

3. Granny in her Advance Directive can choose to have everything from no extraordinary measures to all extraordinary measures.  If Granny chooses not to have extraordinary measures, she will still receive full palliative care measures to keep her comfortable, clean, and to die as peacefully as possible.  Granny, hopefully, will have access to hospice to provide this care; it is already paid for by Medicare.

4.  Granny has the choice of appointing a Health Care Representative (usually a family member or very close friend) to be her “health care power of attorney” to speak on her behalf if she is too ill to communicate (but perhaps is not in a terminal condition), or to consult with her physician if she is in the process of dying.

5. Here are some of the key rules:

a.  Granny has the  right to decline to talk about her end of life with her provider.

b.  Granny has the right to decline to fill out an Advance Directive.

c. Granny must be mentally clear (alert and oriented to time, place, and self) to fill out the Advance Directive.  If Granny is suffering from dementia, or is confused or delirious due to some medical cause, she is not considered competent (at least in my state) to fill out the Advance Directive at that time.  If she clears mentally later, she may can complete the document.  If Granny’s condition is diagnosed as permanent (such as advanced Alzheimer’s), then the family may need to consider a guardianship, but that is another topic.

d. Granny’s doctor, or if she is in a facility, a facility employee, CANNOT be her Health Care Representative, to prevent any conflict of interest in determining her treatment.

Being at the bedside of a critically ill patient, likely to die, and supporting the family through the decision-making process of what to do, when Granny never talked about it is agonizing for everyone.  One conversation would have spared all concerned the pain of indecision and second-guessing.

The AARP states,

Bottom Line: Health care reform isn’t about putting the government in charge of difficult end of life decisions. It’s about giving individuals and families the option to talk with their doctors in advance about difficult choices every family faces when loved ones near the end of their lives.

That is compassionate health care.  It is no slippery slope toward euthanasia, and it is not killing Granny.  It is, however, a provision (already in place in many places around the country), to ensure that the majority of America’s Grannies, truly die in peace and dignity.

A Caveat: Yes, I live in Oregon, which has the ignominious distinction of being the first state in the country to permit suicide with the assistance of a physician.  I personally oppose the legalization of suicide by this means (or any other, for that matter).  My hospital, being a Catholic institution,  does not encourage or participate in assisting terminal patients to commit suicide.  But that is a topic, perhaps, for another blog in the future.

The moment Sen. McConnell and Rep. Boehner realize the "They're killing Granny" distortion has seriously backfired.  Photo: Life Magazine Archives

The moment Sen. McConnell and Rep. Boehner realize the "They're killing Granny" distortion has seriously backfired. Photo: Life Magazine Archives

They Judge Themselves

This level of greed and deceit is by no means new.  The actions of insurance company executives, strategists, and lobbyists, as well as the politicians who parrot their lies are condemned in this passage from the Book of Proverbs in the Bible:

A scoundrel and a villain, who goes about with a corrupt mouth, who winks with his eye, and signals with his feet and motions with his fingers, who plots evil with deceit in his heart–he always stirs up dissension.

Therefore disaster will overtake him in an instant: he will suddenly be destroyed–without remedy.

There are six things that the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him:

  1. haughty eyes
  2. a lying tongue
  3. hands that shed innocent blood
  4. a heart that devises wicked schemes
  5. feet that are quick to to rush into evil
  6. a false witness who pours out lies
  7. and a man who stirs up dissension among [others].

Proverbs 6:12-19, NIV

In the article about the Seven Deadly Sins, regarding greed/avarice, Wikipedia writes:

In Dante’s Purgatory, the penitents were bound and laid face down on the ground for having concentrated too much on earthly thoughts.

“Avarice” is more of a blanket term that can describe many other examples of greedy behavior. These include disloyalty, deliberate betrayal, or treason, especially for personal gain, for example through bribery .

Take a look again at the section of the bill I quoted.  Read it over several times if you like.  Do you honestly see anything that even hints that the purpose or outcome of that provision will endanger Granny?

Granny is going to be so much better cared for under the new legislation.  Those who oppose health care reform and are lying to get it defeated are the ones who need to be worried.  Very worried.

Greed & Avarice.  Dante's Fourth Level of Hell.  Wood-cut Print, 1476

Greed & Avarice. The sixth of the Seven Deadly Sins. In this depiction, the damned are being boiled in oil. This image appeared in 1496 in Le grant kalendrier des Bergiers, published by Nicolas le Rouge in Troyes, France

I should say in conclusion that both my wife and I have advance directives.  So does my mom, the best grandma in our arm of the galaxy.

Now is the Time: My Message to President Obama

Featured

President Obama, as part of his commitment to secure health care reform published an op-ed piece today in the New York Times, “Why We Need Health Care Reform,” laying out for the American people, and perhaps the world, the case for change.  I am a regular comment contributor to New York Times Op-Ed columns and below you will find the text of my comment.

I ended my comment with the statement: “Now is the time.”  There are times in the history of a nation, that certain reforms, regardless of the opposition, and, yes, even despite the fears of some must be overcome and guaranteed for all as part of the Common Good.  One of those times was the Emancipation Proclamation abolishing slavery.  One of those times was the ratification of the 19th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States granting women the right to vote.  One of those times was Brown v. The Board of Education decision of the United States Supreme Court that revolutionized equality in education for all U. S. citizens.  Many more could be mentioned.

Now is the time for health care to be added to those moments of sublime national change, to join those great reforms, cast as the finest, hardest steel into our Nation of Laws as an inalienable right and an eternal Blessing of Liberty.

Mr. President,

I work in health care, as a hospital chaplain, and I could give you a thousand more stories of real people whose lives have suffered and through their loss of quality of life and productivity America has suffered, simply because they could not afford health care.  I am blessed to work for a non-profit hospital system that treats every person who comes to us, but this is a burden that cannot be sustained.

I support health care reform, universal coverage, and the complete overhaul of our broken and unjust system.  I believe that health care is a constitutional right, just as freedom from slavery, women’s suffrage, and equality in education has become enshrined among the “Blessings of Liberty.”

I urge you to be courageous and strong to fight for every American’s right to medical care, as a blessing of Liberty that will build a foundation for a healthy America into the future.  Now is the time!

The Public Plan–Is Obama Capitulating or is This a Feint?

Featured

The media is all a-twitter (pun intended) over touting the demise of the Public Option in the Health Care Reform legislation, as if it were sliding toward the edge of the negotiating table ready to dribble over like a melted popcicle.  On the news I must have seen the clip where the President calls the plan just a “sliver” of the whole reform effort a dozen times.  Pundits are in full obituary mode.  Even the New York Times, a staunch supporter of the Public Option, is grief stricken.  Bob Herbert, in his column for August 18th, wrote,

The hope of a government-run insurance option is all but gone. So there will be no effective alternative for consumers in the market for health coverage, which means no competitive pressure for private insurers to rein in premiums and other charges. (Forget about the nonprofit cooperatives. That’s like sending peewee footballers up against the Super Bowl champs.)

It’s over.  The insurance companies are laughing all the way to the bank.  The clink of expensive brandy snifters raised in countless boardroom toasts is reverberating across the country.  The corporate jets are warming up on the  tarmac, ’cause it’s fiesta time for Big Medicine!

Have you heard Rep. John Boehner or Sen. Mitch McConnell whine about anything significant this week?  Have the shout-down disrupters in the Town Hall meetings gotten more strident?  Are the “experts” on Fox and CNN actually agreeing?  I even heard a PBS contributor use the term “panic” when referring to the president’s health care strategy.  Is Tom DeLay going to be on Dancing with the Stars?  I mean, if Tom DeLay “The Hammer” who almost certainly has been consulting with his Republican clients about how to kill the Public Option, has time to, well, uh, trip the light fantastic  on national TV, can there be any hope?  UPDATE: Chris Matthews, host of  “Hardball”  just named DeLay, “Twinkle Toes.”  I’m not kidding–check the transcript on MSNBC  for 8/18.

Hmm.   Well, I’m suspicious.  You see, in the days before the election (when Extreme Thinkover was still in its infancy) I posted a blog stating one of the most difficult things Americans would have to come to terms with, if Barack Obama won, would be the presence of a very smart president as president:

Make no mistake, this will be a shock to Americans if Barack Obama is elected, not because he is African-American, a Democrat, a liberal, or in the eyes of some, the Anti-Christ, but because he is smart.  That’s right, I said it plain and simple.  Barack Obama is a smart person, well educated, and has an intrinsic capacity for deep analytical thinking.

Now, I knew this would be a shock to Republicans, who had basked in George Bush’s inability to compose a coherent sentence, and Dick Cheney’s ability to snarl his victims into stone-like fear for the past eight years.  I, however, underestimated how much of a shock this would be to Democrats, who voted for Obama.  But I admit now that the Democrats in Congress are as much in shock.  They can’t seem to figure out to do with their success, AND a president that thinks complex thoughts and speaks, well, college-level English.

Back to health care reform.  I’m just thinking.  Why would a really smart politician like Barack Obama just waffle around on one of the key ideas of his health care plan?  Yes, I know, he can’t control all the political variables, and having majorities in both houses of Congress takes a while to get the kinks worked out.

So, is the dust-up over the Public Option the result of an inexperienced president, a disorganized president, a whatever president–panicked, sold out, capitulating?

Like John Stewart said, “I can’t tell if you’re a Jedi and ten steps ahead of this thing?”

Or maybe is this president well aware of this game of chess played on a shifting, multi-dimensional board, with changing rules and players, and working out his strategies many moves in advance, letting the different gambits and forays play themselves out, knowing full well what his end game will be and when to pull that trigger?

Capitulation or a calculated feint by a very smart man, who happens to hold the highest office in the land and is determined to get what he wants?

My take: Jedi Master and the Public Option: Yes.

How the Texas Long Horns and the TCU Horned Frogs Saved Health Care Reform

Featured

I just finished watching clips from NBC’s Meet the Press, which featured Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) discussing the status of the “public option” in the health care reform debate. It wasn’t much of a debate, despite host David Gregory’s best effort to provoke something other than party-line blather from either senator.  He wasn’t having much success.

But then, seemingly out of nowhere, Sen. Schumer made a comment that snapped my attention to full alert. He compared the public plan competing against private health insurers with public and private colleges and universities.  (If you watch the clip, it comes right at 2:00 minutes.)  I had to back it up and watch it again to confirm I actually had heard him correctly.  Gregory didn’t catch it, which he should have; Sen. Hatch, if he caught the comment, either had no response, or was so close to dozing off, he just kept mumbling the same old script.  I couldn’t really tell.

Schumer’s statement was a new characterization; I hadn’t heard it before. I’m not sure he even recognized the significance of it.  But it is an intriguing way to look at the public option. And since my PhD is in Higher Education, this is something I actually know something about.

Every state in the country has private and public universities.  Take Texas, for example, where the idea of the public option is more anathema than the Long Horns losing to Oklahoma.  The University of Texas in Austin is a public university.  Texas Christian University (TCU) in Ft Worth, where I earned my Master of Divinity degree, is a private university.

Hook 'em Horns.  University of Texas Football

Hook 'em Horns. University of Texas Football

According to the prevailing dogma of Republican and Free Market devotees, the government should never be allowed to compete against free enterprise and the private market, because the government will always do it worse, waste vast amounts of money in the process and destroy competition, thereby threatening the American Way of Life.

Does the public university “system” in the country drive out the private schools by being too competitive for them to survive? They could in theory, because student tuition in the state schools is subsidized by taxpayer dollars (although that has been shrinking dramatically over the past twenty years–the states all too often are short on cash), attracting more students than the private schools. For example, UT is a lot bigger than TCU (50,000 vs 9,000!). But private colleges, which were the original American academic institutions (Harvard was founded in 1636), continue to compete and flourish, despite the apparent advantage the public schools have. The typical model for what we think of as a state college or university did not come into being until after 1862 with the passage of The Morrill Act.

TCU Frog Fountain and Campus

TCU Frog Fountain and Campus

There are a lot of reasons, but the one relevant to our discussion about health care is that federal financial aid creates portability and allows students to choose (in concept) to attend any school in the country. I have two degrees from private schools and two degrees from a public school. Why did I choose those schools? Because in each instance it offered the academic program I wanted to pursue. Federally funded financial aid guaranteed that I had a choice. That is higher education’s equivalent of a “public option.” (now this isn’t the place to argue about the issues in financial aid such as student loan debt, etc–it is beside the point for this discussion).

We come up with this formula, thanks to Sen. Schumer’s insight:

Federal F/A= Choice + Access + Desired University (public or private) + Academic Degree

So when we look at America’s higher education system, a combination of private and public institutions that arguably is the best in the world (granting it has its own imperfections and needs for reforms), which allow the schools to provide their services in a competitive but mutually beneficial market, and provides students (as consumers) a huge amount of choice, both in program and in cost, it is just plain wrong to say that “government” can’t do anything right and to assume that a public option would destroy competition in the health care market.  The success of higher education contradicts the assumption and renders it null.

We Horned Frogs are justifiably proud of our private Texas Christian University. But if I was a bettin’ man, I wouldn’t place a red-cent on a wager that a University of Texas grad, dead-set against the public plan in health care, would admit that his/her “government education” was inferior in any way, shape or form!

Therefore, applied to the Public Option, the formula becomes:

Federal Public Option= Choice + Access + Desired Coverage (public or private) + Appropriate Medical Care

Responses anyone?

TCU Horned Frog Mascot

TCU Horned Frog Mascot

Go Frogs!

Sniffer Report: The RNC Pulls the Trigger on the Nuclear Option to Oppose Health Care Reform—Or Maybe Not?

Featured

Sniffer Report: Revised and Updated:

Cue shrill klaxon.  “Detonation in three…two…one…Click…

If you are reading this post from my New York Times comment, “Majority Rule on Health Care Reform,” my guess is you’re madder than a hornet at my criticism of the Republicans, the Republican National Convention led by Michael Steele, and the entire congressional contingent of the GOP.

Sometimes, you write a brilliant, passionate statement, and, well, it doesn’t make it into the comments section of whatever Op-Ed to which you’re replying.  So, if you are reading this post, you’re, heavy sigh, just reading this post because you decided to visit Extreme Thinkover.  Thanks so much for that!  I also appreciate how many of my comments do get published in the New York Times Op-Ed pieces, as well as those by Paul Krugman, and other columnists.

So read what I wrote by clicking here, and then if you are madder than a hornet, etc.,  the next paragraph will make some degree of sense.

Good.  You should be mad.  Just not at me.  You see, for several months I’ve been following and analyzing the organized opposition to health care reform with a hypothesis.  I called it my “radiation sniffer” and even came up with a somewhat tongue-in-cheek image to accompany it:

The Sniffer: Ever vigilant for the tell-tale radiation signature of the nuclear device designed to kill health care reform in one massive blow.

The Sniffer: Ever vigilant for the tell-tale radiation signature of the nuclear device designed to kill health care reform in one massive blow.

The Opponents were planning to ramp up the rhetoric (little did I know how much shouting, screaming, enraged caterwauling that would really entail), and at some point, detonate the equivalent of a nuclear blast to destroy health care reform once and for all.  I’ve called it the “nuclear option.”   I assumed the GOP, in league with various elements of Big Medicine had a strategic plan, which was confirmed when Wendall Potter, former Cigna executive, described in detail how they developed and implemented exactly that.

I honestly thought finding evidence for the Nuclear Option would be tougher to ferret out.  Silly me.  What helped, however, is the proponents of health care reform are actually organized and have their own strategies for countering what the nay-sayers are putting out there.

The trick, though, has been looking for the trigger.  At first I thought it might be the whole, “killing Granny” gambit, but that had run out of steam by mid-August.  The Death Panels, a la Sarah Palin, was astonishing for the traction it got;  it was fun to say (deeeaaath paannnelll), and made a good chant for the Astro-Turfers, but I didn’t think it was the trigger.  Palin is just too much of a loose cannon to have been a key component in the Nuclear Option plan, though her rants probably helped the Opponents stay under budget on their advertising.  The whole Town Hall disruptor concept was really impressive on one level, because it covered the entire August Recess for Congress, but it got old, too, and with the exception of the wing-nuts carrying guns to presidential appearances (notice how deafeningly quiet the NRA has been on that whole thing????), even the recess-mania would have died out sooner.

The drone of the GOP representatives and senators, except when Sen. Grassley, and now Sen. Enzi, say something really inane, has become so much background noise.  Nobody’s heard anything from Boehner or McConnell in a couple of weeks.  Orrin Hatch and John McCain have been caught off guard because they had such good relationships with Teddy Kennedy, whose death from cancer, and valiant fight for life, has to have really messed up the Opponent’s playbook.  They started whining about “not politicizing” his death for Democratic advantage before the poor man’s body was even cold–that’s a clear sign of desperation.  It’s also not going to work.

Enter Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Convention.  As August has worn on, Steele has been more vocal.  But he’s got a problem.  He kind of talks with a logic that is a combination of George W. Bush and Sarah Palin, which is to say, unless he’s ticking off the predetermined talking points, he just doesn’t make very good sense.

And face it, he has gotten the whole Medicare thing tied into such a crazy knot, nobody knows what he really believes, much less what he means.  Unless the plan is to get everybody to confused: the Republicans can always claim they are right, which is certainly a possibility.  It doesn’t have to make sense, as long as you can talk in circles so circuitous people lose track of what you’re saying.  I think that’s called a shell game.  It’s great if you’re at a Penn and Teller show in Las Vegas, but if it is coming from the senior executive of a political party that can be elected to govern the country, it’s terrifying.

And now to the “Survey.”

Here’s the actual question #4:

The Worst Survey Question in the History of the World.  Courtesy of the RNC Health Reform Questionaire, August 2009.

The Worst Survey Question in the History of the World. Courtesy of the RNC Health Reform Questionnaire, August 2009.

So, is this the trigger to detonate the Nuclear Option?  Or is it a diversion thrown into the public arena by the GOP/Big Medicine operatives to pull our attention away from what really will be the blast to end all blasts?  It, of course, hit all the blogs, as well as John Stewart’s show, so if this is the trigger, whoever wrote the question will be nominated for the “Inartful Nincompoop” award by the National Association of Survey Question Writers.  It has been suggested that the government of Myanmar could use a survey question writer with exactly these skills.

Ah, but the question is: who will be revealed as having “suggested that the government would use voter registration, etc.?”

The drama is beginning to take on the scope of a Cecil B. DeMille film, only this time named “The Ten Survey Questions” with Michael Steele playing the part of Moses (now that Charlton Heston is dead–BTW, did they ever pry his gun from his cold dead hands–Has the National Enquirer cleared that up, yet?), pleading with Pharaoh Obama (this will send the birthers into fits of apoplexy; his forged birth certificate is from KENYA not EGYPT, you idiots!) to let his people go to escape the inglorious servitude and slavery to a world-standard health care, forced onto their backs by their Democratic taskmasters.

I hope they consult Google Earth before they go.  That last 40 years in the wilderness thing was a real drag.  Besides, mass migrations by 30 or 40 million Republicans with lots of guns and a big chip on their shoulders is going to have some logistic problems, let alone getting visas, parade permits for 40 million, all that stuff.  They can’t even go to Texas and secede.  The Constitution won’t allow it (I looked it up).

But here’s an idea.  Maybe the plan by the GOP/Big Medicine is to unleash ten plagues.  H1N1 already has some folks suspicious it’s a manufactured virus.  But that won’t work, because then you’d need lots of access to medical care for your own people so they’ll survive the plague (lamb’s blood over the door-casing isn’t going to work this time), and the government will have to coordinate the emergency care, and, darnit, you just have to stand on principle and oppose that.

The drama continues.  The Sniffer is working around the clock.

“The envelope please, Mr. Steele.  And the winner is…”   Click.

There Will Never Be Another Tax Cut

Featured

Huh??  What do you mean there will never be another tax cut? Congress can vote to cut taxes anytime it wants.  Have you lost your mind, Waggoner?

Consider this statement:

Using tax levels consistent with the past half century in America, then subtracting entitlement payments as currently promised for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, The Heritage Foundation (another conservative think tank) estimates that sometime just before 2020, there won’t be enough money in the federal treasury for anything but the entitlement programs.

It was written by Bruce Brattain, owner of Wisdom River Partners, who, among his many talents, is an elder care consultant.  Now, don’t roll your eyes over the word “consultant.”  Start reading a few of the pieces in his blog, aninconvenientbruce, and you’ll instantly realize, this is one very astute observer who has his finger on the pulse of a number of national issues.

And, just to entice you more to go read the entire article from which this quote was taken; it’s not what you think it is.

Now.  Please. Go read what Bruce has to say.  Oh, and be prepared to not only to have your assumptions challenged in a classic Extreme Thinkover manner, get ready to be entertained by a guy with one wicked wit!  Click here.

Then come back to my post for this:

Post Script:  I just watched PBS’s The News Hour:

In an ongoing series of conversations on health reform, Jeffrey Brown speaks with Robert Laszewski, a former insurance executive and skeptic of a public insurance option.

Laszewski, in this interview, lays out the manifesto for Big Medicine’s opposition to health care reform.  He is articulate, clearly believes in his cause, and goes over their case against the public plan point by point.

And proves the argument for implementing a public option in the health care reform legislation so beautifully, I almost jumped up from the couch to give him a standing ovation.

Huh?   Two times in one post?  Read the interview of Robert Laszewski, former insurance executive and Big Medicine consultant by Jeffrey Brown.  Click Here.

Looking Up–Seeing the Past and Pondering God

Featured

This week I inaugurated a new blog called “DÎSCÎ,” which is the Disciples’ Institute for Scientific and Cosmological Inquiry. (It is pronounced “dye-sigh”). The address is: http://www.disciforum.wordpress.com.  DÎSCÎ’s homebase is on The Intersection, which is a companion site for members and friends of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), sponsored by DisciplesWorld, an independently published print and online magazine for the Disciples.

I have, for some time, wanted to create a forum, an online institute in which people of faith could discuss the many issues regarding religion and science.  But my idea was to move beyond the creation-evolution debate and start a conversation of what it means to be a person of faith, particularly from the Judeo-Christian perspective in a universe that is very large, very old, and to give genuine credit to the advances in science over the past nearly 500 years.

I am grateful for the assistance of Rebecca Woods, who created The Intersection and serves on the DisciplesWorld staff, for her interest and encouragement in launching DÎSCÎ.  Here, then is the Inaugural Post of the Disciples’ Institute for Scientific and Cosmological Inquiry.

DĪSCĪ Space Theme

Looking Up–Seeing the Past and Pondering God

Day and night. The most important cycle that governs our lives. Our bodies are finely attuned to the light of day and the dark of night.  It is as natural as breathing.  We think of that 24 hour cycle as very simple.  The earth spins on its axis; part of its surface is always in light and part is always in dark.  It has been this way since the creation of the world.  Both of the creation stories in the Bible, in Genesis 1 and 2 use the word “day” to describe God’s creative activity.

There is, however, nothing simple about it at all.  The complex set of forces that keep us safely spinning around the life-giving warmth of the Sun are only now beginning to be understood.

Yet, because of its constancy, we take it for granted.

Let me ask you a question.  When was the last time, when you left your home after dark, that you actually looked up at the sky?  Not just a glance, but looked up with intention to see what, well, what you could see?

I’ll venture a guess: Probably only rarely.  If you live in an urban setting, the combination of light pollution and air pollution might make it nearly impossible to see much of anything.  If your home is in a rural part of the country, you may very well be able to see the starry arc of the Milky Way stretching from horizon to horizon.  And if you are fortunate enough to live or visit well away from a population center, the night sky can be so bright you hardly need a flashlight to move around safely.

Whatever you can see, though, when you look up into the sky is not the present but the past.  The photons hitting the retina in your eyes are all different ages even though every one of those photons is traveling at exactly the same speed–the famous speed of light, which is about 186,000 miles per second, or 300,000 km per second.  Astronomers call this “look back time.”

The light reflected from the moon takes just a tick over one second to reach Earth.  The Sun, some 93 million miles away, takes around 8 minutes. The farther the object is from me, the older the light is when it reaches my eyes.  When Earth passes by Mars (which is the fourth rock from the sun), the light takes anywhere between three and about six minutes to reach us, because both orbits of Earth and Mars are elliptical, just slightly egg-shaped.

If I point my telescope at the Andromeda Galaxy (also called M31), which even in my suburban backyard I can easily see, I am looking at light that is over 2.5 million years old!  And Andromeda is the closest spiral galaxy to the Milky Way.  In fact, Andromeda and the Milky Way are moving toward each other and some billions of years into the future, they will collide and merge.  Astronomers call it, somewhat tongue in cheek, “Milkomeda.”

Milky Way with Annotations. Generated from Spitzer Space Telescope Images
Milky Way with Annotations. Generated from Spitzer Space Telescope Images.  Our Solar System lives in the Orion Arm.

You get the idea.  The farther away the object is, the older the light is when it reaches Earth.

The other key concept is that everything in the universe is moving, and not just moving haphazardly, but expanding away from each other (the trajectories of some galaxies, like the Milky Way and Andromeda, will cause them to collide).  That’s what Edwin Hubble proved in 1925, using the Hooker 100 inch Telescope on Mt Wilson just up the hill from Pasadena, California, that was threatened by the huge “Station Fire” just last week.  This discovery led to the realization that the universe was expanding from a beginning point in space and time, which we now call the Big Bang.  And just a few years ago, astronomers discovered that the universe is not just expanding, it is accelerating.

What we’re interested in, though, is the Beginning, not the End.  Astrophysicists have wound the cosmic clock backward and come up with an age that the Universe is about 13.7 billion years old.  That’s old. Really old.  Can we see anything that old in the sky?  No, we can’t.  But modern telescopes have gotten so powerful that we can see a long way away and therefore back in time.  On September 2, 2009,  Prof. Tomatsugu Goto of the University of Hawaii released this photo of the most distant galaxy with a central black hole, and therefore oldest object ever observed.  It is 12.8  billion light years from us and the mass of the black hole is estimated to be  a billion times that of our sun.

QSO (Quasi-Stellar Object) The Largest and Most Distant Black Hole Galaxy Ever Imaged
QSO (Quasi-Stellar Object) The Largest and Most Distant Black Hole Galaxy Ever Imaged. 12.8 Bn LY Distant.  Photo: T. Goto, University of Hawaii.

Ponder this image for a few moments, as pixelated as it is.  This is the image of a real galaxy with a real black hole at its center (just like our galaxy has, by the way) that existed  billion years ago.

Here on Earth, which by comparison is only 4.5 billion years old, we humans–in particular we humans of the Judeo-Christian heritage–have viewed our universe as being, well, kind of cozy.  As the old saying goes, “God’s in his (sic) heaven and all’s right with the world.”  And although about 500 years ago that coziness began to be challenged and started unraveling when Copernicus published his “On the Revolutions” in 1543, we have been mostly content to think and talk about God in the way we always have.

Enter the dawn of the 21st Century. We are struck by the enormity of what  astrophysics has revealed to us; new discoveries make the news every week.  The universe is not cozy.  It is huge, old, complex, colder than we can imagine and hotter than we can imagine.  The very molecules that make up our bodies were born out of forces we can barely describe when stars blew themselves apart.

How do we talk about God in this kind of reality?  And life? Life on one planet in a universe that stretches 46.5 billion lights years in every direction?  How do you talk about God in this reality?

This is where we will start.  The Disciples’ Institute for Scientific and Cosmological Inquiry is officially open for discussion.

Before you answer, if you can, go outside and look up into the sky for a while, and ponder what is out there, as ancient photons hit your retina, and your brain translates them into the points of light we call stars.

Rebellion For or Rebellion Against? The Republican Party Puts America on the Knife Edge

Featured

The knife edge between the rhetoric of rebellion and inciting rebellion is sharp, ragged,  and stained with the blood of the innocent; the severing blow comes all too often from a hand unexpected and beyond the control of those speaking as the Advocates for that Rebellion’s Agenda.

Read this interview exchange between Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), who is the Republican Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, and Jeffrey Brown, of PBS’s The News Hour on September 17, 2009:

REP. JOHN BOEHNER: Well, I think — you’ve heard me over the last several months make it clear that we want Americans to involve themselves in this discussion, but it ought to be civil. And, by and large, almost all of it is. Oh, there’s going to be someone now and then who’s going to get out of control or yell, but we are in the middle of a modern-day political rebellion in America.

JEFFREY BROWN: Rebellion?

REP. JOHN BOEHNER: Rebellion. I’ve never seen anything like this. I’ve been around the country in a number of members’ districts, and I’ve been watching this grassfire grow all year.

And the American people, they’re concerned about what their government is doing. They know that these trillion-dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see, this is not sustainable. And they’re concerned that government here in Washington is getting too big, getting too much control, and they’re making their opposition to it known. And all of my colleagues have encountered their citizens more engaged than they’ve ever seen them.

Now, I went to a tea party in West Chester, Ohio, on September 5th, Labor Day weekend, along with some of my colleagues; 18,000 people were there. And there were some Democrats there and some Republicans there. But three-fourths of the people there were people — average Americans who’d never been engaged in the political process, really didn’t know much about it, except that they were concerned about where our country was going.

And so this conversation that’s underway is healthy for our democracy. It was Thomas Jefferson 220 years ago who said, “A little rebellion now and then is good for our democracy.”

Are Rep. Boehner, and the Republicans who advocate this language, rebelling for something or against something?  Are they fanning the flames of anxiety by the use of such words to what end?  I honestly can’t tell.  They cry “Give us back our country!” but what do they cite as evidence the country has been lost?  They cry “Don’t take away our guns!” and make threatening inferences, “We came unarmed…This time.”  They cry “Our constitutional rights are being squashed!” but I cannot remember a time when our constitutional rights were more protected.

What is the rebellion?  What is truly the word “rebellion” being used to communicate?

John Boehner, will you tell us the truth why you are using the word “rebellion?”

And here is why I make this demand:  The Declaration of Independence sets the standard for initiating rebellion against tyranny.  Rebellion is a just cause when a people are under the yoke of a government that deprives them of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

The advocacy of rebellion for any other reason cannot meet that standard.

The advocacy of rebellion as a political means to bring down a legally and constitutionally elected president and government, because you refuse to abide by either the law or the Constitution as the Loyal Opposition, is not justifiable by the standard set forth in the Declaration of Independence, and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America.

That is not rebellion, Mr. Boehner, that is revolution.  I pray that is not your true agenda.  For that you cannot control, and it will exact a cost you and all who follow you cannot pay.

Rocket Powered Camels

Featured

Okay, let’s start with the obvious.  The sun, the moon, planets and stars rise in the east and set in the west.  We all know this; everybody knows this.  Even before Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo (in the 1500s and early 1600s) figured out the motion was due to the rotation of the earth and not of a cosmic celestial bowl turning over a stationary earth, the day and night cycle was something everybody just knew because that’s what everyone observed, day after day.  And aside from the occasional comet or meteor shower, everything in the sky rose in the east and set in the west.  “Sicut erat in principio, et nunc et semper, et in secula seculorum. Amen.  Alleuluia.

What few astronomical references we have from the Bible, it’s always rise in the east and set in the west.  The passage in Joshua 10:12-15 doesn’t contradict this.  According to the text, Joshua asks the Lord to stop the motion of the sun and the moon “in the middle of the day” (v. 13a), and “[the sun] did not hasten to go down for about a whole day” (v. 13b).  Some day, huh.

Neither does the curious passage in Isaiah 38, in which the Lord directs Isaiah to tell the dying Hezekiah that the sign of his healing will be, “‘I will cause the shadow on the stairway, which has gone down with the sun on the stairway of Ahaz, to back ten steps.’  So the sun’s shadow went back ten steps on the stairway on which it had gone down” (Is 38:8).  Isaiah then heals the king’s near-fatal boil by applying to it a “cake of figs” (v 21).  That’s the NASB’s translation.  The NIV says a “poultice of figs,” but to my way of thinking the whole idea of a poultice has a much higher “yuck” factor even if it is more literal.  Of course, why they just didn’t do the whole fig-cake thing to begin with, we’ll never know.  Anyway, modern Astronomy doesn’t have an answer to either of these accounts, but it doesn’t matter.  The Israelites won the battle over the Amorites, and Hezekiah got a 15-year lease on life, so don’t knock it.

All right, where is this going?  I do have a plan.

Fast forward to the Nativity narrative in Matthew, with the Magi.  When Magi AstroConsulting ™ show up at Herod’s court in Jerusalem, they said they had seen this new star in the east, that according to their Cray Supercomputers, er, magination and divinations had determined it signified a new King of the Jews.  Aside from the fact this rather impolitic announcement spread like wildfire in all the local papyrus tabloids and cable TV talking heads, their announcement, was astronomically correct.

These astronomer/astrologers were east-centric.  From our modern perspective, space is a big, big place and the whole notion of the cardinal points of north, south, east and west, are not of much significance in a universe that stretches infinitely away on all vectors from our small blue dot. That’s for us landlubbers, anyway.  Navigation by air or sea requires the correct heading or bad things will happen.

But the guys at Magi AstroConsulting ™ lived in a much cozier universe, and predicting accurately what stuff in the sky came into view, when, and in what order made all the difference (not to mention keeping their heads connected to their necks).  Therefore, prior to the Copernican Revolution, the most important direction was EAST.  Besides with artificial lighting to accompany us at all times, we in modern culture rarely look up anyway.  What’s the point?  I’LL TELL YOU WHAT THE POINT IS…oh, sorry, I don’t want to cry and get my computer keyboard wet.

So the Magi see this star rise in the east and watch its track to where it sets in the west.  Although they couldn’t compute longitude (the vertical grid circling the globe), they could compute latitude (the horizontal lines), and throwing in a little astrology to plot which constellation signifies an auspicious event in the land of the Jews, they packed up their dromedarian SUVs and headed west.  ROAD TRIP!  The Route 66 of the Ancient World!  Destination Jerusalem!  On the way back, they’d hit Caesarea Phillipi, hang out on the beach, catch a few shows.  Some things never change.

The plot thickens, of course, because in present day, every off the shelf astronomy computer software program can calculate the night sky between 10,000 B.C. and A.D. 10,000 (10,000 C.E if you want to archeologically correct), and there were some very interesting things happening in the sky between 6 B.C. and A.D. 6., but we’ll deal with that story nearer Christmas.

And as for the star guiding the Magi caravan to the house in Bethlehem?  Well, there’s west (recall they were going west) and then there’s west.  Remember, the sun sets truly in the west only twice a year: at the Spring and Fall Equinoxes.  As soon as one deviates from true south or north in a westward direction, then one is “going” west.  That’s about a 180-degree variation of “westerly.”  So, despite the fact Bethlehem is slightly southwest of Jerusalem, it’s no big stretch to get everything to line up.  Of course, the Matthew narrative is much more satisfying, so since they found the right place, don’t knock it.

Double fast-forward to modern day.  I’m standing in my driveway looking west for the newest star in the heavens to appear.  Yes, west.  Didn’t seem right, with all I have just written, but west it was.  And it wasn’t really a star.  It was the International Space Station.  The fourth brightest object in the sky, and as well, only the fourth object in the sky to be visible in daylight (not counting the rare supernova or bollide meteorite).  Why west to east?  That’s the direction of the rotation of the earth.  It’s the rotation of the Jet Stream.  Spacecraft generally are launched with the earth’s spin.  Takes less fuel.  Launch to orbit in eight minutes.

So, there I was.  8:23 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time.  Out of the glow of the setting sun a golden star, the brightest object in the sky, soars overhead.  Fast!  Very fast!  About two and a half minutes from horizon to horizon.  I was stunned!  About it’s size.  Of it’s brilliance.  And of the implication that every few nights, when the clouds of the great Cascade rain forest part for even a few moments that I will be able to step outside and watch this golden orb slide overhead.

A naked eye object.  A real spaceship. A human presence in space.  Not science fiction.  Real.  Just step out of your home every few nights and look up.  You can check the schedule for your Zip Code by going to www.spaceweather.com and clicking on the “Satellite Flybys.”

And I imagined what the Magi might have thought if such a thing, this golden star had soared over their heads, west to east.  Going the wrong direction.  To follow that star, they’d need rocket-powered camels!

ISS Glides Over Butser, England.  3 Mar 09.  Credit: Martin Saban-Smith, http://www.m109.co.uk

ISS Glides Over Butser, England. 3 Mar 09. Credit: Martin Saban-Smith, http://www.m109.co.uk

Amputating the Finger to Save the Ring

Featured

There are many ways to do things wrong.  A couple of weeks ago I woke up with my left hand seriously swollen.  It was a reasonably good reproduction of the hand of the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Boy.  I headed to the Urgent Care Center to have it looked at.  The first thing out of the nurse’s mouth was, “We’re going to have to cut off your wedding ring.  If it cuts off the circulation anymore, you could lose your finger.”

Cutting off my wedding ring had not been part of the plan.  Although it was very tight, my ring finger didn’t hurt, and I just assumed the doctor would give me something to get rid of the swelling, my hand would return to its normal size, and I’d go my merry way.  Besides, having been married some thirty-two years, I’d guess that easily around twenty years had gone by since I’d even been able to get the ring off.

The decision actually was pretty easy to make.  Gold rings can be repaired and dead fingers can’t.  Within minutes, the nurse and her CNA were sawing away at my ring with a special device designed to cut the metal and not my finger.

Once the ring was sliced through, then came the hard part. Pulling the ring over my hyper-sized fleshy knuckle proved to be the painful part of the process.  As they say, see illustration below:

David's Swollen Hand and Ring Finger

David's Swollen Hand and Ring Finger

Within a few hours, my hand returned to its normal size and I retain a healthy ring finger.  My wedding ring can be repaired, as well.

But as I said in my lede, there are wrong ways to do things.  That happened today in the Senate Finance Committee when two different amendments for a public health plan, supported strongly by at least 65% of Americans according to recent national NYT/CBS poll, were defeated by a combination of Republicans (who have spent zillions of dollars as well as bazillions of hours trying to either wound to kill health care reform) and a group of Democrats (who, in the Senate, are referred to I think as Donkey Blue Dung Beetles).

Here’s my analogy.  The public option is the “ring finger” in the health care reform hand.  It is essential since people hands have had five fingers for a long time.  The ring finger, however, has become controlled by Big Medicine, and they have come up with this outrageous lie that their ring is soooooooo important and big, that the public plan ring finger should be amputated.  See illustration below:

Gigantic Engagement Ring. Credit: www.lovetoknow.com

Gigantic Engagement Ring. Credit: www.lovetoknow.com

Yep, save the ring; amputate the finger.  We won’t be able to  wear it on the hand, so we’ll just have to wear it like a crown, to remind us daily that Big Medicine is King/Queen of American Health Care.

Thanks, Max.  You’re doin’ a heckava job there making sure the American health care disaster is complete success.  Heckava job.

A Bible Only A Radical Conservative Could Love

Featured

The Conservative Bible Project has announced its intention to publish a version of the Bible that they believe will correct errors and translational biases caused by “liberal” agendas:

(Note: Links in the quoted passages go to Conservative Bible Project sites.)

Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations. There are three sources of errors in conveying biblical meaning:

  • lack of precision in the original language, such as terms underdeveloped to convey new concepts of Christianity
  • lack of precision in modern language
  • translation bias in converting the original language to the modern one.

Of these three sources of errors, the last introduces the largest error, and the biggest component of that error is liberal bias. Large reductions in this error can be attained simply by retranslating the KJV into modern English.[1]

Gospel of John, Codex Sheef Manuscript; Source Unknown

Gospel of John, Codex Sheaf Manuscript; Source Unknown

Here is the list of deficiencies they believe infect current translations, especially the New International Version:

As of 2009, there is no fully conservative translation of the Bible which satisfies the following ten guidelines:[2]

  1. Framework against Liberal Bias: providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias
  2. Not Emasculated: avoiding unisex, “gender inclusive” language, and other modern emasculation of Christianity
  3. Not Dumbed Down: not dumbing down the reading level, or diluting the intellectual force and logic of Christianity; the NIV is written at only the 7th grade level[3]
  4. Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms as they develop;[4] defective translations use the word “comrade” three times as often as “volunteer”; similarly, updating words which have a change in meaning, such as “word”, “peace”, and “miracle”.
  5. Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction by using modern terms for it, such as “gamble” rather than “cast lots”;[5] using modern political terms, such as “register” rather than “enroll” for the census
  6. Accept the Logic of Hell: applying logic with its full force and effect, as in not denying or downplaying the very real existence of Hell or the Devil.
  7. Express Free Market Parables; explaining the numerous economic parables with their full free-market meaning
  8. Exclude Later-Inserted Liberal Passages: excluding the later-inserted liberal passages that are not authentic, such as the adulteress story
  9. Credit Open-Mindedness of Disciples: crediting open-mindedness, often found in youngsters like the eyewitnesses Mark and John, the authors of two of the Gospels
  10. Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word “Lord” rather than “Jehovah” or “Yahweh” or “Lord God.”

The Conservative Bible Project evidently believes the eisegesis  and the imposition of political ideology, “conservative” take precedent in Bible translation rather than accuracy in communicating the author’s intent with the highest degree of integrity of possible, deliberately suppressing the urge to phrase the passage to one’s own ends.

Gospel of John, Egerton Papyrus.  Credit: http://historyofscience.com/G2I/timeline/images/egerton_papyrus.jpg

Gospel of John, Egerton Papyrus. Credit: http://historyofscience.com/G2I/timeline/images/egerton_papyrus.jpg

All Bibles have translational biases.  It is unavoidable.  The key is the intent of the translators and what they want to end up with.  For example, Martin Luther’s original translation of the Bible into vernacular German had passages translated in such a way that reflected his anti-Semitism.  He may or may not have been aware of them when he was working.  The Revised Luther Bible and the Today’s German Bible correct these biases.

So, let’s start with how to translate an ancient text.  You don’t start with an intermediate translation (such as the King James Version), you work with the oldest copies of the manuscript you can find.  Such as the Codex Sinaiticus, that’s now available online.  The most commonly used New Testament Greek source is the Nestle-Aland text.

Then you compare the different versions of these original language texts and look for variations.  You’ll find them, but biblical manuscripts tend to have fewer variants than other MSS from the same time periods.  The copiers were motivated to be accurate, and before the advent of printing, there were publishing houses producing multiple copies for sale, and they had proof-readers and editors.

In the case of the New Testament, you have four gospels, all written by different authors at different times.  Three of them, Matthew, Mark and Luke, used a common source, called “Q” by scholars (from the German word “Quelle” meaning source).  Q was a collection of the sayings of Jesus.  These three gospels are referred to as “The Synoptics” meaning from one view or source.  Unfortunately, no version of “Q” has survived or been discovered yet).  The Gospel of John approaches the story Jesus quite differently, but it, too, has the key common elements.  Think of it as giving a story pitch to Tom Clancy and Dan Brown.  They are required to follow the plot, but you end up with two quite different books.

What then do you do with the variants? You can throw them out (maybe the scribe was part of a “liberal” 12th Century publishing house) or you can look at how often that variants show up in manuscripts from different scribes.  If you decide your most reputable sources all include the verse, you generally will leave it in.  It is common for the “disputed” passages to be bracketed, such as the story of the “Woman caught in adultery” that only appears in the Gospel of John (John 7:53ff).  It does not appear in the earliest MSS, but after it does appears, almost all MSS include it.  As Net.Bible points out, it may come from an independent Jesus tradition, and though unlikely Johannine, it is thoroughly consistent with the acts of Jesus in numerous other passages.

Christ and the Adultress, Valentin de Boulogne, 1543.  Copyright: Getty Trust, Getty Images

Christ and the Adultress, Valentin de Boulogne, 1543. Copyright: Getty Trust, Getty Images

The Conservative Bible Project calls for explaining Jesus’ parables about money as “free market parables.”  They do not list any examples; however, I would counter that there are no “free market parables.”  All the parables that include an illustration of money are of the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven, how Christians are to think about God and treat each other as children of God, or are about stewardship.  Although Jesus commends giving liberally (sorry, just couldn’t help myself) and with generosity, he  is not giving a Dave Ramsey or Suze Orman seminar on investing or economics.  In fact, his anger and rampage over the money changers in the Temple is an example of Jesus condemning unchecked and unethical free market practices.

Their plan and intent, however, is far more dangerous than just spinning a passage to suit their ends.  What they propose is presenting another gospel.  Hans Kung, the preeminent German Catholic theologian, in his book, The Church (Verlag Herder KG, 1967) says this is schisma of the worst kind:

When the expression “heresy” is used in the New Testament, not in a neutral sense meaning “school” or “party”, but in a definitely negative sense, it implies something more than the word “schisma”. . .which indicates a “split” in the community based above all on personal quarrellings. “Heresy means a fellowship which questions the whole faith of the ecclesia by presenting “another gospel” (cf. Gal. 1:6-9), and which is therefore in opposition to the ecclesia (p 315).

Heresy? Perhaps, perhaps not.  But the authors of this version walk perilously close to “presenting another gospel” discounting 2000 years of scholarship and orthodoxy.

Fast forward to today.  One of the most common tools for studies of the Gospels is called a Gospel Harmony.  The complete text of all four gospels are lined up side by side, sometimes with the primary Greek MSS used for that translation, so you can read it to compare and contrast what the four authors wrote.

What I find interesting to the point of almost laughable about the Conservative Bible Project, is that the New International Version of the Bible was touted as the vanguard of conservative, evangelical translations when it was first published!

As for the cited example, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” (23:34), not all early MSS include the verse, but the inclusion is based on sound hermeneutical principles

Translating any ancient document is complex.  Most works were written by a single author.  The Bible was written by numerous authors over a period of perhaps 1000 years.  The Conservative Bible Project, with what they list on their website, appears to lack the panel of reputable biblical scholars needs for an accurate translation, in addition to having a dubiously authentic rationale to remake this work into their own image.

If you want an English translation that was intended to be as accurate reflection of the best Greek sources, chose the New American Standard Bible (1960).  The “Updated Version” (1997) has retained that translation accuracy while creating a text that is more readable.  The 1960 version was often written in a style that was better “Greek” than it was English.  The Updated Version corrects this tendency.

The Conservative Bible Project is about to commit a travesty of Biblical proportions.

Sniffer Report: The Countdown to Annihilate Health Care Reform is Running

Featured

The Sniffer: Big Medicine's Atomic Radiation Detected!

The Sniffer: Big Medicine's Atomic Radiation Detected! Credit: Smith Detection, UK

Update: The Senate Finance Committee voted 14-9 today, 13 Oct, (Olympia Snowe, R-ME, was the sole Republican to vote with the Democratic majority) to pass the Health Care Reform Legislation they have been working on since January.

************

For years Big Medicine–led by America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP)–has been planning to obliterate the next attempt at health care reform.  I call it their “nuclear option.”

For the past year I’ve been sleuthing between the lines of the great media Sturm und Drang over health care reform legislation for clues to what AHIP was up to, which turned out to be far easier than I ever imagined. I assumed that they were trying to surreptitiously maneuver their anti-health reform nuclear device into position.  Only it wasn’t very surreptitious.  They were clumsy, overplayed their hand, their corporate brow becoming sweatier by the week.  So, today, AHIP released a study that was supposed to turn us all to stone.  Or something like that.  It had to be outrageously expensive to commission. Therefore the anticipated effect should have been just as extreme, reasserting their ascendancy over all things health care related.  MSNBC reported:

The study commissioned by America’s Health Insurance Plans marked a shift in strategy by the industry, which had been working for months behind the scenes to help shape health care legislation. With the Senate panel set to vote on legislation the industry fears could result in a loss of revenue, the insurers went on the attack, in dramatic fashion.

Maybe MSNBC can’t say AHIP’s plan has come apart at the seams, is in disarray, and the attack is a panic attack, but I can.  I’m writing political commentary.  AHIP should have called PhRMA and asked for a few semi’s filled with tranquilizers sent over to their headquarters.  But then AHIP would have to exercise rescission on itself for a pre-existing condition, a psychiatric anxiety disorder.  Or else, raise the rates on themselves so high for filing a claim that no one in AHIP could afford their own insurance.  To my way of thinking that leaves the Big Wigs of AHIP with the sole option of chewing on their fingernails.

Despite hundreds of millions of our health care dollars spent on lobbying and advertising by AHIP–the money we pay for the health insurance that is supposed to cover our medical costs–the wave of public sentiment, including many progressive politicians, for universal health care, a public option, and a right to medical care has grown higher and stronger.  It has begun to crest, a powerful rolling tube of determination racing toward the shore.

The strategies of Big Medicine, on the other hand, have been not at all as successful as they believed their money and influence should be.  They are angry; they are frustrated.  No one, they believe, has the right to interfere with their carefully crafted system that keeps the people at the top fabulously wealthy while the common rabble who pay them grow less and less healthy, creating desperation for medical care at any price those at the top choose to charge.  No one!  It must be stopped regardless of the consequences.

Today, instead of stunned submission, they got unbridled derision.

As reported by the Associated Press, the new report was immediately blasted for its conspicuous conspicuousness:

Questions about the technical soundness of the industry analysis by the PricewaterhouseCoopers firm was a big part of the discussion Monday. The release of the study late Sunday on the eve of the federal Columbus Day holiday had Democrats crying foul.

“The misleading and harmful claims made by the profit-driven insurance companies are politicking for corporate gain at its worst,” said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.

You can read AHIP’s defense of the report by their spokesperson, Nancy Ignagni, who was interviewed by the News Hour’s Margaret Warner, by clicking here.  I watched the interview.  Nancy looked very grim and used lots of insurance jargon as a way to sound quite peckish and put-out with all of us mere peons who immediately recognized this report was the biggest crock of bantha poodoo since George the 43rd declared “Mission Accomplished” in, what was it, 1383.

Courtesy Getty Images

Courtesy Getty Images

Nevertheless, it is zero hour.  The anti-health care reform atomic bomb is in position.  AHIP has its finger on the button.  They will not be trifled with.  The so-called “report” (undoubtedly a work of fiction so cleverly devised it would make Dan Brown envious) is the start of the count-down clock.

Make no mistake about it.  AHIP will push that button.  Only the will of the American People, demanding from the President and the Congress no compromise on the establishment of Universal Health Care will determine whether or not the bomb goes off.

bravo_test_s atomic mushroom cloud

Sniffer Report: AHIP Pushed the Button and…

Featured

The Sniffer

The Sniffer

e=mc2 (Excessive-influence = moola x congressional-greed squared)

America’s Health Insurance Plans pushed the button on their “nuclear option” bomb to blast health care reform into oblivion.  The safety was released, the countdown went to zero, and “click!”

This is what AHIP and Big Medicine wanted to hear:

bravo_test_s atomic mushroom cloud(Click on the photo)

Instead they heard this, from the President of the United States:

In fact, the insurance industry is rolling out the big guns and breaking open their massive war chest – to marshal their forces for one last fight to save the status quo. They’re filling the airwaves with deceptive and dishonest ads. They’re flooding Capitol Hill with lobbyists and campaign contributions. And they’re funding studies designed to mislead the American people.

It’s smoke and mirrors. It’s bogus. And it’s all too familiar. Every time we get close to passing reform, the insurance companies produce these phony studies as a prescription and say, “Take one of these, and call us in a decade.” Well, not this time. The fact is, the insurance industry is making this last-ditch effort to stop reform even as costs continue to rise and our health care dollars continue to be poured into their profits, bonuses, and administrative costs that do nothing to make us healthy – that often actually go toward figuring out how to avoid covering people. And they’re earning these profits and bonuses while enjoying a privileged exception from our anti-trust laws, a matter that Congress is rightfully reviewing.

Don’t think for one second that AHIP has conceded or surrendered.  As the bills move through the process of being reconciled, the intensity of the pressure on Congress and YOU and ME, will intensify into a political nuclear storm, the likes of which we have never seen.  The days before the final votes in the Senate and the House will be filled with a Big Medicine-financed noise that would turn an Orc to stone.

President Obama, however, did not stop there:

Last November, the American people went to the polls in historic numbers and demanded change. They wanted a change in our policies; but they also sought a change in our politics: a politics that too often has fallen prey to the lobbyists and the special interests; that has fostered division and sustained the status quo. Passing health insurance reform is a great test of this proposition. Yes, it will make a profound and positive difference in the lives of the American people. But it also now represents something more: whether or not we as a nation are capable of tackling our toughest challenges, if we can serve the national interest despite the unrelenting efforts of the special interests; if we can still do big things in America.

I repeat here what I posted on August 15, 2009:

There are times in the history of a nation, that certain reforms, regardless of the opposition, and, yes, even despite the fears of some must be overcome and guaranteed for all as part of the Common Good.  One of those times was the Emancipation Proclamation abolishing slavery.  One of those times was the ratification of the 19th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States granting women the right to vote.  One of those times was Brown v. The Board of Education decision of the United States Supreme Court that revolutionized equality in education for all U. S. citizens.  Many more could be mentioned.

Now is the time for health care to be added to those moments of sublime national change, to join those great reforms, cast as the finest, hardest steel into our Nation of Laws as an inalienable right and an eternal Blessing of Liberty.


2009 Pandemic H1N1 Influenza A: A Balanced Presentation by a Family Practice Physician

Featured

Extreme Thinkover Guest Article

2009 Pandemic H1N1 Influenza A:

A Balanced Presentation by a Family Practice Physician

By John Bogen, MD; Northwestern University Medical School, 1994

I am a family practice physician who wishes to write a balanced presentation of facts – no fear mongering in either direction. In the article below I often use the misnomer “swine flu” since it is by this name that the general public has come to know this virus. I am not trying to be “politically correct” here – scientifically the virus has swine, avian, and human influenza virus components – it’s just too cumbersome and wordy to write “2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza A” when “swine flu” is understood. “Seasonal flu” refers to the strains of influenza we see in “non-pandemic” years.

Disclosure: I have no ties, financial or otherwise, to the government or pharmaceutical companies. I do own mutual funds which invest in thousands of different companies. I do not benefit financially if patients are vaccinated (reimbursement covers just the cost of vaccine, and there is no mark-up).

H1N1 Virus

H1N1 Virus

The virus which started this pandemic was first identified in Mexico in March 2009, and then in California in April 2009. Influenza vaccine takes 5-8 months to invent, test, produce, test again, manufacture on a large scale, allocate, distribute, and administer. The chicken egg-based process has its limitations. A case could be made to develop other methods to improve speed and allow people allergic to egg proteins safe access to vaccine.

Clinical trials of several thousand people show that the swine flu vaccine is safe, but it is reasonable to expect rare serious reactions to occur once millions of people are vaccinated. More commonly, some people feel arm soreness or generalized malaise for a few days after the shot. This is a reaction of the body’s immune system to the vaccine. You cannot get the actual influenza infection from either swine or seasonal flu shots. The vaccine will likely save tens of thousands of lives, some of them through herd immunity if a critical percent of people in communities get vaccinated. The absolute benefit of the vaccine will obviously be reduced by any delays there are in getting vaccinated.

Unvaccinated, the estimated case fatality rate for swine flu is similar (we won’t know more precise numbers for a few months) to the seasonal flu, “only” 0.01-0.1%. This is lower than in 1918, and comparable to 1957 & 1968. We can expect more people to get the influenza this season than in normal flu seasons since this is a pandemic – there is little natural immunity to this new virus in the general population. If 100 million (one third of the U.S. population) people get infected, this means approximately (ballpark figure; it won’t be 1,000 or 1 million) 10,000-100,000 deaths. The practical benefit for most people isn’t preventing hospitalization or death, but rather it’s like an “insurance policy” against getting influenza and missing a week of work or staying home to care for a sick child, or for that college student who doesn’t want to risk getting sick during final exams week in the heart of flu season.

The swine flu vaccine was 97% effective overall in triggering a protective antibody level in a clinical trial, 93% in the elderly. In real life, don’t count on numbers this good, maybe 90%. The seasonal flu vaccine is only 60-80% effective and even lower for elderly (as low as 30%). Herd immunity is very important for seasonal flu. Elderly seem to have some natural immunity to swine flu, and this may be due to the fact that variations of the 1918 H1N1 were in wide circulation until the 1957 pandemic of H2N2. Seasonal H1N1 disappeared until 1977, and ironically, may have reappeared due to accidental lab release. Surprisingly and dishearteningly, young and healthy people and pregnant women seem to be dying from swine flu, which is different from seasonal flu which mostly just kills elderly, immunocompromised (i.e. weakened immune systems), the very young, and those with serious underlying medical conditions (notably heart, lung, and dialysis patients).

A nice source of the latest statistics on the extent of pandemic influenza is http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/ – note the time lag between the dates data are available for and the current date.

There is a Japanese study showing influenza vaccine saves lives. I include this because it demonstrates what happened when the shot was mandatory for school children, and then deaths increased after the shot was made optional. Also, there are no U.S. politics, drug companies, or conspiracies involved. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/344/12/889

washyourhands1Hygiene is the best way to avoid getting influenza (seasonal or swine). I’d suggest using a paper towel to touch faucets and doors in public places and avoiding shaking hands (just tell a white lie that you’re coming down with something, and this awkward impolite moment turns into a “thank you for being concerned about my health” moment). Grocery carts and groceries others (i.e. other customers, stockers, and the cashier) have touched are also sources of infection. Also, avoid touching your eyes/nose/mouth with unwashed hands. Cough and sneeze into your elbow. Disinfectant wipes are convenient and effective in situations where hand washing is impractical. Antimicrobial soap is not necessary.

Patients who decide to get the swine and / or seasonal flu shots should be aware that currently about 99% of flu cases are swine flu (a type of influenza A abbreviated as S-OIV H1N1 = swine-origin influenza virus H1N1). As we move into winter, we might see more seasonal flu strains (a different H1N1 influenza A, H3N2 influenza A, and influenza B). But, as per past pandemics, the new strain tends to dominate and replace the old strains in circulation in the community. Therefore, we could very well see that most cases this fall / winter are swine flu, and thus the swine flu vaccine might be more important to get than the regular seasonal influenza vaccine.

A study reported to me on 10/7/09 via email said that the seasonal flu vaccine might give partial protection against swine flu. An unpublished report from Canada shows the opposite effect – that one vaccine weakens the benefit of the other vaccine by half. In light of this uncertainty, some infectious disease specialists have recommended a 2 week delay between the vaccines. Practically speaking, this phenomenon will have already occurred in many situations due to the delays in receiving the swine flu vaccine from its foreign manufacturers.

The facts on the 1976 “swine flu” vaccine debacle (i.e. there was no pandemic, false alarm, different from 2009): 532 people got Guillain-Barre out of 40 million vaccinations, and of those, 32 people died. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/361/3/279 This year’s swine flu is very different from the strain in 1976. Since then, flu vaccines are associated with (not necessarily cause and effect) a 1 in 100,000 to 1,000,000 chance of getting Guillain-Barre. This is smaller than the chance of death from swine flu.

Most swine flu shots, and seasonal flu shots from multi-dose vials, have 25 micrograms (0.025 milligrams) of mercury in the form of thimerosal (contains ethyl mercury) as a preservative. The half life of ethyl mercury is 7 – 10 days, so it is out of your system within a few weeks (4 half lives). I believe it is safe according to research studies. Opponents of my view cannot cite any clinical study showing it to be unsafe. Here is one study showing that it is safe: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/357/13/1281 Due to public outcry, thimerosal has not been present in routine childhood vaccines since 2001 (some non-routine childhood shots do have thimerosal). The quantity of mercury is comparable to what we get from our environment (doesn’t necessarily make it O.K.) or food (e.g. a can of tuna).

Addendum:

The nasal swine flu vaccine has no mercury, but only a limited number of doses will be available. It is indicated in non-pregnant healthy people age 2-49. I am unaware of any reports of serious adverse reactions with the seasonal version of this vaccine in prior years or the new pandemic H1N1 nasal vaccine. There are some restrictions because it is a live-attenuated virus. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/nasalspray.htm

Some anti-vaccine people are propagandizing the fact that the State of Washington suspended its strict law on legal limits for mercury content of vaccines. The 0.5 microgram limit was the equivalent of banning all vaccines with thimerosal. Some seasonal flu and most swine flu vaccines have 25 micrograms of mercury, thus lifting the ban was the equivalent of making those shots legal in Washington (they are legal in the other 49 states). Instead of being part of a “government conspiracy,” the State of Washington was actually getting in line with all the other 49 states, putting the decision whether or not to get the vaccine back in the hands of patients and their physicians. http://www.doh.wa.gov/cfh/Immunize/documents/parentinfo5305.pdf and http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm.

I realize there are certain people that won’t believe medical facts because they don’t trust the government, pharmaceutical companies, CDC, WHO, doctors, the health system in general, etc. The current health care reform debate is fueling a lot of the rhetoric. The virus could care less about one’s personal politics. It’s a free country. Shots are not mandatory. And even if you get influenza you’ve got a 99.9-99.99+% chance of coming out fine. The swine flu will rarely kill humans, and the vaccine will have even fewer serious adverse reactions – for those few individuals, the flu season will be tragic. A non-medical analogy to this debate is playing the lottery – you cannot expect to win, but the investment is minimal when purchasing one ticket. Patients should make informed decisions about their health care based on unbiased facts, and I have tried my best to present what I feel to be relevant. Patients also should consult with their personal physicians to discuss their concerns. Regardless, I think we all should hope that the flu season is not too severe, and that the vaccine causes minimal problems.

Article printed with the permission of the author

The Numbers of a Miracle: 220-215

Featured

One step closer.  Not done, but one step closer.  Plenty of  opposition still left.  The Sniffer will remain vigilant.  AHIP, PhRMA, Big Medicine, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Anti-Reform PACs and Astroturfers.  Probably not their best day.

The House of Representatives voted, 220-215, and the Affordable Health Care for America Act, H.R. 3962, passed.

Universal Health Care took its closest step to being a reality in the history of  the nation.  We stand at the threshold of being a  healthier people.  Those determined individuals who through choice or calling have dedicated their lives to being healers today were honored.  Yes, honored.  A doctor, a nurse, an aide, a therapist of any stripe, even the chaplain, administrator, clerk, or support staff.  Even those in Big Medicine who dedicate their lives to creating the best medical care possible, despite the the greed that has held them hostage.  Today they were given a new legitimacy, not in what they do, they’ve always had that.  Yes, I know there are those who take advantage of the trust they’ve been given, or reach a point of compassion fatigue where they lose their edge. And make mistakes.  But that is not the point.

Tonight we celebrate the majority, who work and work and work that the sick and injured are given the chance to have their lives back, or to be given a life for the very first time.  Tonight, in America, the healers have a new identity.  Or nearly so.  Like the subtle change from night to twilight, that just perceivable shift from sky black to the dimming of the stars, the new dawn of medical vitality is just over the horizon.

The Caregivers’ dawn is rising.  America the healthy will soon rise right along with them.

Dawn with Star Pike Pictures UK

Dawn with Star. Image Courtesy: http://www.pikepictures.co.uk/prints

H1N1 Status: Updated with Latest CDC Data

Featured

Extreme Thinkover Guest Article

Dr. John Bogen, MD

Updated with the Latest CDC Data, November 12, 2009

What is the current status of the pandemic in the U.S?

The CDC reported that for Week 43 (ended October 31, 2009), both hospitalizations and deaths from influenza dipped slightly. A total of 18 pediatric deaths were reported for the week. Virologic surveillance of 14,151 specimens sent to U.S. labs for testing revealed that 37.2% tested positive for influenza, a slight decrease. Of those that tested positive, 0.3% were influenza B, and 99.7% were influenza A. Of the influenza A strains subtyped, 99.9% were the pandemic strain, and only 0.1% were strains associated with strains seen in prior seasons. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/

What do these data mean for the average patient? The seasonal influenza vaccine has so far had little value, since almost all the influenza currently circulating is the new pandemic strain. The pandemic vaccine has just now begun to be distributed and given to patients. We are still in the heart of the flu season. It is too early to tell from the data if the country itself has “peaked” in terms of the number of cases. There are also regional and local differences – some areas have already been hit hard, as evidenced by school closures. Other areas have not yet peaked. It is also too early to tell if the pandemic vaccine has made any difference in the overall numbers.

In usual “non-pandemic” influenza seasons, an estimated 36,000 deaths occur directly or indirectly from influenza in the U.S., with 90% of these in the elderly or in those with weakened immune systems. One piece of good news this season is that the elderly population seems to have some immunity to the pandemic H1N1 strain, probably due to different H1N1 strains that were in circulation until the 1957 H2N2 pandemic, at which time H2N2 replaced H1N1 as the seasonal strain. The bad news is that we are seeing more than the usual number of deaths in younger people (under age 65). People with weakened immune systems are still dying disproportionately, and we are seeing more than the usual number of deaths in previously healthy individuals including children and pregnant women.

According to a CDC report on November 12, 2009, here have been about 3,900 total deaths since the pandemic started. The estimated mortality rate has been about 0.022% for elderly, 0.024% ages 18-49, and 0.007% ages 0-17.

Data on vaccine safety are difficult to obtain at this time, since distribution of the vaccine has just begun. Several highly publicized anecdotes of serious reactions have appeared in the lay press. Most of these were with the seasonal vaccine. Ongoing clinical testing of the pandemic vaccine has continued to show good short-term safety. One must keep in mind that a temporal association between vaccine and symptom does not imply causality, but patients with serious reactions (e.g. anything more than local muscle soreness from the shot and the common few days of general malaise following the shot) can and should be reported to VAERS. It is quite obvious that, worst case scenario, that deaths from pandemic influenza greatly exceed the number of serious reactions from the vaccine.

The next few weeks will be critical. Between vaccine being distributed / administered and the pandemic running its course through communities, one would hope to see a downward trend in hospitalizations and deaths. The vast majority of unvaccinated patients who get pandemic influenza will be fine after a few days of misery. The vast majority of patients who get the vaccine prior to getting sick from pandemic influenza will not have a serious reaction to the vaccine and also will not get ill or die from the virus. If we see fewer deaths from influenza this season than the usual 36,000, that would be a good thing, but hardly a consolation to the families and friends of people who died from the pandemic.

If I may offer my educated opinion, I predict the pandemic strain will continue to be the dominant strain of influenza in the community. Next year’s seasonal influenza vaccine will include the current pandemic H1N1 strain (or a mutated version thereof that exists next spring), and influenza B. With luck, subsequent seasons will be mild because so many would have already gotten ill and developed immunity to the novel H1N1. The elderly will continue to have some natural immunity, and the vaccine and herd immunity will protect most of the rest of the population.

We All Deserve Health Care

Featured

Quinnipiac Poll: What the Republicans Failed to Mention About Health Care Reform

Featured

A Sniffer Report: The Quinnipiac House Health Care Bill PollThe Sniffer: Always on the Job to Sniff Out Anti-Healthcare Reform Radiation

During the Senate debate on the Health Care Reform Legislation,  the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a number of Republican senators referred to a op-ed piece by David Broder, Washington Post columnist, titled, “A Budget-buster in the making.“  In his column, Mr Broder quotes from a survey poll conducted by Quinnipiac University released on November 19, 2009.  Mr Broder, focusing on just one question, states:

It read: “President Obama has pledged that health insurance reform will not add to our federal budget deficit over the next decade. Do you think that President Obama will be able to keep his promise or do you think that any health care plan that Congress passes and President Obama signs will add to the federal budget deficit?”

The answer: Less than one-fifth of the voters — 19 percent of the sample — think he will keep his word. Nine of 10 Republicans and eight of 10 independents said that whatever passes will add to the torrent of red ink. By a margin of four to three, even Democrats agreed this is likely.

That fear contributed directly to the fact that, by a 16-point margin, the majority in this poll said they oppose the legislation moving through Congress.

Hmm, is that so, Mr Broder?  Well, I just happened to read the complete news release from the researchers at Qunnipiac, including all those boring tables and numbers, and I came away with a completely different conclusion.

In Mr. Broder’s defense, he cites the opening statement of the report correctly:

Three-quarters of American voters – 74 percent – like President Barack Obama as a person, but only 47 percent like most of his policies, and voters disapprove 51 – 35 percent of the health care overhaul passed by the House of Representatives which he has endorsed, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

Voters disapprove 53 – 41percent of President Obama’s handling of health care.

Perhaps, though, Mr. Broder only read those two paragraphs, because just two paragraphs later is this statement:

Voters favor 57 – 35 percent giving people the option of being covered by a government- run health insurance plan, the “public option.” Independent voters approve 55 – 39 percent. The overall approval is down from 61 – 34 percent in an October 8 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. And they oppose two proposals to modify it:

* Allowing states to opt out of the public option is a bad idea, voters say 49 – 43 percent;

* Voters also oppose 47 – 38 percent the “trigger,” where the public option kicks in only if private insurance does not cover enough people.

Mr. Broder, as well as the distinguished Senators from the Republican Caucus, conveniently forgot to mention these results.  And some others, very important others, but we’ll get to those in a moment.

How should we parse these responses?  First of all, as an experienced researcher myself, the question is not very well written.  Not because of the content; it is a perfectly legitimate question to ask.  But the setup is too complex, and it borders on being a leading question.  It also should have been split into two questions:

  1. Do you think that President Obama will be able to keep his promise,
  2. Do you think that any health care plan that Congress passes and President Obama signs will add to the federal budget deficit?

Because of the way the question is phrased, we do not know to which of the two issues the respondent is answering.  Technically, the question should have been thrown out and the results not reported.

This assessment is strengthened in light of the next set of results.  In contrast to the results of the first question, the voters show considerable support for components of the health care reform.  By a margin of 55-37 percent, voters support the public option.  They oppose letting states opt out by 49-43 percent, and they oppose the “trigger” option by 47-38 percent.

Now, I don’t know about you, but these three items are among the most important in the entire health care reform legislation.  Couldn’t one, with some degree of confidence, say that from these results the American public generally supports key elements of the bills going through Congress?

That depends.  When asked if the respondents supported the House version of the bill, the split was 51-35 percent oppose, but 14 percent gave no answer.  The strongest opposition was expressed by whites, over 55 years of age, making more than $100,000, and describing themselves as conservative, and born again Christian evangelicals.   The strongest support came from African-Americans, in the 18-34 year old age range, with incomes less than $50,000 per year, describing themselves as liberal. (No data for Black religious preference was listed.)

As for President Obama’s support of the House bill, the attitude of most Americans toward him appears not to be much affected.  The category “no difference” runs consistently in the 40-50 percent range, with the obvious exception of those who identify themselves as Republican.  Since the percent of people who look favorably upon the president for his support of the House bill averages roughly 30 percent, adding it  to those whose attitude has not changed, we can’t draw too many conclusions, because the ones claiming no difference may be overall positive or negative.

The respondents, however, contradict themselves.  The next four questions all have to do with core concepts of health care legislation: the public option, states having the authority to opt out of the federal plan, the passage of a “trigger” provision that would  activate under a set of conditions where not enough people were covered by an established date, and whether or not Congress should pass the legislation this year.  On all four items, the responses are solidly positive.

But one issue they do not contradict themselves is their opinion of the Republicans and their behavior regarding the health care reform legislation.

While this survey has bad news for the President, the news for Republicans is worse:

Voters say 45 – 36 percent, including 40 – 37 percent among independents, that Obama is better able to handle health care than congressional Republicans. In October, it was 47 – 31 percent in the President’s favor.

Voters also say 59 – 29 percent that Republicans are not making a good faith effort to work with Obama and the Democrats on health care.

As one might expect, neither Mr. Broder nor the Republicans, reading the same industry-supplied script they’ve been parroting for months, mentioned anything about this part of the survey.  In the spirit of fairness, the voters aren’t all that favorably disposed to the Democrats either, but  out of Pres. Obama (45-36% over the GOP), Democrats (36-55%) and Republicans (31-58%) , the GOP  comes out dead last.

The quest for universal health care continues, strongly braving the winds of opposition blowing at hurricane strength.  The storm may increase, but the gale will not deter us.  All storms blow themselves out.  America will have universal health care.  A new blessing of Liberty will be enshrined in the Great American Experiment.

Now for Something Beautiful…Sunset Over Kecks’ Twin Domes

Featured

This from Astronomy.com:

The Keck interferometer on Mauna Kea, Hawaii. The interferometer consists of two telescopes each with a 10 meter reflecting mirror, made up of 36 hexagonal mirrors on computer controlled actuators for pinpoint accuracy (4 nano-meters), in separate domes, about 279 feet (85 meters) apart.  Photo Credit: W. M. Keck Observatory.

Twin Keck 30 Meter Observatories at Sunset, Mauna Kea, Hawaii

Note the observing shutters have been opened and are facing east, so when the first objects to be observed come up over the horizon, the telescopes will be able to track them immediately. Interferometry has two great observing advantages. First, using two telescopes twice the amount of light coming from the object is captured. Second, just like having two eyes, each image is that tiny bit from a different perspective, giving the telescopes a kind of stereo vision and that allows for the computer processing the image to add in a great more detail.  The observatory to the left of the two Kecks is the Subaru 8.2 meter optical/infrared telescope operated by Japan.

Cutaway View of Twin Keck Domes and Astronomy Center

From the Astronomy.com article:

An exquisite look at black holes

The Keck Interferometer directly resolves the accreting material around supermassive black holes in galactic nuclei. Provided by Max Planck Institute, Bonn, Germany. December 8, 2009

“An international research team presents some of the first long-baseline interferometric measurements in the infrared towards nearby active galactic nuclei with the Keck Interferometric Telescope in Hawaii. The team, led by Makoto Kishimoto from the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy in Bonn, Germany, found the measurements to indicate a ring-like emission from sublimating dust grains and its radius to yield insights into the morphology of the accreting material around the black hole in these nuclei.”

Cutaway Diagram of the Keck 10 Meter Telescope with Annotations

For more photos of the Kecks and their observing gallery, click here.

Photos Courtesy of the W.M. Keck Observatory.

VISTA: Celebrating First Light of ESO’s Newest Observatory

Featured

The European Space Agency and Great Britain

proudly announce the “First Light” of the world’s

newest observatory: VISTA

ESO's VISTA "First Light" Photo: The Flame Nebula in Orion (NGC 2024)

A new telescope — VISTA (the Visible and Infrared Survey Telescope for Astronomy) — has just started work at ESO’s Paranal Observatory and has made its first release of pictures. VISTA is a survey telescope working at infrared wavelengths and is the world’s largest telescope dedicated to mapping the sky. Its large mirror, wide field of view and very sensitive detectors will reveal a completely new view of the southern sky. Spectacular new images of the Flame Nebula, the centre of our Milky Way galaxy and the Fornax Galaxy Cluster show that it is working extremely well.

VISTA, located in Paranal, Chile, at an elevation of 2635 meters (8645 ft) has a 4.1 meter single mirror (unlike the Twin Kecks in Hawaii that have 36 small hexagonal mirrors to create 10 meter reflectors).  According to the VISTA website, “In photographic terms it can be thought of as a 67 megapixel digital camera with a 13 000 mm f/3.25 mirror lens.”

Congratulations to the ESO and U.K. Consortium!  VISTA: Welcome to the Universe!

Star of Wonder–Transformed from Myth to Astronomical Event?

Featured

Star of Wonder-- Myth or Astronomical Event?

Part 1

This is a story that starts in the wrong place.  They’re my favorite kind.  And the wrong time.  That’s even better.  A story that starts in the wrong place and the wrong time has to be interesting.  There’s something to be said for predictability, but it rarely makes for a good plot or an intriguing ending.

This story does not have those disadvantages.  Some people have believed it was true.  Others believed it was false.  Others, still, believed it was myth, of uncertain veracity, but a beautiful, even elegant narrative.  For two millennia, Christians have believed it was part of a miracle.  Others, of different faiths, may have acknowledged it as a lovely story, but of no spiritual significance.  For the past four hundred years, as men and women have studied nature in new and innovative ways, and expanded our understanding of the Earth and the sky into a cosmos unimaginably large and old, the story’s credibility declined, seemingly moving toward the status of a fairy tale.

All of this, while true, is not the start I to which I was alluding.

Flores sapiens next to Homo sapiens. Photo Credit: National Geographic & Nature/ Peter Brown

Sometime around six thousand years ago, the human race, Homo sapiens sapiens discovered a problem.  The Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) and the Cro Magnon (Arcahic Homo sapiens) were long extinct; one hominid now possessed all that was known to exist (the earliest dating for Homo florsiensis is currently 18K years). It might have been earlier, but the record left by humans before that gets harder and harder to read.  So, I’ll suggest six thousand years, with the caveat that date might need to be adjusted with the next archaeological blockbuster discovery.  The problem was the Earth.  More specifically, the ground.

I need to, at this point, dispel one very important, misconception.   That is the

Turkana Boy: Homo erectus, 1.5 mil. yrs. Field Museum, Chicago. Replica. Your ancestor? Yes. Your intellectual equal? Nope.

fallacy of modernity.  The individuals I to whom I am referring are modern humans.  Same body, same brain, same capacity for intelligence, problem solving, or IQ.   Just like Albert Einstein, your neighbor Justin, who wears only faded NASCAR t-shirts, your eccentric Aunt Lizzy, that beauty Angelica or hunk Chad (depending on your hormonal drivings) who in high school you never had the nerve to ask out, or even your cousin Zeke.  All right, maybe not cousin Zeke, but that is only because he hasn’t put down the game controller or said a single word since Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 113 came out.  He may be more cyborg than human after all this time.

This is the paradigm I want you to remember: ancient ≠ primitive.  Got that?

Back to our discovery.  At some point in the ancient past, one of our ancestors had the revolutionary thought that the ground was substantively different from the sky.  This was not a “well, duh,” moment.  It was a paradigm shift, perhaps capable only due to the superior huge frontal cerebral cortex of the Homo sapiens.  The shift was beyond the observation of a day/night cycle, although that would have been part of it.  This shift, like the differentiation between the sense of the boundary between my body and not-my-body, changed the human perception between earth and sky.

Stuff comes out of the sky.  Rain, snow, hail, clouds, wind, fog, as well as birds and bugs.  Some of those things are good, even edible.  Bad things like volcanic or range fire smoke and ash, dangerous wind blowing debris and biting things can come out of the sky, too.

Geese flying over the surf. Oregon Coast, Sept '07

Some things, most things actually, in the sky are beyond reach.  The Sun, the Moon, the stars, and the wandering stars.  Some stars appeared to streak across the sky; others appeared mysteriously out of nowhere glowing with a dim head and a long tail.  And rarely, a flash of a new star in the night that soon disappeared.  Or every once in a while there was a day in which the Sun seemed to be consumed by a black disk, turning the day to dusk and all the birds stopped singing, or the Moon, its regular phases interrupted, too, a dark shadow crossing its face, then glowing a blood red before being released from its captivity.

Lunar Elipse, Feb. 27, 2007. Photo credit: Astronomy.com

The regular cycles of those things in sky that are out of reach is what we are interested in.  We live on the ground.  We can’t fly like the bugs or the birds.  We can’t live under water, either, but that is not the focus of this discovery.  Living on the ground, as we do, we know a lot about the ground.  Most of what lives on the ground keeps us alive.  Some of the other things that live on the ground can also kill us, but that is secondary to our discussion, as well.

Milky Way over Mauna Kea. Photo credit: Mauna Kea Observatory

On that day that one very bright modern human looked at the ground, maybe sifting a handful of dirt through his or her fingers, and then looking up at the sky, squinting at the sun or  gazing at the bright swath of starlight of the Milky Way, and said the equivalent of  “Huh, now that’s interesting,” and human understanding shifted forever.

From that moment, the science of astronomy was born, as well as those of geology and biology.  The problem was, earth and life were tangible.  The sky, however, was a complete mystery.

What was the sky?

Yes, that was the question: What was the sky?  What were the lights in the sky?   The daytime sky and the nighttime sky were so different.  Why was that?  Why did all the lights in the sky appear in the East, move in an arc reaching a highest point that changed with the season and then always set in the West?  But what about the stars in the Northern sky that never rose nor set?  For some of our observers, however, not knowing they lived below that line we now call the equator, the lights in the sky looked quite different, still rising and setting East to West, but those stars that never rose nor set were to the south.

The Sun, the greater light to rule the day, its brightness so intense to dare a glance

Total Solar Eclipse with Diamond Ring Effect

of more than a fleeting moment brought pain, even blindness.  At the same time, it brought the warmth of the day, its risings and settings regular, though half of the time, the days would grow longer and half of the time shorter, and with it the corresponding warmth and seasons.  The earth tuned itself to this great annular cycle, of living and dying, growing and seeding, warming and cooling.

The Moon, the lesser light to rule the night, possessed a soft glow that one could study without risk; its phases regular following the seasons decreed by its daytime master, its face never changing. Yet at intervals beyond comprehension, it, like the Sun, would be covered with a shadow, at times in part, at others completely.

Of the night, though, what of the Wandering Stars?  The first a fleeting spark always near the Sun’s rise or setting. Next, brighter than the others, one of the mornings and one of the evenings at times so bright it cast a light that caused shadows. Another with a glow of angry red, appearing out of nowhere and growing into a dominant light.  A fourth, a great golden giant stately moving through the heavens night after night.  Also a fifth, whose trek seemed like that of an old one slowly working its way through the constellations.  And some, it is said, saw a sixth, dim grey-blue phantom only on the rarest of nights.  Against the apparent immutable backdrop of the other lights at night, why did these few shine without the twinkle of all others, and how, against all reason, did they change their direction in the sky and track back toward the East, then inexplicably again reverse and march toward the West?

Five planets - Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn - gather over the ancient Stonehenge monument in England. *Image Copyright*: Philip Perkins

What was the sky?  Why did some of the lights form patterns against the black velvet backdrop of night?  What was the swath of light that cut across the sky from horizon to horizon?  What was the force or cause of their motion?  What were the faintest clouds of light, while others seemed to cluster into groups distinct from the random spread of most of the stars?

One might say the ancients had plenty of time to work this all out.  Day after day and night after night, if they chose to pay attention, they could discover patterns and cycles.   On every continent where humans collected, they in fact did pay attention, and observed the patterns and cycles.  What they decided those observations meant and what caused them was another thing altogether.

To explain the sky, both day and night, these individuals drew upon the source of information they understood the best: the ground and the sea, and the abundant life that inhabited both.  Those were the things they would touch.  They made the very logical assumption that the sky was made from the same things the earth and oceans were.  They couldn’t have been more wrong.  At the same time they couldn’t have been more right.

I must again remind you of our one rule: ancient ≠ primitive.  The observers devised theories about how the earth, sea, and sky came into being, using the “materials” to which they had access.  We call these descriptions of the creation of the world, myths.  That is, if we are honest, modernocentric, even arrogant.  It can result in our overlooking key facts and observations, assigning to them to the status of fable rather than seeing myths for what they were: descriptions of the origin and  forces of nature and life.

The Aztecs provide a perfect example of a creation account that follows their observations of the natural world:

Quetzalcoatl: Aztec Lord of the Morning Star & Wind

The dualistic gods Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca, lightness and darkness, looked down from their dwelling in the sky at the water below. Floating on top of the water was an enormous Earth Monster goddess who devoured all things with her many mouths, for the goddess had gaping mouths at the knees, elbows and other joints.

Everything the twins created, the enormous, floating, terrible, insatiable goddess ate. The twin gods, normally implacable enemies, agreed she had to be stopped. They transformed themselves into two enormous, slithering snakes, and slid silently into the dark, cool water, their cold eyes and flicking tongues seeking her body.

One of the snakes wrapped itself around the goddess’s arms and the other snake coiled itself around her legs and together they tore the immense Earth Monster goddess in two. Her head and shoulders became the earth and her belly and legs became the sky. Some say

Tezcatlipoca: Aztec Lord of Death, Creator of Fire, Night Sky, & Warriors

Tezcatlipoca fought the Earth Monster goddess in his human form and the goddess ate one of his feet, therefore his one-legged appearance. Angered by what the dual gods had done, and to compensate for her dismemberment, the other gods decided to allow her to provide the people with the provisions they needed to survive.

From her hair were created the trees, the grass and flowers; from her eyes, caves, springs and wells; rivers flowed from her mouth; and hills and mountains grew from her nose and shoulders.

The goddess, however, was unhappy, and after the sun sank into the earth the people would often hear her crying. Her thirst for human blood made her weep, and the people knew the earth would not bear fruit until she drank. This is the reason she is given the gift of human hearts. In exchange for providing food for human lives, the goddess demanded human lives.  Source: James W. Salterio Torres

Though the price of human sacrifice causes us to shudder, the battle with the Earth Monster goddess, with her defeat and dismemberment is hauntingly similar to the Sumerian story of the defeat of Tiamat:

Tiamat possessed the Tablets of Destiny and in the primordial battle she gave them to Kingu, the god she had chosen as her lover and the leader of her host. The deities gathered in terror, but Anu, (replaced later, first by Enlil and, in the late version that has survived after the First Dynasty of Babylon, by Marduk, the son of Ea), first extracting a promise that he would be revered as “king of the gods”, overcame her, armed with the arrows of the winds, a net, a club, and an invincible spear.

And the lord stood upon Tiamat’s hinder parts,

And with his merciless club he smashed her skull.

He cut through the channels of her blood,

And he made the North wind bear it away into secret places.

Markuk slaying Tiamat. Bas relief on stone.

Slicing Tiamat in half, he made from her ribs the vault of heaven and earth. Her weeping eyes became the source of the Tigris and the Euphrates. With the approval of the elder deities, he took from Kingu the Tablets of Destiny, installing himself as the head of the Babylonian pantheon. Kingu was captured and later was slain: his red blood mixed with the red clay of the Earth would make the body of humankind, created to act as the servant of the younger Igigi deities.

Source: Wikipedia–Tiamat

Two creation stories, having so many parallels, even though those who devised them lived on opposite sides of a planet they did not know as such, and who never had had contact with one another.

The ground, the sea, the sky were all the world.  Thousands of years would pass before the problem of the sky would again be addressed.  The untouchableness of the sky would create a new question, without which, this story could not continue in Part 2.

Landing the Health Care Reform Bill: It Feels Like Apollo 11 Redux

Featured

The voyage of the legislation to create a Health Care Reform Bill has all the

Sen. Harry Reid Launches Health Care Reform in U.S. Senate. Photo credit: C-Span

emotional elements of landing Apollo 11 on the Moon in July 1969.  Health Care reform has been a long, complex mission with an uncertain outcome.  Is it an overstatement to say that landing on the Moon and returning to Earth was an easier and safer endeavor than getting the Health Care Reform Bills passed, conferenced and onto the President’s desk for signature?

At this moment, it seems almost to be the case.

When Neil Armstrong took manual control of the lunar lander to find a safe spot to set down, a thousand different things could have gone wrong.  In fact, alarms were going off in the cockpit.

As the Eagle’s landing radar acquired the surface, several computer error alarms appeared. The first was a code 1202 alarm and even with their extensive training Armstrong or Aldrin were not aware of what this code meant. However, they promptly received word from CAPCOM in Houston that the alarms were not a concern. The 1202 and 1201 alarms were caused by a processing overflow in the lunar module computer. As described by Buzz Aldrin in the documentary In the Shadow of the Moon, the overflow condition was caused by his own counter-checklist choice of leaving the docking radar on during the landing process. Aldrin stated that he did so with the objective of facilitating re-docking with the CM should an abort become necessary, not realizing that it would cause the overflow condition.  Source: Wikipedia

Eagle Lunar Lander just seconds after separation, Apollo 11, July 1969, Photo: NASA

It’s one thing to read about it.  As we close this 40th Anniversary of the Apollo 11 Landing, it really is much more satisfying to watch it.  This video is one continuous shot of approximately the final 10 minutes of the descent and landing, viewed from the right window of the LEM.  The audio is quite good, as well.  Watching it still stirs in me that sense of excitement I felt as a 16 year old kid glued to the TV set with my family.

[For a similar, but NASA produced video, click HERE.  This is the final approach, and included is an inset window that tracks the Lander's progress crater by crater.  It provides a sense of perspective for the approach.]

Regarding the impending passage of the Senate bill and then the conference process, if you tend more toward the pessimistic side, you probably agree with Jonathan Cohn of The New Republic:

If your standard for comparison is your ideal health care reform, then of course this will be disappointing. Like every bill that’s moved through Congress, this one would leave millions uninsured even after full implementation–and leave millions with coverage facing substantial, although generally not crippling, financial burdens. It would introduce some reforms to the delivery system and, according to the official cost estimates, generate budget surpluses over time. But it’s not going to radically turn American health care into a paragon of cost efficiency.

If you tend more to the optimistic side, you probably agree with Paul Krugman of The New York Times:

Let me say that I get especially, um, annoyed at people who say that the plan isn’t really covering the uninsured, it’s just forcing them to buy insurance. That’s missing not just the community rating aspect, but even more important, it’s missing the subsidies. And we’re talking about big stuff: between Medicaid expansion and further support for families above the poverty line, we’re looking at around $200 billion a year a decade from now. Yes, a fraction of that will go to insurance industry profits. But the great bulk will go to making health care affordable.

So how anyone can call a plan to spend $200 billion a year on Americans in need a defeat for progressives is a mystery.

I wish there were a public option in there; I wish there were broader access to the exchanges; I wish the subsidies were even bigger. There’s lots of work to be done, work that may eventually culminate in a true, not simulated, single payer system. But even in this form, we’re looking at something that will make America a more just, more secure nation.

If you are a Republican or Tea Party Advocate, you are most likely hoping and praying the Health Care Reform bill will suffer the fate of the Soviet Luna 15 Lunar Lander Probe that was launched three days before Apollo 11:

Luna 15, launched only three days before the historic Apollo 11 mission to the Moon, was the third Soviet attempt to recover and bring lunar soil back to Earth. The spacecraft was capable of studying circumlunar space, the lunar gravitational field, and the chemical composition of lunar rocks… After completing 86 communications sessions and 52 orbits of the Moon at various inclinations and altitudes it began its descent. Astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin had already set foot on the Moon when Luna 15 fired its main retrorocket engine to initiate descent to the surface at 15:47 UT on 21 July 1969. Unfortunately, transmissions ceased only 4 minutes after deorbit at a calculated altitude of 3 kilometers. The spacecraft impacted the lunar surface on July 21, 1969. The spacecraft had probably crashed onto the side of a mountain.   Source: Wikipedia.

Launched 3 days before Apollo 11, the USSR's unmanned Luna 15 crashed onto the Moon's surface just hours after the Eagle had safely landed with Armstrong & Aldrin on board.

I’ll give House Minority Leader, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) the final word…

Photo courtesy Politico.com & BlueStateDigital.com

No, I think I’ll give this Tea Party protester the final word.  Just like the rest of us loyal and patriotic Amurricans, life without spell-check is worse than…oh, wait, he spelled the word right.  In high school he clearly decided to protest which sections of Mrs. Dewey’s English classes were not patriotic enough, because he was getting this way-too-liberal education paid for through public taxation.  And those unacceptable sections happened to include homonyms and writing complete sentences.  I think his pointy hat needs to be cone not a tri-corner.

A Tea Party Protester: The Epitome of the Well-Educated American. Photo: ImageShack

Star of Wonder– A Myth Transformed into an Astronomical Event?

Featured

Merry Christmas and


 

Happy Holidays


 

to my Readers!


 

On my DISCI Blogsite, I wrote two posts

regarding the latest thinking about

the Star of Bethlehem from an

astronomy point of view.  Was it real

or did Matthew in his gospel include the story of

the Magi for dramatic effect?

You may be surprised at the new theories

advanced by astronomers that point to the

distinct possibility the Star was an observed event!

Intrigued?

For a historically-based look at a beloved

Christmas symbol, click HERE.

 

Christmas Satellite 3D Globe by Tom Wagner

A Little Humor: Electronic Medical Record Alerts We’d Like to See

Featured

Warning signs are commonplace.  Most of them are appropriate and provide information that is worth heeding.  Part of the upcoming revolution in medicine is the computerized patient medical chart, most often known as the Electronic Medical Record or EMR for short.

The hospital I work for took the plunge into EMR in 1998, when the software was still very much in its infancy.  Twelve years later, along with dozens of upgrades and new version rollouts, our EMR is state of the art and has vastly reduced the amount of paper we used to use in our patient charts.  The savings, easily, is in the range of one-half to maybe even two-thirds.  It also assists in preventing medical errors that can harm our patients.

A typical electronic medical record screen shot. Photo: Happy Life

For all the advantages the EMR provides to the clinicians and the patients, this post is not really about what the EMR can do.  It’s about one feature of the EMR: the Alert Box.

Alert Boxes are automated pop-windows that contain information such as the patient’s drug or food allergies, drug interaction warnings, implanted medical devices like pacemakers, insulin infusion pumps and a host of other things related to the safety of the patient and reminders to the clinicians.  The alert boxes often look like this:

Alert Box in an EMR Screenshot. Photo courtesy: exscribe EMR Systems

These pop-up windows are an important and sometimes vital tool to protect patients and to alert doctors to critical information that will assist in their treatment of that person.

They are also boring.

Heh.

With a diagnosis like that, Dr. Waggoner believes a presecription for proper treatment is in order to avoid the reader succumbing to a case of terminalis bordomitis.   So, here, in no particular order is his contribution to the funny bone of medicine:

Alert Messages We’d Really Like to See…

Glossary:  pt= patient, dx=diagnosis, p.o.=by mouth, i.m.=a shot injection, NEJM=New England Journal of Medicine.

Warning: Patient has a terminal dx: Stage 4 Bewilderment

Warning: Face mask with shield required for this pt with dementia when administering p.o. meds. Pt was 5 time national watermelon seed spitting champion.

Warning: Pt has dx of hemera antidiatithemamitis. Provide instructions unaccordingly.  (Challenge: try to translate the illness)

Warning: Pt practices ancient art of hirsute armpit braiding. Dx: lice.

Warning: Pt has dx of schizophrenia with persistent delusions that he is a starfish because he has five appendages. Will only move when placed face-forward in contact with wall or floor.

Warning: Pt requires a sitter. Pt made a bomb out of a nitrile glove filled with alcohol gel hand cleaner and flushed it down the toilet.

Warning: Pt thinks physicians are manifestations of Satan because she claims somewhere in the Bible Lucifer appears dressed in white.

Warning: Pt believes that all medications given I.M. contain nanobots that broadcast his thoughts to the NSA.

Warning: Pt has an addiction to genealogies and will babble incessantly about the origins of your family name during the exam.

Warning: Pt has a small semiautomatic 9mm handgun (loaded) strapped to her inner thigh and if you ask her to remove it she will claim you are violating her constitutional rights to bear arms.

Warning: Pt will insist on explaining the meaning of each of his 87 tattoos before letting you treat him. Note: Be sure to act very interested in the ones on both of his knee caps. Pt agitates easily.

Warning: Pt will come with his copy of the complete works of Paracelsus and look up everything you do and diagnose to check if you’re right. Note: Be sure to brush up on the Harmonies before the pt visit.

Warning: Pt is a prospector. Will only pay in gold dust.

Warning: Pt will quote passages from the NEJM contradicting everything you say.

Warning: Pt ingests Mentoes and Diet Coke just prior to exam.

Warning: Pt has an implanted IPod.  Push right nipple to change tracks; twist left nipple to adjust volume.  Upload port located in right nostril diguised as a piercing,  Just pull to extend for easy connection.

Warning: Pt is hyper-patriotic.  Carries a flag wherever he goes.  Will insist the two of you stand at attention and recite the Pledge of Allegiance before beginning the exam.

Warning: Pt has a prostate exam fetish.

Warning: Pt has the Declaration of Independence tattooed on his right ear drum.  Will ask for a $20 donation to look at it.

Warning: This pt will only speak through a sock puppet on each hand.  Talk only to the one on the left hand.  The one on the right cusses like an old longshoreman.

Warning: Pt has carved the nail of his right big toe into a train whistle which he will insist on demonstrating all of the crossing codes.

Warning: Pt had a silicon cast of her head made, which she carrys with her at all times and talks to before she makes any decision.

Warning: Pt believes she channels Jessica Rabbit.

Any other warning messages come to mind?  Feel free to post yours in the comments (please keep them in the G and PG-13 rating range).

Born in the CAU’d!…Corporations of America Unlimited

Featured

As of today, unless Congress finds the courage and the will to push back against the Supreme Court, you now live, for all intents and purposes, in the Corporations of America Unlimited®.

Justices of the United States Supreme Court, 2110. Photo: SCOTUS Offical Portrait

Your rights as an individual citizen of the country previously known as the United States of America are now irrelevant.  Those rights you had will now be doled out to you by those who sit in the board rooms of the World’s biggest corporations, no longer by the now defunct Constitution of the United States and the Congress.

Your right to free speech, the expectation that your voice actually counts in political discourse and that your expression of that will be heard by your elected representatives, is now an endangered species.

The New Headquarters of the Unlilmited Corporations of America? Photo: Stock Photo, Source Unknown

If you were among those angry anti-government populace that wanted to vote out all the incumbents you may now sleep soundly with the assurance you have achieved your goal, not by voting out the crooks, but by ceding all their authority to the Corporations of America, now the only citizens with true voice and power.

Did I mean to say “citizens”?  Yes.  They have the same rights as you do, as an “organizational person” who may now use all their resources of finances and lobbying voice to rule the Corporations of America Unlimited®.  They have now all the same rights you used to have.  And they can use those rights to ensure that the rights you have are only the ones that ensure their profits have no limitations, and their ability to influence the congressional pawns they support do their bidding is unencumbered.

We are no longer free.  We are owned.  Does that mean we are slaves?  No, but we are serfs, or will be in a matter of time.

My guess is this outcome is not what the Republicans, neo-cons, and the Tea Baggers had in mind when they shouted “Give us back our country.”

They got something different.  They got a brand new country.  Only it does not belong to us.  It belongs to the Corporations who now may use their money and influence to get everything they pay for.

Tea Party Surprise--Did the Tea Baggers get more than they were demanding?

Is this true?  Well, the Supreme Court part of it is.  The corporations won their case.  What happens in real life remains to be seen.  If the worst turns out to be true, then we’ll need a new flag and national anthem.

Are You Proud to be CAU'd? Will this replace the "Stars and Stripes"?

Are you aware this is all so a conservative activist can show his film:

Hillary: The Movie Poster.  Image Courtesy Citizens United.

Hillary: The Movie. Image Courtesy David Bossie, Citizens United

David Bossie, the conservative activist who brought the case to defend his campaign-season promotion of the documentary “Hillary: The Movie,” said he was looking forward to rolling out his next film in time for the midterm elections.

Titled “Generation Zero,” the movie features the television host Lou Dobbs and lays much of the blame for the recent financial collapse on the Democrats.

“Now we have a free hand to let people know it exists,” Mr. Bossie said.  Source: The New York Times.

The always controversial Noam Chomsky made this all too astute observation:

The most effective way to restrict democracy is to transfer decision-making from the public arena to unaccountable institutions: kings and princes, priestly castes, military juntas, party dictatorships, or modern corporations (Emphasis added).

Corporations of America Flag. Photo courtesy Adbusters

Are you proud to be CAU’D™?

Post Script: I looked up CAU’D, to be sure I was not violating an established organization or a copyrighted set of initials.  To my surprise and cynical delight, Wikipedia provided this link:

Caudal (Latin – caud(a), tail): of, at, or near the tail or the posterior end of the body. In the human case, towards the bottom of the feet.

I could not have made up anything better to help make my point!

Could the H1N1 Pandemic Be Over? Dr. John Gives us the Straight Scoop

Featured

Guest Contributor, John Bogen, MD, provides another update on the H1N1 pandemic along with his observations with what to expect in the coming year.

Photo: UCSD.edu

Since August 30, 2009, 99+% of subtyped influenza A have been novel 2009 pandemic strains (944 different strains have been identified). And so far, seasonal H1N1 and H3N2 strains have not been resurgent, and have killed very few compared to past years. If the oft-quoted 36,000 deaths annually from seasonal influenza is correct (of which 90% are elderly), then we can be thankful this season that influenza has “only” killed about 10,000 due to it’s low virulence compared to seasonal H1N1 and H3N2, and the fact that elderly have some immunity to the pandemic strain due to their birth before the 1957 pandemic when H2N2 replaced H1N1 as the dominant strain.

H1N1 Influenza Virus. Photo: CDC

The CDC website has posted weekly updates (usually on Fridays). The presentation has been quite clear.

What could have been done better? One could blame the foreign manufacturers for the delay in vaccine, which admittedly has made the vaccine have little impact on the pandemic this season, but I cut them some slack – the virus was identified in California in April, and the pandemic was not declared until June.

If you want to improve the system, you could make the case to reduce legal liability and red tape in the U.S. to encourage more vaccine manufacture in the U.S. (only the nasal version was made here this season), and encourage pharmaceutical companies to move past the slow chicken egg processes.

Eggs Being Prepared for Vaccine Production. Photo: Medirsource.com

The one thing I disagree with the official govt policy now is the strong push for healthy individuals to get vaccinated, and consume the vaccine that has already been manufactured and paid for. Herd immunity [Note: herd immunity occurs when a sufficient percentage of the population either has had the influenza, or has been vaccinated against it that there is no longer anyone left to contract the virus-DW]  is now very high due to the fact so many people contracted pandemic H1N1 already, with a smaller herd immunity effect due to the delayed vaccine. Healthy people have an extremely low mortality rate from pandemic H1N1 (most deaths were those with chronic illnesses as per usual, with a shift in absolute numbers towards younger people simply due to the fact that younger folk got so many more cases due to no innate immunity).  In my humble opinion, it is now a waste of time to vaccinate healthy individuals, and time should be spent by us PCPs on our non-vaccine duties.

I offer a prediction that the pandemic is over (i.e. no more peaks this season) in the U.S., and we will not see a resurgence until the usual influenza season next winter. I also would not be surprised if pandemic H1N1 becomes the new dominant seasonal strain in subsequent flu seasons (as happened historically after the 1957 and 1968 pandemics).

I predict the vaccine next season will be quadrivalent, containing pandemic H1N1 strains in circulation now (i.e. an update from current vaccine that contains hemagglutinin from strains present last spring / early summer), the former seasonal H1N1 and H3N2 (just in case they don’t disappear from circulation), and influenza B. I do not have info on the seasonal vaccine being prepared for the southern hemisphere’s upcoming flu season (during our summer).

I'm too cute to cause flu.What? I did? Oops, sorry! Photo Courtesy: MADMAXX174 Photo Bucket

This whole exercise was a “rehearsal” for the event that we ever get a really devastating influenza A pandemic, as would occur if H5N1 (a.k.a. bird/avian flu with it’s 60% mortality) ever co-infected an animal or human with a highly contagious influenza A virus (e.g. any H1N1 or H3N2), genetic material was exchanged, and a new virus was born. The WHO and CDC will be even better prepared for future pandemics.

One more thing, we did not know the case-fatality rate or epidemiology of pandemic H1N1 when vaccine planning was performed in spring / early summer 2009. It is better to be over-prepared than under-prepared.

It is true HIV, TB, and malaria are devastating in other parts of the world, but that is a separate debate. The issue here is did public policy officials have the appropriate response in the U.S. to the influenza pandemic (I think yes), and what have we learned to plan better for next winter’s flu season.

And to end on a light note:

Despite how silly this photo looks, it is an actual N-95 mask fitting procedure. You put on the mask securely, the hood is placed over your head and an aerosol odor is puffed into the hood. If you cannot smell the aerosol, then the mask is properly fitted. I know because I've gone though this fitting procedure--DW. Photo Courtesy: PunditKitchen.com

2010–The Year We Learn That Life Beyond Earth Exists?

Featured

Dr. David S. McKay, Astrobiologist. Photo: NASA

There’s a buzz out there amongst astrobiologists that before this year is out, Dr. David McKay and his research team are going to announce that they have definitively identified fossilized organisms in meteorites from Mars that have been collected on earth.

Martian microorganisms.  Martians.  Real Martians.  That bubble of perception that life exists only here on Earth will have been burst.

The next step, of course, will be to design Mars missions to determine if any of those organisms have survived Mars’ harsh and extreme history in an environment in which only extremophiles (as we now know flourish on Earth) could survive.

That those first missions will be robotic is certain.  The opportunity that a human will ever reach down and pick up a rock from the surface of Mars that potentially carries evidence of life living or fossilized in this century, at least under the sponsorship of NASA, appears increasingly doubtful in the current political and geo-centric environment.

Although we may be witness to the extinction of the hominid drive to discover the undiscovered, life confirmed beyond the delicate bubble of rock, water and air from which we were formed, literally changes the very quantumization of life itself.  It is a change that cannot be undone. From the present into the future, what it means to be living, what it means to be human will be different.  For life, as we’ve always known it, no longer requires Earth.

Martian Metorite NAKHLA 2058. Possible Fossilized Life. Microscopy Photo: NASA

There is more, however.  All technical considerations aside, if and when this announcement comes, the theological implications, as well as our geo-centric Christology, will no longer be the topic of idle speculation but confront us with a reality that demands a response to the world.

Since 1543, when Copernicus’ De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the

Folio Pages Showing the Copernicus' Heliocentric Model. De Revolutionbus, 1543. Photo Courtesy fotosearch.com

Celestial Spheres), we have been attempting to unify our Christology with our Cosmology.  The results have been, in my opinion, at best, mixed.

Parable of the Sower, from the Plenarium or the Evangelical Book of the Year, 1516. Basel, Switzerland. Photo: Pitts Theology Library, Emory Univ.

The announcement of alien life, even microbial, requires a new conversation with a new set of rules.  It shall be a heady time, indeed.  Ours is the generation that broke the shackles of gravity and set off across the Solar System.  If, too, we are to be ones who confirm that life’s seed has been sown across the expanse of space like the Sower in one of Jesus’ parables, we have much work to do.

Here are three links:

http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1001/09marslife/

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/01/11/2169791.aspx

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/47114/proof-life-mars-come-year.html

Looking into the stars that seed the night will never be the same. Ever.

Professor Obama: The Presidential School of Bipartisan Education.

Featured

You may have thought the summit President Obama presided over today was all about health care reform.  It wasn’t.  Health Care Reform was the topic, but the subject was a six-plus hour seminar in front of a national audience on how to  be bipartisan led by the professor-in-chief, Barack Obama, J.D.   The pundits and bloggers, well, like, me are pounding away at their computers trying to wring every bit of meaning and nuance from the day’s-long exchange.

Health Care Reform was the topic, but the subject was a six-plus hour seminar in front of a national audience on how to  be bipartisan led by the professor-in-chief, Barack Obama, J.D.

Let’s get one thing out of the way.  How do I grade the debate on health care reform?  I give the Democrats a C, and that’s generous.  Their acting like they are close to the Republicans in the substance of the bill was stretching credulity nearly to the breaking point.  But I give the Republicans a D- and that is because they went out of their way to avoid any semblance comprehension what the summit was really about.  Just a whole day of props and talking points without as much as a single original thought.

Sorry, Mitch, John, Lamar and Eric, starting over isn’t an option.  It wasn’t about how many minutes each side gets to speak, Mitch (that has to be one of the most sophomoric gaffs of your career). You know as well as I do that it is empty rhetoric.  It’s impossible to start with a clean sheet.  The sheets in the health care debate are not paper.  They are hospital bed sheets and have over a half a century of political grime ground into them.  There are no clean sheets.  You can’t rewind history.  The perpetuation and dissemination of ideas follows the one-way arrow of time.  Health care reform does not exist in a bubble undisturbed by the flow of reality in the present environment of human medical needs.

Republicans: It’s time for you to step out of the way and let we Americans have access to medical care that meets our needs, covers us without regard for preexisting conditions, and sets the stage for a era of wellness through preventing those medical conditions that can be prevented.  Your ideas won’t work because your plan has an inherent stinginess to it that is, well, just incomprehensible in a nation  that thrives on being generous.

Republicans: Your ideas won’t work because your plan has an inherent stinginess to it that is, well, just incomprehensible in a nation  that thrives on being generous.

Now, on to the real subject of the summit today.  Prof. Obama led the seminar in bipartisanship.  Neither political party really figured that out, however.  They have over the past year (two? three? twenty?) been overwhelmed by the drumbeat of talking points drilling themselves so deeply into the daily consciousness of our congressional representatives, that it appears almost as if they have lost the capacity to speak in any other manner or with any independence of thought.

Prof. Obama conducted a very well run seminar in what can easily be described as a highly-charged setting.  The representatives of the two parties, both Senators and Congressional Representatives have been sniping at each other, saying  some of the most outrageous things ever entered into the Congressional Register, attacking with a ferocity just shy of out and out fisticuffs.  It’s a good thing the debates in the wells of both Houses are not near windows.  The amount of acrimonious bile spewed at each other could have led to the defenestration of any number of the members in the tradition of the Bohemians in Prague, first in the 1400s and again in the 1600s.

It’s a good thing the debates in the wells of both Houses are not near windows.  The amount of acrimonious bile spewed at each other could have led to the defenestration of any number of the members in the tradition of the Bohemians in Prague, first in the 1400s and again in the 1600s.

But neither side got it.  At least neither side wanted to be the first to admit that they got it.  As soon as they walked out of Blair House and across the street back to the Capitol, the auditory hallucinations of hyperpartisanship appear to have kicked in like throwing the main breaker on a mental trash compactor.

Regarding health care reform, the lack of substance was arguably all that could be expected.  Regarding reestablishing a beneficial and productive dialogue between the two parties, it was right there for all America to see.  The professor, behaving at his presidential best, conducted an exercise in statesmanship.  The comments, although, at times impassioned, were respectful and under the watchful eye of the Professor-in-Chief. The two sides were able to carry on a debate that did not devolve into shouting or irrational charge and counter-charges.  The summit was a demonstration of political civility on the TV screens or computer monitors for all America to see.

So, now we will see how the introduction of statesmanship into this debate will be able to work its way through the consciousness of both our elected leaders and the American people.  Will it grow over time; were seeds planted that will germinate and change the landscape of the national political scene?

Health care reform, just a few weeks ago declared dead on arrival after the Massachusetts election, has survived.  Is it healthy?  That remains to be seen.  But the recovery of  reform is proceeding in ways that could be best compared to an intensive rehabilitation program.

He left no doubt that his skills as President of the United States have grown and matured in ways that give great encouragement to his supporters and equal concern to his opponents.

The summit today, however, was historical for what it may have saved for American politics, more than the result of the final disposition of health care reform.

Professor-in-Chief Obama is undoubtedly exhausted after today’s intensive experience and exercise in democracy.  But one thing is certain.  He left no doubt that his skills as President of the United States have grown and matured in ways that give great encouragement to his supporters and equal concern to his opponents.  I have said on several occasions that America would have to get used to a very smart president.  Today, we just saw one reason why.

Health Care Reform–The Train is Ready to Leave the Station

Featured

Universal Health Care? Don't Be Silly! Image: oldamericancentury.org

Update 18 Mar, 12:50 p.m., PDT:  The U.S. House Rules Committee has just posted the text of H.R. 4872–Reconcilation Act of 2010.  http://bit.ly/aUWBUK #healthreform.

The very first post for Extreme Thinkover was to advocate for health care reform.  Although I have written dozens of posts since September 2008, my most frequent theme has been to make the needed, and yes, sweeping changes to the nation’s health care system that will establish access to medical care as a right and not a privilege available to only those who can afford to pay for it, that these reforms rectify an endemic injustice that mushroomed into a national health crisis of unprecedented historical proportions.

By July 2009, it had become evident that the Big Medicine, often led by the

The Sniffer. My Buddy to Detect Nuclear Radiation. Photo: Ajax

American Health   insurance Providers (AHIP), while publicly mouthing support for reform was, in fact, spending hundreds of millions of dollars and perhaps the most intense lobbying in U.S. history to kill reform once and for all.  They were gearing up to use what I labeled their “Nuclear Option”–to destroy the health care reform legislation in one large blast.  To accompany me on this journey, I invented The Sniffer.    The Sniffer has been constantly busy, doggedly pursuing every whiff of anti-reform nuclear odor, as Big Medicine worked and spent millions of our dollars paid for our care to try to deny us the very care we were paying for.    The Sniffer was “semper fi” in his work.  He helped reveal attempt after attempt to do in the legislation.  Big Medicine ratcheted up the pressure week after week as the President and the Democrats (with the exception of the shameful behavior of the “Blue Dog” Democrats, who on more than one occasion nearly succeeded in pushing the button), struggled through a barrage of anti-reform initiatives, advertising and lobbying, and the increasing pitch of outrage by such groups as the Tea Partiers.

Nuclear Option Button. Photo: Courtesy Getty Images

The Town Hall Meetings of August 2009 devolved into the summer of discontent and ended up as the month that will be remembered as the time when throwing political tantrums erupted onto the American political scene or else a new form of Primal Scream Therapy had become vogue.  It was difficult at times to distinguish which one was happening at the moment.  To be honest I experienced moments of angst and despair that this negative energy might provide the critical mass Big Medicine needed to construct its nuclear device.  One thing I was very certain of is that with the support of the congressional Republicans, if the legislation appeared to have the votes to pass, the Anti-Reform Mission Control would press the button.

Then something else arose out of the smoke and mirrors of the August tempest.  It began to lose steam.  In reality, the tantrums burned themselves out.  The American Public, being smarter and more insightful than given credit by  either many politicians, in particular the Republican Leadership, one Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell (minority leaders in their respective houses), or the political consultants and pundits, soon tired of endless pictures and TV video of people, appearing to be adults in terms of their chronological age, acting like four-year olds who hadn’t gotten their way at the pet store because mom or dad refused to let them buy that cuddly little mastiff puppy.

In the midst of this din of obstructionism and protest being broadcast at a volume equivalent a Rolling Stones concert at Yankee Stadium, the House passed their version of the health reform bill.  I held my breath.  The Senate was still wrangling over the details.  In October 2009 I wrote:

America’s Health Insurance Plans pushed the button on their “nuclear option” bomb to blast health care reform into oblivion. The safety was released, the countdown went to zero, and “click!”

The device failed to detonate.  Through November and into the Holidays, the Senate sat paralyzed as Montana Democratic Senator, Max Baucus, employed a strategy to get his version out of committee.  He did, when Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) finally broke and said she’d vote yes, but only to move to the floor of the Senate for a final vote.  It passed finally on December 24 on a strict party-line vote.

The Late Sen. Ted Kennedy with Pres. Obama. Photo: PBS.org

When Massachusetts held its special election to fill the seat left by Ted Kennedy (who had died months earlier from brain cancer), which had been filled by an appointee Democrat and the voters chose a Republican, the champagne bottles were uncorked by the Anti-Reformers.  The Democrats had lost their filibuster-proof majority and could no longer pass a bill over the heads of the Republican opposition.  The airwaves fairly sizzled with pundits announcing that without Kennedy to champion the cause it was over; health care reform was dead.

Instead the Opposition made a fatal strategic error in their plan of destruction.  The Republicans failed to have at the ready a full-blown alternative bill to introduce as the savior of health care to fill the vacuum.  Their “start over with a clean sheet of paper” backfired, because no one in America believed it was possible, including those who opposed reform.  The tide shifted.

House Health Care Reform Bill. Photo: Jesse Blumenthal.

After the Health Care Summit in which President Obama invited members of both houses and parties to participate, the Republicans during the televised seven hours long event had nothing to offer. They repeatedly sniped at the bills that had passed and the fact they were over 2700 pages long , copies of which they had sitting on their tables as a prop making an impressive stack.  The pundits also got it wrong.  The Republicans spoke with a carefully rehearsed unified voice, but rather than its intended affect to present to the people a solid wall of principled objection, they showed a solid wall of obstructionism–and with nothing behind it to present to the public.  They had been determined to cause the failure of this bill and Obama’s presidency.  They failed on both accounts.  The President and the Democrats came out energized.

As I write this post, three days from now, the House of Representatives will vote on the final version of the bill.  The Senate then will vote, as well.  The Republicans are desperate to stop it, but only have an expensive nuclear dud left in their arsenal.  AHIP and Big Medicine are still spending millions to thwart it.  This last ditch effort is failing on both fronts.  If they have something up their sleeves, a secret device they can detonate and kill the process, now is the time they must use it.  That they apparently are losing ground, and that they appear to have been outflanked by both Pres. Obama and the Democratic leadership in both houses seems to be the evidence they have no nuclear option left to use.

Short of a secret weapon unleashed, the bills will pass and health care reform will begin to move, like a freight train beginning to roll, almost imperceptibly at first, but with an inexorable increase in velocity rumbling down the track, creating in its path an new era for Americans and their health and medical needs.

Photo: Cape Care, MassCare

The Dawn’s Early Light…A New Era of Health Care For Americans

Featured

Dawn's Early Light. Photo Courtesy Pike Pictures, UK

Now is the time for health care to be added to those moments of sublime national change, to join those great reforms, cast as the finest, hardest steel into our Nation of Laws as an inalienable right and an eternal Blessing of Liberty.  D. Waggoner, Phd, 2009.

A Promised Fulfilled...A New Dawn of Health Care for America

That large-heartedness — that concern and regard for the plight of others — is not a partisan feeling. It’s not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character — our ability to stand in other people’s shoes; a recognition that we are all in this together, and when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand; a belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play; and an acknowledgment that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise…

I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road — to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term…

But that is not what the moment calls for. That’s not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it’s hard. (Applause.) I still believe — I still believe that we can act when it’s hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility, and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things, and that here and now we will meet history’s test.

President Barack Obama.  Address to Congress and the Nation, 9 Sept 2009.

Sunrise: Health Care For All Rises Above the Horizon

Featured

The Sun has Risen for Health Care in America. Photo Courtesy: Bolte Medical

.

Now is the time for health care to be added to those moments of sublime national change, to join those great reforms, cast as the finest, hardest steel into our Nation of Laws as an inalienable right and an eternal Blessing of Liberty.  D. Waggoner, Phd, 2009.

.

 

Oregon Health & Science University: Oregon's Premier Medical School and Research University. Photo Courtesy OregonLive.com

.

President Barack Obama:  Our presence here today is remarkable and improbable.  With all the punditry, all of the lobbying, all of the game-playing that passes for governing in Washington, it’s been easy at times to doubt our ability to do such a big thing, such a complicated thing; to wonder if there are limits to what we, as a people, can still achieve.  It’s easy to succumb to the sense of cynicism about what’s possible in this country.

But today, we are affirming that essential truth -– a truth every generation is called to rediscover for itself –- that we are not a nation that scales back its aspirations. We are not a nation that falls prey to doubt or mistrust.  We don’t fall prey to fear.  We are not a nation that does what’s easy.  That’s not who we are.  That’s not how we got here.

.

Pres. Obama Signs Health Care Reform Act into Law. Photo Courtesy: Saul Loeb, AFP/Getty Images.

.

We are a nation that faces its challenges and accepts its responsibilities.  We are a nation that does what is hard.  What is necessary.  What is right.  Here, in this country, we shape our own destiny.  That is what we do.  That is who we are.  That is what makes us the United States of America.

And we have now just enshrined, as soon as I sign this bill, the core principle that everybody should have some basic security when it comes to their health care.  And it is an extraordinary achievement that has happened because of all of you and all the advocates all across the country.

.

A Promise Fulfilled.

.

In Memoriam–Rev. R. Edward McIndoo, 1936-2010

Featured

In Memoriam

Ray Edward (Ed) McIndoo

1936-2010

 

Ed McIndoo, Pastor, Professor & Chaplain. Photo: Northwest Christian University

Obituary from the Eugene Register Guard:

A memorial service will be held at 2 p.m. Monday, March 29, at the First Congregational Church in Eugene for Ray Edward McIndoo of Springfield, who died March 24 of leukemia. He was 73.

He was born July 12, 1936, in Jewell County, Kan., to Ray and Theda Aubushon McIndoo. He married Connie Pierson on July 18, 1955, in Caldwell, Idaho.

[It should also be noted that Ed was a graduate of Northwest Christian College (now University) in the Class of 1958, and completed his seminary work at Phillips Graduate Seminary.]

He served as pastor at churches in Oklahoma, Colorado and Ontario, Ore., as well as Springfield Christian Church and St. Paul Methodist Church in Springfield. He served as [hospital and] hospice chaplain at Censored by Corporate Social Media Policy* and as professor at Northwest Christian University.

Survivors include his wife; two daughters, Pamela Starks of Bonaire, Ga., and Lynette Greco of Folsom, Calif.; a brother, Cecil of Greenleaf, Idaho; a sister, Hazel Macy of Newberg; seven grandchildren; and one great-grandchild.

Hope was one of the keys to Ed’s spiritual life as a minister of the Gospel of Christ.  This video on Hope is set to the music of Secret Garden and the piece “Celebration” from their album “White Stone.”

 

Shalom, my friend, mentor, colleague and brother in Christ.

 

*This post has been redacted and censored to comply with my employer’s Social Media Policy as of Nov. 1, 2010.  All references to my place of work and the system it is part of, as well as photos have been removed.  This action appears to be only recourse I have to preserve my Constitutional rights to free speech and the free expression of my views on Extreme Thinkover.

Maundy Thursday–A Room for all Time 2010

Featured

A Room for All Time

Jesus knew what he wanted. It was time to prepare for the Passover. Jesus knew it would be his last Passover and his last meal. And so he wanted a room that would hold all of his closest disciples, the Twelve, and probably those few other men and women whom Jesus loved most. He sent Peter and John to arrange the room and the meal. The owner of the house is not named, but undoubtedly he was one of Jesus’ followers. The room was large and on the second story of the house. The room was perfect–perfect for the One who would make this a room for all time.

For over a thousand years the Jews had celebrated the Passover in rooms like this one. But Jesus was standing history on its head, and now this room would witness an act of God’s grace. For in that room Jesus spoke the words, “This is my body, which is given for you” and “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” As Jesus spoke those words, God’s presence was no longer hidden away in the Temple in the Holy of Holies. For the rest of all time, God would be present in any room, or place, in which the words were spoken and the meal partaken.

Yes, Jesus knew what he wanted that night. The Upper Room was the place where Jesus declared himself to be God’s greatest gift to creation, where through his death on the cross, all humans would find salvation.

As you eat the bread and drink the cup today, let us all give thanks to God for His presence in this room at this very moment.

August 15, 2004

This communion meditation was originally presented at Northwood Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Springfield, Oregon.

Holy Saturday: O Mensch, bewein’ dein Sünde gross. Bach BWV 622

Featured

O Mensch, bewein’ dein Sünde groß

A Meditation on Christ’s Sacrifice for our Sins

O Man, Bemoan thy Grievous Sins, Bach BWV 622

English Translation:

O Man, bemoan thy grievous sins

For which Christ left His Father’s

Bosom and came down to earth

And was born for us of a pure

And tender Virgin as He wished

To become our Mediator. He raised

The dead to life, healed the sick

Until the time appointed for Him

To be sacrificed for us, when He

Bore the heavy burden of our sins

On the Cross.

Performed by Ana Elias, church of “O.-L.-Vrouw-o/d-Dijle”, Mechelen (Belgium)

Light of the World–Easter Sunday 2010

Featured

He is risen!

He is risen, indeed!

...And the Light shines in the darkness and the darkness cannot overwhelm it! Photo: Courtesy Bing.com Images

Light of the World

On the night of His birth a chorus of angels sang praises to God for this new life

Thirty-three years later He was reviled by angry crowds calling for His death

On the night of His birth He was hailed as the Prince of Peace, the heir to David’s royal throne

Thirty-three years later He was condemned as a false king and an enemy of the state

On the night of His birth shepherds came to visit Him and rejoiced that they had beheld the Lamb of God

Thirty-three years later He became the sacrificial lamb whose blood was poured out for the f0rgiveness of sins

On the night of His birth He was wrapped in swaddling cloths and gently held by His mother

Thirty-three years later He was stripped of his clothing and scourged by Roman soldiers

On the night of His birth He was placed in a wooden manger

Thirty-three years later He was executed on a wooden cross

On the night of His birth He was born in a stable, most likely a cave, open to the cold night air, attended by gentle farm animals

Thirty-three years later He was buried in a tomb, most likely a cave, covered by a massive stone, attended by armed guards

On the night of His birth a new star appeared in the heavens, splitting the darkness, and the heavenly host rejoiced that Emmanuel, “God With Us” had come into the world

Thirty-three years and three days later, He arose, a New Light, and appeared to the world, banishing the darkness of sin and all humanity rejoiced that Jesus, the “Light of the World” is the Risen Lord whose light shines forevermore.

December 22, 2002

This meditation was originally presented at Northwood Christian Church, Springfield, Oregon.

Swimming through Boiled Okra: The American Political Stew, 2010

Featured

Swimming through Boiled Okra:

The American Political Stew, 2010

Some Background:

I lived in Texas for three years while attending seminary at Texas Christian University.  Being a native of the Northwest, I was exposed to a whole new cornucopia of foods: great Texas barbecue, Tex-Mex, and Southwest cuisine. I learned how to eat grits the right way (butter and salt and pepper, or cheese—none of this milk and sugar over Cream of Wheat stuff).  To this day I love grits.

My one culinary defeat was okra.  For those of you who haven’t experienced this little vegetable,

Okra--Secret Dispenser of Slime. Photo: FowlerNurseries.com

Okra--Secret Dispenser of Slime. Photo: FowlerNurseries.com

it certainly looks benign enough in its raw form.  It’s also as popular as broccoli in more northern climes and a staple vegetable in numerous countries around the world.  You can see from the photo, it can look quite appetizing.  Okra can be prepared in many ways.  It can be breaded and fried (of course, most anything in the South can be breaded and fried—and usually is).  It can be boiled with all sorts of other foods.  Many people love it pickled.  It’s a popular ingredient in a wide variety of soups and gumbos.  That’s all fine and good, except…

Boiled okra is slimy.  For those three years I tried my best to sample okra in its various gastronomic manifestations.  I discovered, despite all this experimentation, that the only way I could handle okra was fried.  Fried okra is not slimy.  It just doesn’t have much taste for my palette, other than an oily breaded mushy…well…veggie-something-or-other. Take a look at the crosscut round of okra.  It looks a lot like a crosscut jalapeño pepper.  Only the jalapeño has both flavor and zing.

Okra Seafood Gumbo. One of a thousand ways to create vegetative slime.

In fairness to the otherwise popular vegetable, I selected two of my friends (completely non-random, and no intent to be so), on separate occasions, and who don’t know each other, and asked if either liked okra?  Their responses were identical to mine: Okra in soup is slimy and I don’t really like it.  So, what’s the point?  There are at least two other males in the United States who, without prompting as to reason, agree that okra in soup is slimy.  And none of us like it because of that particular quality.  And that’s important because of what comes next.

A Test of Your Gag Reflex:

Back to slimy.  Not just slickish slimy, but stringy and slimy.  As for stringy: A hundred times

Ultimate Alien Slime, Aliens, 1979, Photo Courtesty MGM.

worse than my grandmother’s over-cooked rope-strength stringy asparagus.  And as for slimy: pure gaggy slimy: You start to chew the spoonful of boiled okra, which just seems to release this gelatinous goo, resembling the stuff that drips off of your typical movie monster’s tongue or, uh, snout. As you try to swallow the bite the goo elongates itself so that by the time the first half of your bite has traveled the length of your esophagus, reaches your cardiac sphincter, and dumps into your stomach the other half is still trying to get out of your mouth and down your throat.

Gag.  Retch.  Get me something to wash down this uck!  Now!

An Analogy of the Absurd—But the Bridge to the Topic at Hand:

Imagine stirring a pot of okra the size of an Olympic swimming pool with that potential for such slimy viscosity.  Imagine swimming through a pool filled with such.  Michael Phelps wouldn’t be pleased.  Michael, whatever his other imperfections, would have the good sense to avoid such an Olympic sized pool of mucousity.

Okra Stew--Imagine an Olympic Pool filled with this.

Now to the Main Dish:

On the other hand, that exact unpalatable characteristic makes for a good analogy of the current state of American politics.  The so-called melting pot of America has been emptied of its finest ingredients, civility, respect, loyalty, etc, and filled to the brim with okra soup.  The blogosphere is boiling over with okra slime, from both the right and the left, but all too often the temperature of rhetoric coming from the right is higher.  In this context, characters such as Limbaugh and Beck, Palin and the Miz Liz of Cheney are but spices in an otherwise noxious recipe of political okra gumbo.

Last summer, we were caught off guard by the sudden rise to the boiling point of the Town Hall Meetings held in August during the Congressional Summer Recess.  But this year, the pot is already bubbling resembling those gloppy mud pots in Yellowstone National Park, and it’s still over seven months until the November mid-term elections.  Itsa bubblin’, like they say.  I think.

This year there will be no surprises.  Members of Congress in both Houses and from both sides of the Aisle may find it best to attend their town hall meetings dressed in a heatproof full-body firefighter outfit.  The political okra soup pot likely will reach a rolling boil even before summer.  The slop-slinging will probably be fierce.

The question is can it be sustained?  My observation last year was that the Sturm und Drang of the Tea Party’s birth and its rapid rise to an ear-shattering keen burned out before the end of the month.  Part of that, in my opinion, was it was “newsed” into numbness.

Numb News—It’s the American Way:

The success of cable/satellite/internet news with its around the clock accessibility very quickly has habituated Americans (and most of the world, undoubtedly) to a very short news cycle.  Inside of two weeks last August, people at the Town Hall Meetings screaming the same rant over and over lost its punch if not its volume. Though the opponents of everything Obama were taking great delight in the attention and media coverage they were receiving, they missed an unintended consequence of that saturation.  They unwittingly became passé. Almost with the predictability of an autonomic response, the polls shifted subtly, but the shift was critical.  It was pro-reform.

Inside the shift was the data that kept Health Care Reform alive, passing the House in November and the Senate on December 24. Despite the loss of one senate seat in January messing up the Senate Democrats’ supermajority of 60 seats the rhetoric of the opposition from the elected officials, the right-wing pundits and the “angry” right-wing citizenry did not shift.  Their message, although loud, consistent, and vitriolic, became less and less influential as each day passed.

That message also offered nothing: the “Let’s start with a blank piece of paper gambit” failed, not because the Republicans were united but because they had nothing to counter with.  If at the great Health Care Summit, the Republicans had shown up with a bill that could have been plopped down beside the one that had already passed (since December 24th, remember) that was half the height of the Democratic bill, Americans’ attention would have been riveted to know what was in that piece of legislation.  Instead the Republicans brought a blank piece of paper and kvetched for seven hours about the size of the already passed bill.  The three best words for this colossal error are: stupid, stupid, and stupid.

The opponents did not recognize their strategic error. They thought they were being consistent and united.  The president and the Democratic leadership, on the other hand, correctly interpreted the message as dragging itself down: that the public sentiment in a shift of even one or two points in favor of reform was far more important than the actual percentage of support or opposition was being rolled out weekly by the multitude of pollsters.  TV, Internet, Radio, newspapers, magazines along with pundits of all stripes missed that nuanced reality, their focus locked on a depth of field most conducive to seeing their ratings and profits and not the meaning of the changes.

Health Care Reform passed, astonishing and infuriating the Republican leadership and all sorts of right-wing groups.

Elections 2010: Jump in, the Okra’s in Prime Slime!

What’s next?  More of the same: A big pot of slimy okra political soup we will be forced to swim around in between now and November.  The Republican formula of Stupid3 remains the strategy they are taking into the Fall under the illusion (or delusion) it will be different this time and they will snatch the majority status from the Democrats in a great uprising of voter rage, or a groundswell of secessionist sentiment threatening the fabric of the Republic, whichever comes first.

I almost hesitate to write this next section for fear of tipping off the Republicans and the Tea Party supporters to the actuality of the situation that the colossal error they made attempting to kill health care reform remains a colossal error as they plan for the mid-term elections.

Poster Advocating Revolution. But What Kind? Photo: Menifee Tax Day Tea Party

The emerging rhetoric calling the administration a “regime” accompanied by repeated less than veiled threats of revolution and civil war, marches with guns in plain sight are not the next phase they believe it to be; it is rather an escalation of the same message.  TV and the other media again will create the opposite intended consequence the Right Wing wants to convey.  Their agenda, antics, and demonstrations will be covered ad nauseum, giving them all the coverage they desire, but dulling the impact of their effort: Why?  Very simply, Americans want “new” news.  Every day.  That is what we have been habituated to expect from the media.  It’s not a matter of how it’s slanted or editorialized, or punditized.  It has to be new.

This is an essential lesson the Democrats must keep in the center of their political radar screen, locked on like the Space Shuttle launching toward the International Space Station.  They have to remain disciplined in their own rhetoric as the campaign heats up.  The key: New talking points must be rolled out every week or so of what Obama and the Dems have accomplished and what they plan to accomplish after the polls close.  They don’t even have to counter what the Republicans are saying.  The Republicans will continue to tighten the trap they set for themselves in the broken record scenario they initiated upon Obama’s election in 2008, and the contrast between a constantly renewing fresh message and the broken record message will quickly create a gulf between the two in the Democrats favor.

Guns and Bombs Belong in the Movies and TV, Not in Real Life:

Why?  People crave the status quo.  The vast majority of U.S. citizens do not want revolution or civil war or any other highly disruptive political or social action.  We’re not talking about changes to health care—we’re talking about being able to go shopping or out to eat or on vacation, Friday night football, going to worship, school plays, and a thousand other everyday things we routinely do.

Domestic tranquility is what Americans want.  The news video of the bloody revolt and possible regime-changing coup in Kyrgyzstan is exactly the opposite of what Americans believe political change should be.  The more violent that situation becomes and the more coverage it will get because of American military interests in the country, the more nervous the typical American will be about the language in the okra soup.  They see suicide bombers belonging in Baghdad and Kabul, not valiant freedom fighters, 21st Century Minutemen here in the U.S. claiming they are wresting their constitutional rights from an oppressive and socialist government.  Regardless of how dissatisfied they may be about their taxes, Americans do not want bombs and blood flowing down the streets of their community.  The reason is straightforward: Americans make political change through ballots, not through bombs and bullets.

Tea Party Protester Advocating the use of Guns. But to Shoot What or Whom? Photo: TalkingPointsMemo.com

Swimming in the Soup of the Statistically Illiterate:

We can be certain that the media will continue to misinterpret the polls because they do not understand how to correctly interpret them to begin with.  Most political groups will continue to misinterpret the polls because they are always looking for an advantage for their side and a disadvantage for their opponents.  “Spin” is a set of heuristic blinders. Here’s why: Raw percentages are a flawed indicator of support.

We quote percentages as if they mean something absolute.  They do not.  Percentages provide information, just not what we typically believe it is.  The fundamental error in interpreting poll percentages is equating a final percentage of a vote with a pre-vote percentage.  The two are not equal indicators of support.  The better pollsters understand this and couch their questions with very precise language and report their results with statistical caveats that, for the most part, the media and the public ignore, and then they are surprised when the results don’t match the polls.  They blame the polls (some justifiably) instead of having the insight to realize they didn’t correctly read the data in the polls. We will see a lot of this in the next seven months.

Central Limit Theorem: One reason calculating percentage trends is complex. "In probability theory, the central limit theorem (CLT) states conditions under which the mean of a sufficiently large number of independent random variables, each with finite mean and variance, will be approximately normally distributed (Rice 1995)." Source: Wikipedia

Should we not believe the polls?  No, but be cautious about reading into the number what you want it to mean, rather than looking at the gap and vector of the differences between the two percentages.  That is where the real information is.  And understand there are ways to use the percentages that sound valid but are really nothing more than concoction and spin.  Second, don’t make the mistake of treating a final vote result with a pre-vote survey.  Even if the final outcome numbers are identical, they are two quite different metrics, almost to the point of being two separate statistical species.

Understand the spin-meisters of all the political parties and their various PACs are not going to give you the slightest bit of help in understanding any of this.  They are paid to convince you the numbers are always favoring their party or candidate, even if the most accurate interpretation suggests disastrous defeat.  They want the political okra pot to be as slimy as possible to confound your ability to squeeze the slightest bit of truth from the numbers.  No, it’s not pretty, and never will be, apparently, until the pot is emptied and a new recipe of soup, sans okra, is placed on the stovetop.

Is it November yet?  I can’t stand okra.

Okra: Abelmoschus esculentus. Photo: digthedirt,com

A Tale of Two Planets

Featured

"No one would have believed..." Photo: JPL/NASA

 

A Tale of Two Stories

My dear readers might expect the opening lines of a post bearing the title with such an obvious play on the most-published original English story in the world to follow the path of Dickens’ immortal words.  In this case, however, I ask your indulgence to open with the words of another world-famous piece of literature, known for its dramatic presentation, but far fewer have ever read its introductory sentence:   

NO one would have believed in the last years of the nineteenth century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man’s and yet as mortal as his own; that as men busied themselves about their various concerns they were scrutinised and studied, perhaps almost as narrowly as a man with a microscope might scrutinise the transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water.   

These words written in 1898 by the equally immortal English author, H.G. Wells, open his universally known War of the Worlds. I have to admit, with some embarrassment, that like many, if not most contemporary Americans, I know Wells’ story through its radio and cinematic productions, but have never read the book.  I had to look up a copy of the text on-line, because unlike Dickens’ opening salvo in his novel, A Tale of Two Cities, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…”, Wells opens his   

War of the Worlds, 1st Edition, 1898. Image: Public Domain

 

at a much more subtle and cerebral level, “No one would have believed in the last years of the nineteenth century that this world was being watched…”  Watched by whom?  Martians: perhaps the first modern depiction of alien life prescient of the field of astrobiology.  Amazingly, many would have believed it; millions did.  Mars was the planet of fanciful speculation, with good reason.  But I will return to that later.  Nevertheless, the universe was still a relatively small and cozy place.  Science, as we know it today, was a toddler awkwardly running to and fro, counting and building things.   

Yet a revolution was brewing, pushed by industry through the 1700s and 1800s, astonishing breakthroughs on how to build things big, how to make an inconceivable jump from the strength and power of humans and beasts to the harnessing of natural elements into machines with the power of a thousand beasts and ten thousand laborers.  That however was prelude, for another force was being created and directed, a force that would not only create power but carry information.   

Though this revolution grew, another vortex formed like a gathering tropical storm, from an unexpected province, not over the consequences of the growing industries that were rapidly building on each step of the toddling sciences, but from the increasing rotation of the storm creating winds and havoc–its target–the very ground and the life that lived upon it:  Geology.  Biology.  Evolution.  The age of the earth.  The origin of life.  Bones, now stone, dug from the ground.  Ocean shells on mountain peaks.  That confluence of the science of the human mind and the science of the divine mind created a cyclone that like the Great Red spot on far distant Jupiter’s gaseous oceanic atmosphere, has now raged for over a century and a half.   

As the turmoil over the origin of the world and life raged across the world, something much more quiet and solitary was happening after dark.  For 300 years, since a Dutch oculist placed two pieces of curved glass into a tube and realized it could magnify the image at a distance, and soon after an upstart Italian mathematics professor pointed it at the sky, a select group of men, (almost always supported by women, from a sister who was devoted to her brother’s work, to a room filled with highly educated astronomers, but denied access to the telescopes even as these instruments were growing in sophistication), began counting what they saw in the sky.  What they saw amazed them.  Very slowly it began to dawn upon them that these views of the heavens were going to change the universe in ways so profound that the debate over evolution or divine creation would pale almost to insignificance.  Now, if they could just figure out why.   

War of the Worlds Title Page, 1st Edition, 1898. Photo: Public Domain

 

In the three decades that followed Wells’ words, Science matured at staggering rate, accomplishing more in those thirty years than perhaps had been achieved in the previous thirty centuries.  It is difficult to describe in words the sheer magnitude of the transformation of reality itself.  The universe was not small, it was huge beyond comprehension.  It was not young but old, so old that nothing in the cherished scriptures of three of the world’s greatest religions gave the slightest hint of that age.  And that included an ancient age of the very Earth itself.   

That was only the beginning of the stunning revelations.  As the discoveries of science accelerated through the Twentieth Century, Edwin Hubble in 1929 proved the Milky Way galaxy was but one island universe among, not thousands, but billions, and they were not suspended motionless in the cosmic void, but were moving, and moving at speeds unimaginable previously to any human in history.  Away from each other. Which led to only one other even more stunning conclusion: There had been a beginning.  But what that beginning looked like was so close to being beyond human comprehension that nearly a century later, millions of people still cannot bring themselves to accept it.   

It would make no difference though to those who stepped into the staggering reality of the universe.  Within that one stupendous century powered flight was invented and human technology leapfrogged from aircraft barely able to climb into the air, to a machine of such great power and thrust, that humans broke the gravitational bonds of Earth.  A scant 40 years after Hubble discovered the true nature of the universe, two humans would step upon the surface of Earth’s moon.   

By the end of the 20th Century, these two stories, one by Dickens and the other by H.G. Wells still command the literary attention of the world.  At the same time, the two stories of reality, one guided by a devotion to a divinely inspired word, and the other guided by an inspired effort of humans to describe in words what they observed still have not found a way to comfortable accommodate each other, although growing numbers are searching for that integrative spark of the fusion of the two.  It is among these seekers that the tale of two planets becomes a revelatory event, a new genesis, indisputable in its truth and its impact.   

A Tale of Two Planets

Earth and Mars to Scale. Photo: JPL/NASA

 

When H.G. Wells wrote War of the Worlds in 1898, the photos above did not, could not, exist.  What Wells had at his disposal were maps such as this drawing by the Italian astronomer, Giovanni Schiaparelli in 1877:   

Mars Map by Schiaparelli, 1877. One of the first attempts to map the Martian surface. Originally published in "Meyers Konversations-Lexikon (German encyclopaedia), 1888." Photo: Public Domain

 

A century later, through the combined efforts of NASA and European Space Agency (ESA) satellites orbiting the Red Planet, using sophisticated imaging equipment, the true topography of Mars has been revealed:   

Mars Composite Topography Map of the Surface. Photo: JPL/NASA/ESA

 

The story, however, is a tale of two planets.  In similar fashion, Earth-orbiting satellites have also mapped the topography of our own blue planet:   

Earth Composite Topographic Map. Image: GFSC/NASA

 

One of the most interesting facts about Mars and Earth is that Mars has almost the same amount of land area as Earth.  The difference is that Earth’s oceans cover about 71% of the planet.  Land accounts for 148.94 million square kilometers  on Earth.  Mars has 144.80 square kilometers of land.  Where, then is the water?  That’s a question that has been relentlessly pursued since, well, Schiaparelli labeled surface details on his map “canale”, which was inaccurately translated into English as “canals” rather than “channels.”  Earth-based telescopes could see that the north and south poles of the planet had what appeared to be ice-caps, which grew and shrunk with the seasons (which are about twice as long as Earth’s due to Mar’s orbit being about 80 million km on average farther from the Sun).  But was it enough to have once given Mars vital oceans?  Those hopes were dashed (though prematurely) when in 1964 NASA’s Mariner 4, the first space probe to make it to Mars sent back pictures of a dry, dead, world.  Still, the prospect of a once wetter Mars remained tantalizing.  Over the course of the next half century as more robotic missions were flung toward this enigmatic world, the possibility of water, in great quantities continued to lurk just under the surface.   

The breakthrough finally came in the first decade of the 21st Century, as ever-increasingly sophisticated space probes, some in orbit, some as landers, photographed, radar-probed, scratched the soil, traversed the surface testing thousands of samples of rock and soil.  The chemical hints of water were everywhere, but the proof seemingly nowhere.  Schiaparelli’s channels were there, as were volcanoes of a height that stunned planetary scientists.  Mars bears the scar of the largest canyon known in the solar system, Valles Marineris, as wide as the continental United States, deeper and wider than the Grand Canyon on a scale so massive as to make the great rift in the Earth look like a scratch by comparison.  Ice on the poles was confirmed, too, although the amount of carbon dioxide ice “dry ice” mixed with the water is substantial.  Still, the volume of water seemed too small, even accounting for evaporation and sublimation (liquid turning from ice to gas without going through a fluid state).   

Mars: Valles Marineris with U.S. Map Overlaid. Photo: NASA

 

In 2008, JPL/NASA/University of Arizona in partnership with multiple countries and international companies successfully landed Phoenix at 68.2° North.  Although it was not designed to traverse the martian surface like the wildly successful rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, it had a shovel to scrape through the soil.  On July 31, 2008, in a trench dug no deeper than a child might dig in the sand on a beach, images from Phoenix proved, once and for all that Mars had water:   

Evaporating Ice on Mars, Phoenix Lander, 31 July 2008. Photo: JPL/NASA/Univ of Arizona

 

Ice exposed in the trench on Sol 20 (the designation of a day on Mars), had evaporated/sublimated away on Sol 24.  What if the Red Planet had once been the second Blue Planet?   

Mars with Oceans Current Topography. Image: MOLA & NASA/JPL/MSSS

 

And all this brings us to this photo of an unassuming-looking rock.  Looks, however can be deceiving, for this rock is a meteorite, and it is from all places, Mars.   

ALH84001,0. A Meteorite from Mars. Discovered: Antarctica, 1984, Wt: 1930.9g, Photo: JSC/NASA.

 

Although meteorites confirmed from Mars are extremely rare (only 12 have been verified), the most astonishing possibility as slices of three of these extraterrestrial rocks were subjected to electron microscopy, structures were present that appeared remarkably like microfossils found in earth rocks.   

Possible Fossilized Nanofossil from ALH84001. Photo: NASA

 

And this one from the Nakhla, Egypt Martian meteorite:   

Complex biomorphs appear on another Nakhla chip shown in this scanning electron microscope (SEM) frame. This image contains three basic forms: Broad smooth knife-shaped features, elongated features with rounded endcaps and transverse compartments or dividers, and donut shaped small features, each about 1 micrometer in diameter. One possibility is the donut-shaped features are derived from the compartments present in the elongated features (Wikipedia):   

Mars Meteorite, Nakhla Egypt, Possible Nanolife Markings. SEM Image: David McKay/NASA

 

And, finally, this electron microscope image also from the Nakhla Martian meteorite of a possible nanofossil:   

Martian Meteorite Nakhla, Possible Nanolife Fossil Image. SEM Image: David McKay/NASA

 

Does it not seem oddly paradoxical to recollect H.G. Wells’ opening sentence when he wrote,   

…perhaps almost as narrowly as a man with a microscope might scrutinise the transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water.   

We, the humans of Earth are examining the rocks of Mars, scrutinsing them for “transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water,” even if that drop of water existed billions of years ago.  We know we have found Mars’ water.  Now, are these structures the remnants of life when Mars was the second blue planet?  If that turns out to be the case, the indisputable fact that life existed on both planets, the tale of two planets will require not a new chapter, but whole new book.  For those who cling to the accounts of the Divine Word as given to a one and only act of creation, from which Homo sapiens sapiens is the capstone of the cosmic plan, they will have to grapple, as never before–regardless of the tirades of the past 150 years–with the realization that the Creator they worship is more clever and speaks with words never heard by human ears, not only on our planetary sibling, but throughout a Universe too large to comprehend, but begging us to do so, nonetheless!   

First Photo of Earth Taken from Mars' Surface by Spirit Rover. Photo: NASA

 

This is the first image ever taken of Earth from the surface of a planet beyond the Moon. It was taken by the Mars Exploration Rover Spirit one hour before sunrise on the 63rd martian day, or sol, of its mission. The image is a mosaic of images taken by the rover’s navigation camera showing a broad view of the sky, and an image taken by the rover’s panoramic camera of Earth. The contrast in the panoramic camera image was increased two times to make Earth easier to see.   

The inset shows a combination of four panoramic camera images zoomed in on Earth. The arrow points to Earth. Earth was too faint to be detected in images taken with the panoramic camera’s color filters. Source: NASA.   

Little did H.G. Wells ever imagine that the first Martian to look at Earth would be through robotic eyes sent from Earth.   

   

In Memoriam: Phoenix Lander, Discoverer of Water on Mars

Featured

Phoenix Mars Lander. Artist's Conception. Image: LibraryTechie.com

.

The Tool that Made History:

The Robotic Arm (RA) is 2.35 meters (just under 8 ft) long with an elbow joint in the middle, allowing the arm to trench about 0.5m (1.6ft) below the martian surface, deep enough to where scientists believe the water-ice soil interface lies. At the end of the RA is a scoop for digging and acquiring loose soil. On the bottom side of scoop is a scraping blade for scraping hard icy soil and protruding from the backside of the scoop is a circular rasp used for acquiring icy-soil samples by pulverizing the icy soil and ejecting it into the back of the scoop for delivery to TEGA. Citation: http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/science_ra.php:

Phoenix Mars Lander Robotic Arm. Photo: JPL/NASA

.

Trenches with Proof of Water Ice:

.

Phoenix Lander Images--Proof of Disappearing Water Ice. Photo: JPL/NASA

.

Mission’s End: Mars Has Given Up its Most Precious Secret…To Date:

The JPL Press Release, 24 May 2010: PASADENA, Calif. — NASA’s Phoenix Mars Lander has ended operations after repeated attempts to contact the spacecraft were unsuccessful. A new image transmitted by NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter shows signs of severe ice damage to the lander’s solar panels.

“The Phoenix spacecraft succeeded in its investigations and exceeded its planned lifetime,” said Fuk Li, manager of the Mars Exploration Program at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. “Although its work is finished, analysis of information from Phoenix’s science activities will continue for some time to come.”

Last week, NASA’s Mars Odyssey orbiter flew over the Phoenix landing site 61 times during a final attempt to communicate with the lander. No transmission from the lander was detected. Phoenix also did not communicate during 150 flights in three earlier listening campaigns this year.

Phoenix Mars Lander. Photo from Orbit Confirming Irreparable Damage to the Lander. Photo: JPL/NASA

Earth-based research continues on discoveries Phoenix made during summer conditions at the far-northern site where it landed May 25, 2008. The solar-powered lander completed its three-month mission and kept working until sunlight waned two months later.

Phoenix was not designed to survive the dark, cold, icy winter. However, the slim possibility Phoenix survived could not be eliminated without listening for the lander after abundant sunshine returned.

An image of Phoenix taken this month by the High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment, or HiRISE, camera on board the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter suggests the lander no longer casts shadows the way it did during its working lifetime.

“Before and after images are dramatically different,” said Michael Mellon of the University of Colorado in Boulder, a science team member for both Phoenix and HiRISE. “The lander looks smaller, and only a portion of the difference can be explained by accumulation of dust on the lander, which makes its surfaces less distinguishable from surrounding ground.”

Apparent changes in the shadows cast by the lander are consistent with predictions of how Phoenix could be damaged by harsh winter conditions. It was anticipated that the weight of a carbon-dioxide ice buildup could bend or break the lander’s solar panels. Mellon calculated hundreds of pounds of ice probably coated the lander in mid-winter.

During its mission, Phoenix confirmed and examined patches of the widespread deposits of underground water ice detected by Odyssey and identified a mineral called calcium carbonate that suggested occasional presence of thawed water. The lander also found soil chemistry with significant implications for life and observed falling snow. The mission’s biggest surprise was the discovery of perchlorate, an oxidizing chemical on Earth that is food for some microbes and potentially toxic for others.

Phoenix Mars Lander. Trench Shovel Photo From Phoenix Onboard Camera. Photo: JPL/NASA

“We found that the soil above the ice can act like a sponge, with perchlorate scavenging water from the atmosphere and holding on to it,” said Peter Smith, Phoenix principal investigator at the University of Arizona in Tucson. “You can have a thin film layer of water capable of being a habitable environment. A micro-world at the scale of grains of soil — that’s where the action is.”

The perchlorate results are shaping subsequent astrobiology research, as scientists investigate the implications of its antifreeze properties and potential use as an energy source by microbes. Discovery of the ice in the uppermost soil by Odyssey pointed the way for Phoenix. More recently, the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter detected numerous ice deposits in middle latitudes at greater depth using radar and exposed on the surface by fresh impact craters.

“Ice-rich environments are an even bigger part of the planet than we thought,” Smith said. “Somewhere in that vast region there are going to be places that are more habitable than others.”

.

Phoenix Mars Lander Mission Patch. Image: UAriz/CSA/JPL/NASA

.

We now wait with some impatience for the next mission to cross the great void that separates us from this sister world in hope that from an era of warmer eons, liquid water, and powered by the dynamo of the Sun’s solar engine, that the potential for life was realized.  Well done to the thousands whose individual efforts crafted this small but amazing space-faring robot, flung from our own watered world to descend onto Ares’ dry and dusty surface, scraping its frozen crust to reveal the most precious element of life as we know it: plain old frozen water.

Μπράβο πουλί του πάγου και φωτιάς

MEanderthal: Fun With the Past–Ice Ages Past–From the Smithsonian

Featured

Homo Neanderthalensis, Reconstructed by John Gurche, Smithsonian, Hall of Human Origins

It Has Always Been About More Information: Survival vs Extinction.

A few months ago I got a smart phone.  The name I soon learned was very appropriate for at least two reasons.  First, it can do things that even ten years ago only the most expensive PDAs (personal digital assistants) could do, and second, it really is smarter than I am.  The learning curve is pretty steep on this device, and not being of the Digital Generation; actually that’s not quite true.  The first computer I remember being introduced to was in my senior year of high school, which used computer punch cards to run formulas.  It was about the size of a large suit case, had no monitor and had to be rolled around on a heavy cart.  It was like being given the chance to examine a treasure chest full of jewels, a coup that my math teacher had pulled off to get it on loan for a few days.  It looked something like this, except without the cassette disk drive:

Early WANG 600 Computer. Credit: Computer Museum, Grongingen, NL.

I remember clearly the assignment was to decide on a formula to punch into the cards and then feed them through the machine to get an answer.  The formula I chose was E=mc².  It’s a good thing the Homeland Security hadn’t been thought of yet, or I might have gotten a late night visit from a bunch of guys driving a big black Suburban with darkened windows.  However, once they got a look at my math grades (always my nemesis), they would have undoubtedly left laughing hysterically at the very idea of my being any threat to national security whatsoever, which remains true to this very day.

Back to the Smart Phone.  I spent several months deciding which phone I would purchase.  My daughter, the brilliant young up and coming media  guru has opted for the Apple/Mac world of computing and of course, loves everything about her iPhone.  I, however, have never been responsive to Steve Job’s siren call, because throughout my career, the organizations I worked for always used PCs.  But in a moment of uncharacteristic daring, I decided to take the leap on my phone and bought a Motorala Droid™.  All right, I like it.  A lot.  Even if it is smarter than I am.

What Does It Mean to Be Human?

Now, on to the fun stuff.  The question, “What does it mean to be human?” has been asked in every generation since humans reached the point of being self-reflective sentient beings.  The question is no less important today, as the digital revolution continues to transform our lives in ways unimagined even a decade ago.

One of the most important contributions to this search for meaning has been in the area of genomics.  Unlike the racist roots of the Eugenics Movement a century ago, the development of genomics has been been a set of initiatives based on several different areas of research.  One has been researching the molecular structure of the genes that populate virtually every living cell either as DNA or RNA.  Another has been medical research to discover the causes of certain diseases and conditions (everything from diabetes to cystic fibrosis to birth defects) and attempt to develop new treatments for these debilitating and often life-shortening diseases  (Eugenics is a concern in this area, of manipulating zygote fertilization to create “desired” human offspring, or artificially designing species, among others).  What I am most interested in in this post is how the mapping of  the genome of a single species gives us an enormous storehouse of information of what happened prior to the modern form in its evolutionary development.  That leads to the tantalizing question:  What were our distant ancestors like, which hominid (or hominin, if you prefer) line did we descend from, and how far back can we read those genetic sign posts to better understand who and what humans are now?

The Human Nucleotide Molecules. Image: Public Doman

I am aware that this is an unsettling question to many people who are conservative Christians (and other faith groups, too), but I have stated in numerous posts as well as my blog on science and faith, DÎSCÎ, the Disciples Institute of Scientific and Cosmological Inquiry, that I accept the scientific evidence for cosmic, geological and biological evolution.

The Human Genome Project was completed in 2003, under the leadershop of Dr. Francis Collins, MD, who is currently serving as the head of the National Institutes of Health.  Earlier, just this year, however, the long-awaited Neanderthal Genome Project was completed.  Here from Wikipedia:

At roughly 3.2 billion base pairs,[3] the Neanderthal genome is about the size of the modern human genome. According to preliminary sequences, 99.7% of the base pairs of the modern human and Neanderthal genomes are identical, compared to humans sharing around 98.8% of base pairs with the chimpanzee.[4] The researchers recovered ancient DNA of Neanderthals by extracting the DNA from the femur bone of a 38,000-year-old male Neanderthal specimen from Vindija Cave, Croatia, and also other bones found in Spain, Russia, and Germany.[5] Only about half a gram of the bone samples was required for the sequencing, but the project faced many difficulties, including the contamination of the samples by the bacteria that had colonized the Neanderthal’s body and humans who handled the bones at the excavation site and at the laboratory.[3]

Additionally, in 2010, the announcement of the discovery and analysis of Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from the Denisova hominin in Siberia revealed that this specimen differs from that of modern humans by 385 bases (nucleotides) in the mtDNA strand out of approximately 16,500, whereas the difference between modern humans and Neanderthals is around 202 bases. In contrast, the difference between chimpanzees and modern humans is approximately 1,462 mtDNA base pairs. Analysis of the specimen’s nuclear DNA is under way and is expected to clarify whether the find is a distinct species.[6][7] Even though the Denisova hominin’s mtDNA lineage predates the divergence of modern humans and Neanderthals, coalescent theory does not preclude a more recent divergence date for her nuclear DNA.

Although more work will be done to clarify the findings, the implications of this research will only lead to a better understanding of the lineage of the human race.

Anatomical Comparison of Modern Human and Neanderthal Skulls. Credit: Creative Commons License

With the publication of the Neanderthal Genome Project results, the Smithsonian Institution opened a new exhibit called “The Hall of Human Origins.”

Hall of Human Origins. Image: Courtesy Smithsonian Museum of Natural History. Reconstructions are: Homo habilis, Homo heidelbergensis, & Homo neanderthalensis.

An exhibit with such revolutionary displays of explaining the history of the human race had to be more than set pieces with little placards explaining what this bone or other is what.  And the Smithsonian came through!  They developed an application for both Android and iPhones that would allow you to take a picture and using digital morphing, transform any face into one of several of our extinct ancestors.  Fun?  You bet!

Before you click on the links below to see me, enjoy this short YouTube video on how the app works:

Now, on with the show: David Devolving!

The Black Poll War: The Defeat of the American Political Survery Industry

Featured

Part 1: Dispelling Misconceptions

This essay has absolutely nothing to do with race, racism, or the election of the first Black/African American president in U.S. history.  Really.

Part 2: It Seemed Like a Good Idea at the Time

The essay’s title is a play on the book title by quantum physicist, Leonard Susskind, The Black Hole War: My Battle with Stephen Hawking to make the World Safe for Quantum Mechanics. My title is a tribute to Dr. Susskind and someday I hope to understand at least half of what he wrote, whichever half that I still don’t understand.  It is kind of like a comprehension uncertainty principle.  Don’t worry, I’ll explain that below.  Really.

Part 3: The Really Scary Part

Because of what I learned from Dr. Susskind (and a few others), I am going to use some principles from quantum mechanics as analogies for “The Black Poll Wars.”  You are safe, however, to keep reading because I am not a quantum physicist and so writing as a layperson, I know my primary challenge is to get the my idea across as cogently as possible.  I admit, we’re not at that point yet.

Part 4: A Promise Not to be Too Scary

The thesis of this post is coming right after the definitions in Part 5 and Part 6.  I promise.

Part 5: Werner Heisenberg’s Very Good Idea

Definitions of the Uncertainty Principle From Three Quantum Physicists:

  1. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle—The principle of Quantum Mechanics that limits one’s ability to determine position and velocity simultaneously.  Leonard Susskind (2008). The Black Hole Wars. P. 453.
  2. Uncertainty principle: There is a fundamental limit in nature in the precisions to which certain measurements can be made. Kenneth Ford (2005). The Quantum World. P. 260.
  3. Uncertainty Principle—The statement that the momentum and position of a particle cannot be known exactly simultaneously.  If the momentum of a particle is known exactly, then the position is completely uncertain, that is, there can be no information on the position.  If the position is known exactly, there can be no information on the magnitude of the momentum.  In general, the principle states that the position and the momentum can only be known with a certain degree of uncertainty.  This is intrinsic to nature and not a consequence of experimental error.  Michael Frayer (2010). Absolutely Small. P. 372.

Part 6: Uncertainty: The Answer not the Question

For those of you who are craving for at least one mathematical formula  because of the definitions in Part 5, here it is for the Uncertainty Principle.  On the other hand, if math of any kind causes you to break out in hives, please skip to Part 7.

ΔxΔp≥ ħ/2

Definition of Terms from Ford:

On the right side is the ubiquitous Planck’s constant [ħ] (here divided by 2π), which turns up in every equation  in quantum mechanics.  Momentum is represented by p, and position (distance) by x.  The Δ symbols are used here to mean “uncertainty of” (not “change of”): Δx is the uncertainty of position; Δp is the uncertainty of momentum.  The product of these two uncertainties is equal to the constant ħ (p. 213-214).*

* The alert reader will see that Dr. Ford’s definition of ħ, though correct for the value of ħ, lacks the definition of ħ/2.  Ford defines Heisenberg’s 1927 originally published  formula for uncertainty (which is the context of the definition in that chapter of The Quantum World).  Later that same year the formula was modified, known as the Kenard Revision , and was considered a refinement of the original, which is now known as the Classical Formula. (For the most recent formulation of the Uncertainty Principle, see the Wikipedia article.)

Part 7: The Black Poll War

To be clear, here is my thesis statement for this post:  The polling data being collected and published today will  in all likelihood be wrong in November when the election takes place.  Why?  The pollsters and the public believe the polls.  Right now, if you go to a website such as Polster.com, you will find an up-to-date list of all the major political surveyors and pollsters, professional and academic, party-affiliated and independent.  The people who publish the results of their surveys, for the most part, are highly trained professionals and are working very hard to mine the opinions of the American public.  They use the accepted methodologies for their survey research, collection and analysis.   They are vying for the status of being the most reliable polling organization in country, and many have the history and credentials to make that a genuinely possible achievement.  As an individual who has been trained to do research, has conducted surveys myself, using the same methods, I have, with one or two exceptions, no argument with the quality of their work.

I am growing increasingly convinced, however, they are going to fail.  Two or three of the national survey organizations at most may be lucky and get the final results right.  The rest will not.  The reason is simple; the explanation less so.

This will be the year of the Black Poll War.  The image is appealing for several reasons, aside from the allusion to the Black Hole Wars recently fought in astrophysics.  Election day will be a black day for one of the political parties.  As we get closer to that date, the polls, which historically should be coalescing into a clearer picture will appear to be doing so, but actually be less and less accurate. Those few who are paying attention to what I’m about to suggest will be scrambling to read the tea leaves, so to speak, but instead, may share with me this growing discomfort we are gazing down the maw of a black hole.  Light goes in and never comes out.  The show will appear to be the Event Horizon (the highly charged ring that encircles a black hole) and it will be spectacular, giving the pundits of all stripes an unlimited amount of material to fill the radio and TV airwaves.  They, too, however, will be stunned at how wrong they were the day after.

As I said, the reason is simple.  There is a cultural and sociological equivalent of the Uncertainty Principle at work here in the United States.  We are, undoubtedly, not the only nation experiencing this phenomenon.  But being who we are, the impact the principle is having on us has a disproportionately larger impact on the rest of the world.  If I understand the true relevance of the Uncertainty Principle, it has the biggest effect on the smallest things, such as a single photon of light, or a proton, or some other sub-atomic particle.  Now, stay with me here.  I promise no more math.  The Principle has the least affect on the biggest things in the universe, like galaxies or even clusters of galaxies.

From Royal Astrologers to the Second Foundation

The big things–That is exactly what the pollsters and public are searching for, the big trends, the big shifts, the big percentages.  That’s what surveys are for, right?  Well, of course.  We Americans are obsessed with–majority– I’ll bet you thought I was going to say big.  Just  thinking off the top of my head, we might  be past that stage in some respects.  Look at the trend in consumer electronics.  Bigger isn’t better, smaller is.  More features packed into a smaller container.  The computer I’m writing on with all the capabilities it has started life as a giant, slow, data cruncher that would have filled rooms.  In fact, those early computers couldn’t do 90% of what my lap top does.   Half a century ago if you had used the word “nano” in a sentence, the reaction would be blank stares.  Now we use in everyday conversation like it really means something.  Because it really does.

What, then, is our obsession with majorities?  Politically speaking, the answer is straightforward.  Democracy, as we define it, runs on the foundation that majority rules.  And the reason that formula is used is because we get to cast our vote on a remarkably large number of issues, both regarding choosing the people we want to lead us and in (many different ways) choosing which laws we want to help structure our philosophy of what constitutes an orderly society.  Inherent in this kind of governing system (yes, I know, technically the United States is a republic), is the fact that every time we vote, someone or something wins and someone or something loses.

The people who voted for the person or law that lost are never happy about it, but in a republic, that is the way of things. Since the losers might have been the winners, we agree as citizens living under one Great Code of Governance we call The Constitution, someone always will be in the role of the loser, or to borrow the more genteel phrase from our British friends, “the loyal opposition.”

In the contemporary setting, we are doing far better at the opposition part than the loyal part. There is this emerging undercurrent that the opposition considers itself to be loyal and the majority to be disloyal.  No matter which party is in the majority, when that political shift begins to be a resonating theme of discontent, the very foundation of the republic is at risk.  That analysis, however, is not direction I intend to go in this essay.

My guess is that the field of survey polling exists only because of democracy and voting.  Prior to that political innovation, kings and queens, emperors and empresses, and all sort of other sovereigns wanted to know the future.  The role of astrologers was to provide them with that information.  They didn’t consult the monarch’s subjects; they consulted the stars.  Despite the Disneyesque concept we have of sorcerers and viziers, astrologers were generally among the educated elite (they had to be to write the horoscopes for their particular  patron), and used more sophisticated methods of obtaining information than just drawing planets and epicycles on sheets of parchment.  It is likely that the best astrologers had agents out in the field gathering information for them.  Most were probably covertly operating spies so as not to blow the astrologer’s cover of celestial omniscience.  In one respect it helped assure the Royal Astrologer kept his head attached his body.  In another respect it was the birth of polling.

With the emergence of democracy, covert information gathering on the mood of the populace could finally step into the sunlight.  Both the leaders and public wanted to know the present sentiment of the voters, and also wanted to use that information in all sorts of creative ways, some legitimate, some as a complete distortion.  The goal was and is to achieve the Majority.  Everyone wants their side to be the majority, because of the control and power it conveys.  To meet that demand one of the branches of the science of statistics began developing formulas.  And they were very good at it.  Within a century statistical polling became one of the most powerful tools of any political party, candidate, or ballot measure or initiative proponent.  And for the most part, since Americans not only love to vote, but love to express our opinions about how we plan to vote, survey polling is one of the most lucrative fields to be in (well, as long as you are on the executive side of things).

Survey polling, though, has a huge flaw.  The “black poll war” is going to produce an across-the-board defeat of the field.  The flaw is that survey polling is based on separating the majority and minority, and reporting it as if it were real.  It is their philosophical “theory of everything.”  The issue, from their perspective, is settled.  Yes, methodologies can be refined and trend analysis can be made more robust by the addition of ever-more-precise demographics.  Increasingly sophisticated software run on supercomputers can crunch data at mind-boggling speeds.  All of those things however are no more than a paper mache disk painted to look like a man-hole cover.  You don’t want to step on it.

The flaw is this: Survey polling is still operating in the classical world of majority research.  It is by analogy the same difference between the classical world of Newtonian physics and the Planckian world of Quantum Mechanics.  Survey polling has no equivalent of the Uncertainty Principle, and that is going to make all the difference.

Waiter, there’s a quark in my soup bowl.

Think of it this way.  Suppose I invite an experienced pollster to lunch  for soup.  I place two identical bowls in front her .  One is filled with a steamy hot, delicious soup with a wonderful aroma.  The other contains water filled to the same level.  Then I ask her, as a pollster, to describe the characteristics of each bowl.  Playing along, hoping that she will get the bowl with soup and not the water, she adeptly describes the contents of each bowl.  Next, I ask her, “if each bowl represented a bloc of voters, which one will win?”  Since both bowls are filled to the identical level, she correctly says, “I can’t tell.  I can only make a decision which has the majority.”  I take away the bowl with the water and replace it with an empty bowl.  I repeat my question, and she quite accurately answers “If the amount of soup is the equivalent to the number of votes cast, then the bowl with the soup wins.”  I ask my final question.  “The votes are based on the number of quarks (a subatomic particle that is part of every atom) in each bowl.  Which bowl has the most quarks?”

How would you answer?

We will attempt to find a solution to this question in the next post.  Happy pondering!

The Black Poll Wars: Bowling for Votes, Part II

Featured

The Black Poll Wars: The Coming Defeat of the Survey Polling Industry

In my previous post, I made the following rash assertion:

To be clear, here is my thesis statement for this post:  The polling data being collected and published today will in all likelihood be wrong in November when the election takes place.  Why?  The pollsters and the public believe the polls.  Right now, if you go to a website such as Polster.com, you will find an up-to-date list of all the major political surveyors and pollsters, professional and academic, party-affiliated and independent.  The people who publish the results of their surveys, for the most part, are highly trained professionals and are working very hard to mine the opinions of the American public.  They use the accepted methodologies for their survey research, collection and analysis.

Survey polling has a huge flaw.  The “black poll war” is going to produce an across-the-board defeat of the field.  The flaw is that survey polling is based on separating the majority and minority, and reporting it as if it were real.  It is their philosophical “theory of everything.”  The issue, from their perspective, is settled.  Yes, methodologies can be refined and trend analysis can be made more robust by the addition of ever-more-precise demographics.  Increasingly sophisticated software run on supercomputers can crunch data at mind-boggling speeds.  All of those things however are no more than a paper mache’ disk painted to look like a man-hole cover.  You don’t want to step on it.

The flaw is this: Survey polling is still operating in the classical world of majority research.  It is by analogy the same difference between the classical world of Newtonian physics and the Planckian world of Quantum Mechanics.  Survey polling has no equivalent of the Uncertainty Principle, and that is going to make all the difference.

I pick up my argument from here…

Waiter, there’s a quark in my soup bowl.

Think of it this way.  Suppose I invite an experienced pollster to lunch for soup.  I place two identical bowls in front her.  One is filled with a steamy hot, delicious soup with a wonderful aroma.  The other contains water filled to the same level.  Then I ask her, as a pollster, to describe the characteristics of each bowl.  Playing along, hoping that she will get the bowl with soup and not the water, she adeptly describes the contents of each bowl.  Next, I ask her, “If each bowl represented a bloc of voters, which one will win?”  Since both bowls are filled to the identical level, she correctly says, “I can’t tell.  I can only make a decision which has the majority.”  I take away the bowl with the water and replace it with an empty bowl.  I repeat my question, and she quite accurately answers, “If the amount of soup is the equivalent to the number of votes cast, then the bowl with the soup wins.”  I ask my final question.  “The votes are based on the number of quarks (a subatomic particle that is part of every atom) in each bowl.  Which bowl has the most quarks?”

How would you answer?

The question is not theoretical.  Quarks are real subatomic particles. Every atom contains quarks and there just happen to be six kinds of quarks and each quark has “flavor” (appropriate to soup, as well) so to come up with an answer, that multiplicity has to be factored in.  My pollster, growing hungrier by the minute, now has to solve a multidimensional model, for which she presumably has no statistical formula to work (cross-tabs won’t work here because she does not know which of the six types of quarks represent a yes vote or no vote).

To avoid my researcher becoming peckish and storming out, I bring her a fresh bowl of the soup so she can eat and think about the two bowls in front of her.

Classical statistical reasoning would look at the two bowls, one filled and one empty and conclude that the one with the soup, since the soup is made up of atoms, would therefore have all the quarks, so the empty bowl could be eliminated and the researcher could concentrate on determining which of the six kind of soup quarks represent which kind of vote.  And that would be wrong.

Quantum statistical reasoning would look at both bowls being full.  One with soup and the other with air.  Gaseous atoms have quarks just like soup atoms do.  Now my survey researcher asks for a second bowl of soup because this will take a while to figure out.  In fact, she has a bigger problem than simply counting quarks.  Since the soup is a fluid (we’ll ignore the atoms being steamed off) the number of quarks will remain reasonably stable.  The air in the other bowl is in constant motion, however, so the number of quarks moving in and out of the bowl is in constant flux.  And since placing a lid or layer of plastic wrap over the bowl to trap the air creates an artificial constraint, she just has to come up with a way to solve the problem as it is.

Her conundrum is that she can’t.  She’s not a failure, rather, Classical Statistics in polling has no models or formulas to account for the quarks, or should I say the core basis for decision making by the American public.  Probability and regression theory in statistics is quite sophisticated, and there are numerous models that are attempting to, some with a fairly high degree of success, that can predict the basis of decision making in the voting booth (or envelope in the case of my state, Oregon) within a narrow margin of error.  But since these models continue to look for the majority, they are not measuring what I believe will be the cause of the Black Poll War.

It’s not that they are looking at the wrong data; it is they have failed to make the paradigm shift to be able to analyze the process out of which that data is born.  It does not exist as a majority factor.  It exists as a subpersonal factor.  In quantum statistical reasoning, the function of democratic processes is not one person, one vote.  Using the quark analysis analogy, the democratic process is one person, six isovotes (I know I’ve coined a new term here, but it has parallels in the quantum behavior of quarks that is called “isospin” which is a critical component keeping quarks in a state of symmetry).  Depending on the way each voter processes the information stream to make those decisions those isovotes may or may not be stable through even one election cycle.

The solution is to create a quantum statistical equivalent of the Uncertainty Principle.

Any number of you are saying, “Now wait just a cotton-pickin’ minute here, fella.  You promised no more formulas.”  Indeed, I did.  But I am trying to develop a concept that voting in America has undergone a shift of such a dramatic change, it has evolved into virtually a new species of behavior.  It is the equivalent of the transformation from circumnavigating the earth in 80 days into orbiting the planet in 80 minutes.  We made that scientific and technological shift in transportation, from surface vehicles to the International Space Station.  We are in the middle of its evolutionary transformation in our voting behavior.  That is the metamorphosis of our political behavior from voting to isovoting.

Bowling for Votes: Not Your Grandmother’s Bowling Pins

Isovoting, unlike voting, is dynamic and has a meaning assigned to it by the person.  Imagine that an isovote is like a bowling pin.  Since the beginning of the republic, we have assumed that the vote is the triangle shape of the 10 bowling pins.  We have also assumed that the vote triangles could be colored.  The colors used by the television networks of late have been blue for the Democrats, red for the Republicans, and various other preferences for those who were voting independent.  Any color combination of colors could be assigned (I’ve never heard the explanation of why the colors were chosen in that manner, but it might be an interesting footnote in the history of reporting votes.)  Each vote might have an additional attribute or two attached to it, but even if it were envisioned as a 3-dimensional triangular wedge, it was, almost exclusively, solid and predictable.  People voted for one party or another (many states allowed you to go into a voting machine booth and pull a lever therefore choosing in one action all the candidates of that political party).

That is no longer the case.  The solidity of any bloc of votes is now, well, not solid.  We’ll assume for the moment we still have ten pins but peeling back the outer surface of the nice, neat triangular wedge reveals that the ten pins are not standing neatly at attention, but are in a constant state of motion.  Suppose that each pin, as an isovote, has a set of variable characteristics, let’s say:

  1. Size: From a minimum of some volume to a maximum of volume not taken up by all the other isovote pins together
  2. Shape: From classic bowling pin to any other extrudable shape that will fit within the triangular vote box, or even to exceed that volume
  3. Color
  4. Temperature
  5. Motion: From stillness to rapid
  6. Connectivity: From pin to pin, to the surface of the triangular block, and to any other  receptor site outside the block
  7. Meaning: The isovote pin, like a living cell exists within a specific environment, and therefore being part of the human capacity to decide how to vote, has to be capable of receiving information transmitted from the person to the subperson

The characteristics I’ve described above are an analogy of what an isovote is, not a literal suggestion of an anatomical mechanism.  What is important, however, is that the analogy gives the reader a sense of the complexity of what really constitutes the dynamics of voting.  As long as pollsters rely on defining “majority” and “probability” and “margin of error” as their gold standard, no matter how refined their formulas become, they will still lose the Black Poll War.

The basis of voting I’m describing is much like that of the infamous “Schrödinger’s Cat” thought experiment by physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935.  Basically it says if you had one thousand cages with solid doors, 500 of which had a live cat and the other 500 had a dead cat, there would be no way to determine which state the cat was in until you opened the door, and the act of opening the door determined if the cat was dead or alive.  Observing what was in the box was what created the certainty of the cat’s state of being, not whether the cat was alive or dead before hand because you could never be certain without opening the door.  This is the basis of the Uncertainty Principle, and since I already presented the formula if the previous post, I can keep my promise not to repeat it here.  You however could not be certain with any degree of accuracy or probability that I would keep that promise.  It is this counterintuitive manner of thinking that makes quantum mechanics so darned frustrating to try and figure out.  But quantum physicists turn out to be right, or able to adjust their theories to simplify the complex wrong part into simpler right parts.

That leads to my concluding point.  The transformation of the vote into a compilation of isovotes is the key to understanding the American Electorate.  The pollsters from now on have to make the assumption that testing for probability and the majority will no longer provide accurate results.  The Uncertainty Principle shows that the isovotes cannot fit the Classical Statistical models for voter behavior.  Like quarks in atoms, isovotes behave in dynamic ways that cannot be predicted with certainty either before or after they are observed, and that the very behavior of the survey taker will have a direct affect on the nature of the isovotes, especially with regard to the person assigning meaning to them, creating a new future for that person’s set of isovotes that did not exist prior to being polled on his or her preferences.

November 2, 2010 will be a very interesting day in the history of the United States.  For one, I will find out if my theory of the Black Poll War is vindicated.  If it is, you can say you read it here first.  If it isn’t, you’ll know I’ll be working on the assumptions of my hypotheses to see if I can be as clever as a quantum physicist and adjust them so they fit the reality of the situation more closely.  Perhaps, I’ll just have to throw out the whole thing and start over.  That is the only way to do good science.

In the meantime, I’m very glad I don’t have to actually count the number of quarks in my bowl of soup.  They are very small and would take many human life times to total them, even if I physically could do it. That, I’ll leave to the quantum physicists and their amazing quark-counting machines.


Updated: Rosetta Still Speaks–Not From Egypt’s Eternal Sands but in a Voice “Thro’ Vast Immensity can Pierce”

Featured

It's Just One Boring Day After Another. Photo Courtesy Zazzle.com, UK

I don’t know about you, but my life most weeks is pretty routine.  Even though I work in a setting where no two days are the same, in some respects (I never know which patients I’ll be seeing or what their issues will be) my schedule is predictable, Monday through Friday, with a night of being on-call every other week (One thing is certain, here.  If you get called in the night, it’s never good!  Chaplains don’t get called for the happy stuff at night—that’s just a given.  And with our large service area and being a Trauma II hospital, it’s a rare night I don’t get called).

With that in mind, I look to other sources to provide the unique, the unexpected, the stunning, the beautiful, the historic.  What takes my breath away? Beauty where there should only be the drab.  Inspiration from the simplest of the simple where there should only be plainness.  And historic perspectives never glimpsed by the human eye.

Lagerfeld (TM) Rose Blossom. Photo: David Waggoner

We’ve gotten used to the magnitude of the beauty of the galaxy from photos by the Hubble Space Telescope, or the Twin Keck’s on Mauna Kea’s lofty peak, or composites made possible by the digitization of multiple pictures of the same object taken in various light spectra by different space and earth-based observatories.  The robotic

Cassini Huygens Titan Montage. Photo: NASA/JPL/ESA

probe expeditions to the gas giants, Jupiter and Saturn, such as Galileo and Cassini, respectively, not to mention the earlier Voyagers, have so completely revised our understanding of those miniature solar systems that astronomy textbooks written even five years ago are hopelessly out of date.  In a century Mars has gone from a planet believed to have a struggling civilization, to a dusty, dead, rocky world with no potential, back to a world of potential and interesting; the search for life in space has zeroed in on it as prime suspect #1.  The discovery and confirmation of water ice, just inches below

Mars 27Aug03 at Opposition by HST. Photo: HST/NASA

its surface is reigniting the global interest to send a human crew to investigate, even though the political and economic chaos rippling around the makes the realization of that dream tenuous at best.  Saturn’s moon Titan has now been to be discovered to be so earthlike, although its rains, and rivers and oceans are of methane that astronomers are stunned and rewriting what a planet is and what an active environment can be every few months.  I could go on and on.

Rosetta Stone, 196 BCE, Disc. 1799 in Egypt. Photo: British Museum, London

The picture below fits into the category of “Historic Views Never Seen Before by Human Eyes”.  The photographer is the European Space Agency’s Rosetta Space Probe launched in 2004 whose ultimate destination is the comet, 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, which it is scheduled to reach in 2014.  Like a miniature Casinni-Huygens, Rosetta will launch a probe, the Philae Lander to the surface of the comet and gather data to be radioed back to Earth.  So it has a way to go, but is on track to make its target date.  Rosetta’s trajectory is a gravity-assisted boost cycle, circling the Sun and planetary flybys to increase its speed and set it up for its ultimate goal.

Along the way, Rosetta has encountered several asteroids, the most recent being 21 Lutetia.  This is the last asteroidal encounter before the probe is put into deep space hibernation as it flies toward the comet.

Rosetta Spacecraft Probe. Image Courtesy: ESA

Just released is one of those stunning photos, historic in that no human eye has ever seen 21 Lutetia other than as a dim dot of light, but in the distance is the grand dame of the Solar System, Saturn.  The black of space punctuated by a small asteroid—a piece of the earliest solar system—in the foreground and in the distance—massive Saturn, millions of miles distant but still unmistakable with its signature rings.  The asteroid photo, taken from a distance of  22,300 miles, shows it is approximately 81 miles on its long axis.  Such stark beauty of the very small and the massive opposite in their juxtaposition against the eternal night of deep space takes my breath away!

21 Lutetia Asteroid from 36,000 km by Rosetta with Saturn in Background. Photo: ESA

I end with these prescient verses written nearly 300 years ago by a man who could only imagine in the most rudimentary fashion the reality of deep space, but ended up describing it with a beauty in word, expressing an amazingly close reality of what we know today:

Of man, what see we but his station here,

From which to reason, or to which refer?

Thro’ worlds unnumber’d tho’ the God be known,

‘Tis ours to trace him only in our own.

He, who thro’ vast immensity can pierce,

See worlds on worlds compose one universe,

Observe how system into system runs,

What other planets circle other suns,

What vary’d being peoples every star,

May tell why heav’n has made us as we are.

by Alexander Pope, OF THE NATURE AND STATE OF MAN WITH RESPECT TO THE UNIVERSE, from The Essay on  Man, Epistle 1. 1732

21-Lutetia Close Up: An Update

The European Space Agency has released another image of 21-Lutetia taken by Rosetta at a distance (astronomically speaking) of only 1965 miles.  That’s approximately the same distance as flying from San Francisco to Indianapolis, non-stop.  Or, if you live East of the Mississippi, from Washington, D.C. to Phoenix, Arizona.

Asteroid 21 Lutetia from 1965 miles (3162 km) by Rosetta Spacecraft. Image: ESA

From Astronomy.com:

The July 10 flyby was a spectacular success with Rosetta performing faultlessly. Closest approach took place at a distance of 1,965 miles (3,162 kilometers).

The images show that Lutetia is heavily cratered, having suffered many impacts during its 4.5 billion years of existence. As Rosetta drew close, a giant bowl-shaped depression stretching across much of the asteroid rotated into view. The images confirm that Lutetia is an elongated body, with its longest side around 81 miles (130 km).

The pictures come from Rosetta’s Optical, Spectroscopic, and Infrared Remote Imaging System (OSIRIS) instrument, which combines a wide-angle and a narrow-angle camera. At closest approach, details down to a scale of 200 feet (60 meters) can be seen over the entire surface of Lutetia.

Happy Moon Day, World! July 20, 1969

Featured

Apollo 11 Bootprint. Photo: NASA

Apollo 11 Crew. L-R: Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins, Buzz Aldrin. Photo: NASA

Buzz Aldrin unpacking equipment on the moon from the Eagle lander. Photo: NASA

Galacta

 Verse on the 6th movement theme (Maestoso) from Saint-Saens’ Symphony #3, The Organ Symphony, Op. 78.  Meter: 9.10.9.10.

 I.

From life’s womb our birth

          beholds the stars,

Embraced by Galacta’s

          spiraling arms.

Her xanthic star

          darkness is o’erwhelmed,

Seeds spring from

          elemental dust it warms.

 II.

Childhood, sustained

Apollo 11 Launch

          by this oceaned orb,

Sparks genesis of

          consciousness and fire.

Galacta’s ocean

          vast paradise,

So we leap to the sky

          atop Sol’s spire.

David C. Waggoner, March 16, 1998, Copyright (C) 1998

 

A Recession Forty Years in the Making–Updated

Featured

This Great Recession  Didn’t Happen by Magic…My Rant

The Sniffer Returns. Photo Courtesy: Smith Detection UK

When last the Sniffer’s image appeared here on Extreme Thinkover, he (well, I think he’s a he) was celebrating the passage the the health care reform act, having sniffed out the “radiation” of American Health Insurance Providers and other members of Big Medicine’s failed assault against the legislation, spending undoubtedly hundreds of millions of their subscribers’ dollars in the process.  That money was intended by those who paid it, whether it was the funds directly from the insured or their employers, to pay for health care not to pay lobbyists and advertising to defeat every effort and piece of legislation devised to make it better.  Fortunes spent without consent.  A cruel form of taxation without representation.

We will probably never know how much money Big Medicine squandered in their complete and total defeat, as the benefits of health care for all Americans already taking effect, item by item, promises a future of access to medical care that for over two centuries we have never had the right and many have been denied by sheer accident of their socioeconomic status or a simple preexisting condition.

Now we have the right.  Obviously, we should be celebrating, right?  Right?

Political Memory Distortion

Some of our citizen sisters and brothers continue to snort and paw like an angry bull over the fact that they now have to participate in a society that cares for the medical needs of  all its citizens (joining finally nearly every other First World nation and many others), not just as country that rewards those who would hoard their worldly goods as if none of those around them had any role in the accumulation of that wealth.  In their anger, from distorted recollections of an earlier geopolitical battles, they call it socialism, an incoherent misunderstanding of that term in the history of political systems.  It is not socialism.

A Republic’s Highest Value

To the contrary, it is the highest value of a democratic republic: Sharing.  It is that simple.  In a democratic republic, one of the blessings of liberty is sharing.  To treat another as you would want to be treated.  We are now a large nation, over 300 million people and growing.  The day of a flat birth rate has passed.  It takes a lot of organizational structure to insure that the ideals and the order of a democratic republic are nourished over time.  It cannot be done by stinginess, or by isolationism.  The age of the Rugged Individualist has passed.  We now are connected in ways even those of us in our middle age could not dream of.  We now live in a shared world, a shared connectivity at the speed of light, the evolution of human ingenuity turned up on high, the 20th Century a platform for the 21st.

Equality consists in the same treatment of similar persons–Aristotle, 384-322 BCE.

Most of all it cannot be done by refusing to share in such a way that those with the most are continuously provided with more through no merit of their own, denying the dreams of those in the middle to improve their lot in life, it too a blessing of liberty, and effectively squelching the chance of those at the lowest rungs of life from ever daring to dream that those above them might welcome them to take those steps and dream those dreams out of their poverty.

The right to achieve prosperity in a democratic republic is not the exclusive right of those who have already achieved it through their own effort or inheritance.  At the same time, those who have achieved prosperity have no right to hoard their prosperity so that those who are trying to achieve it as well are denied their right to share in its blessings, regardless of their beginning station in life.  With all due diligence those who are prosperous must ensure that the efforts of those who desire to be so as well are rewarded and their growing prosperity welcomed.  But because human beings all have differing gifts, desires, capacities, and health, a democratic republic can exist living by its highest ideals when the prosperity of the whole also ensures the rights of the whole.

Rant complete.

An Unexpected Proof of Concept: 40 Billionaires’ Pledge

What I wrote in the previous paragraph is not just a flight of fancy or a theoretical construct that never would be tried by the very most prosperous people in our country.  On August 4, 2010, the foundation begun by billionaires Warren Buffet and Bill Gates announced that 40 billionaires have so far pledged to give away at least half of their fortunes during their lives or at their death.  Called The Giving Pledge, the list is available publicly online and, according to Buffet and Gates, this is only the beginning of their project.  For instance, the Wall Street Journal reported one of the pledger’s rational:

In an interview, Tom Steyer, founder of hedge fund Farallon Capital Management LLC in San Francisco, said he and his wife had planned to give away their wealth but decided to go public after Mr. Buffett called.

Mr. Steyer made the pledge to support what he sees as an effort by Mr. Buffett to show how those who profit from capitalism can help improve society.  “We want him to succeed in reshaping the way people think about the private enterprise system,” Mr. Steyer said.

MSNBC reported that the United States has about 400 billionaires, some 40% of the world’s total, and their net worth is estimated at $1.2 trillion.

Some of the billionaires have a very specific goal in mind for their pledge.  George Lucas, filmmaker and creator of the vast Star Wars empire stated,

“My pledge is to the process; as long as I have the resources at my disposal, I will seek to raise the bar for future generations of students of all ages,” filmmaker George Lucas said. “I am dedicating the majority of my wealth to improving education.”

Finally, Warren Buffett co-founder, remains ever the optimistic example for First Citizen in our democratic republic:

“We contacted between 70 and 80 people to get the 40. A few were unavailable. We don’t give up on them. Every saint has a past, every sinner has a future. We’ll keep on working,” Buffett said.

Thank you, Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates.  You get it.  But we are not done here…

So What Next: A Recession Four Decades in the Making

How bad is it?  Ironically, out of the past a major player has come to the horrified realization that the policies of the past forty years, in which he played a major role, beginning with the disgraced Richard Nixon, set in motion the recessionary calamity we are trying to survive.

David Stockman, who was the director of the Office of Management and Budget under the evangelist of  “trickle down economics” and the fomenter of the doctrine that all government is essentially bad, Ronald Reagan, wrote these words published in the New York Times:

Republican pretense that its new monetarist and supply-side doctrines are rooted in its traditional financial philosophy. Republicans used to believe that prosperity depended upon the regular balancing of accounts — in government, in international trade, on the ledgers of central banks and in the financial affairs of private households and businesses, too. But the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance — vulgar Keynesianism robed in the ideological vestments of the prosperous classes.

This approach has not simply made a mockery of traditional party ideals. It has also led to the serial financial bubbles and Wall Street depredations that have crippled our economy. More specifically, the new policy doctrines have caused four great deformations of the national economy, and modern Republicans have turned a blind eye to each one.

Although I politely disagree with Mr. Stockman’s criticism of Keynes, arguing as would Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize winning economist, that had Keynes’ economics been followed, instead of Reagan’s supply side fantasy, we might have avoided some of the damage Mr. Stockman places right at the door of the Republicans, who claim they want more of the same.

As our nation moves along the unstoppable path of time toward the General Election in November of this year, Mr. Stockman’s accusations against his own party are even more troubling.  He continues:

But in the end it was a new cadre of ideological tax-cutters who killed the Republicans’ fiscal religion.  Through the 1984 election, the old guard earnestly tried to control the deficit, rolling back about 40 percent of the original Reagan tax cuts. But when, in the following years, the Federal Reserve chairman, Paul Volcker, finally crushed inflation, enabling a solid economic rebound, the new tax-cutters not only claimed victory for their supply-side strategy but hooked Republicans for good on the delusion that the economy will outgrow the deficit if plied with enough tax cuts. (Emphasis added)

Delusion or Voodoo Economics: Your Choice

Dr. Krugman, however, agrees with Mr. Stockman on one major point: tax cuts will not help our economy outgrow the deficit now, any more than they did by the time Ronald Reagan left office in 1989.  Earlier this  month, also in the New York Times, Dr. Krugman wrote:

Now there are many things one could call the Bush economy, an economy that, even before recession struck, was characterized by sluggish job growth and stagnant family incomes; “vibrant” isn’t one of them. But the real news here is the confirmation that Republicans remain committed to deep voodoo, the claim that cutting taxes actually increases revenues.

It’s not true, of course. Ronald Reagan said that his tax cuts would reduce deficits, then presided over a near-tripling of federal debt…

But we’re talking about voodoo economics here, so perhaps it’s not surprising that belief in the magical powers of tax cuts is a zombie doctrine: no matter how many times you kill it with facts, it just keeps coming back. And despite repeated failure in practice, it is, more than ever, the official view of the G.O.P. (Emphasis added).

Are we at an impass: Yes.  I have done a lot of counseling during my career and one thing I have seen dozens of times is that a person who is suffering a delusion is not aware of the distortion of reality that is affecting them.  Voodoo, and I will place it squarely in the Hollywood horror genre’ and not the religion of many who live in and around the Caribbean, and the image of zombies, plays on our deep fears of somehow having our dead bodies overtaken and made to do nasty things to, well, anyone, but, in this instance screaming attractive American teenagers.

In terms of economics, the accusation of either, is to say something is deeply wrong, but we know that.  What we are suffering from, is the gathering force of economic distortions that have gathered for forty years.  Forty years.  How many really smart people, in both parties, noticed this, and said exactly nothing?  Was it delusions or voodoo?  How could that be, though?  The delusional cannot recognize their delusions, and the zombie’s revivified by voodoo do not know they aren’t supposed to be in that very state.  Does that mean there are not any really smart people left in either party who can figure it out?  A tantalizing question to ponder, I admit, but the answer is no.

If the Answer is “No,” What was the Question, Again?

The question, in the end, is not whether there were smart people following the economy for the last forty years; there were.  The question is how over forty years did nobody get it?  Since Richard Nixon brought the Union to its knees politically and economically, hundreds of economic models have been built, hundreds rejected because they didn’t work.  Computer modeling has entered the 21st Century–Economists of all stripes have access to these computers and run probably terabits of data through them to test the accuracy of their latest theory.

And yet we wallow in the debris of a Recession still threatening our national prosperity and influence, whose roots are easily traced to forty years ago.  This is a topic that must be more closely examined in the months ahead as the election approaches.  I think the Sniffer has a new assignment.

What You Should Call Me?

Featured

Just One Bad Word

Dr. Laura, Courtesy: DrLauraBlog.com

Dr. Laura Schlessinger, syndicated radio host and popular author on relationships, has apparently stirred up the hornets’ nest of what different ethnic groups want their group to be called–both what names are acceptable and what are offensive.  It is a narrow twisty trail to negotiate with an almost unlimited number of ways to get into trouble.  It  is not a difficult thing to do, and regardless of how you perceive your ethnicity and the importance you attach to that perception, the person standing next to you likely has no idea what either of those are.

Is that a bad thing?  It all depends on how you perceive it.  It depends on how important it is to you.  Now, I’m not writing this post to defend or criticize Dr. Laura.  In one respect it makes not one bit of difference which offensive word she used or how often she used it (as reported she used the “n******” word eleven times) have never listened to her show or read any of her books.  What I’m interested is the response.  It made the national news.  The Grio, an affiliate of MSNBC, led with the headline: “Dr. Laura’s n-word rant reflects trend of intolerance.”  Ronda Racha Penrise, writing for The Grio, states,

Many African-Americans have either directly witnessed or heard family members and friends mention how emboldened some of their white co-workers have become in expressing their racist views since Obama’s election. The rationale seems to be that, since there’s a black man leading the nation, it’s okay to say almost anything. On black-oriented radio shows like The Tom Joyner Morning Show and Rev. Al Sharpton’s Keeping It Real, African-American callers feel the disrespect President Obama receives from the Tea Party, conservatives in Congress and on the Internet is tied to his race and not his politics.

Respect, disrespect. Respect, disrespect.  The motivation of the speaker and the interpretation of the hearer, and vice verse,  are practically impossible to discern.  On the other hand,  in a culture that has a history such as one would think that over the course of five hundred years we might have picked up a clue, maybe even two, on the issue.  But it also appears that we haven’t gotten there yet.  So that raises the question: What should you call me?

A Lesson in Archaeology and Words

I’m not kidding, nor am I attempting to belittle or criticize those who have suffered untold offenses, some to the point of death, simply for the color of their skin or the place from which they or their ancestors came, or religious beliefs, or sexual desires.  But I do contend it is a legitimate question to ask, because I also contend that as humans have evolved, despite the growing sophistication of our brains and intellect, like an archaeological dig, the deeper down you go, the further back in time you go.

Irish Ogham Consonant Secret Alphabet; Wikipedia/PD

In this analogy, our cultural identity is one of the oldest layers in the dig.  Perhaps we should be calling this group or tribal identification.  I took enough sociology and anthropology in college to know that people groups, not only have a sense of collective cohesion, but have a sense of language cohesion as well.  Certain words belong exclusively to the tribe and are never spoken in the presence of strangers.  Strangers who discover these totem words can be ostracized, hunted or even killed.  Certain other words are considered “fighting words” a term we’ve all heard, but in our culture, they have disappeared over time.  Only in the past twenty years as we have found ourselves confronting cultures that have retained much different senses of place and language, have we discovered that “fighting words” is a concept that can be alive and well, and we use them at our risk.

What should you call me?

By definition of the United States Census Bureau, I am a White American, often referred to as Caucasian, Europid or Europoid.  To be honest, I have never heard of the latter two terms, although the term European is now being  used as a designation of origin not of race.

The Caucuacus Region: Source of "Caucasian Race"

But to the best of my knowledge, not one of my family ever lived near the Caucasus Mountains, even it it does have the highest peak in Europe, Mt. Elbrus at 18,510 feet (5642 meters).  Sitting between Russia to the north and Turkey and Iran to the south, its largest current nation is Georgia.  A quick look at my personal genealogy shows that on my mother’s side, I have Bohemian (Czech) and Scottish, and on my Father’s side I have Dutch and German.  I can claim to be a Europid, but frankly find the term is not all that appealing.  So do I like being called a “White” American any more than the others.  Well, no.

What should you call me?  You’ll have to guess.  It’s my totem word.  To me it has meaning, and you not only have to guess, but decide if calling me the term will be more offensive if you say it to my face, or should I say, write it in a comment?

Iraq’s Future: Blood or Hope?

Featured

War in Iraq: Seven Years of U.S. Sacrifice, Image Courtesy: Nicholas P. Maurstad

Last One Out, Please Close the Gate

Last night, local time in the Middle East at a border crossing between Iraq and Kuwait, the last Stryker Brigade of American Combat troops rolled through the gates ending seven years of United States military operations.  The combat role is finished and has been turned over to the Iraqi military.  Although the Stryker Brigade is being processed for their first day in Kuwait, a substantial force of non-combat military personnel remain, some 50,000 we are told.

Is the war over?  Did we win?

Iraqi Women Grieving Killed Relatives, Photo: AFP/Getty Images

The hope is that the combat part of the war is over.  The so-called advisors will have many roles, from training to consultation, to building ongoing relations with the Iraqis as their very fragile government tries to survive just one day at a time.  What strategy will the insurgents play?  Only time will tell.

Did we win?  Now that’s an interesting question.  Can you win a war that was begun under false pretenses?  Can you win a war that was started by a president of the United States who chose to either believe pure fantasy about a huge cache of weapons that never existed to begin with, or knowing they didn’t exist, fabricated a horrible lie, colluding with the officers of his administration do give the appearance that we were in state of a clear and present danger?

Since the evidence points to the president’s lying to the nation, an act of duplicity for which he will never have to face justice and neither will the officers who assisted him in constructing this completely false rationale for going to war, how, then, can we say that we won the war?

Started on False Pretenses, Ended on…?

What we did was topple a regime. We sought out an admittedly tyrannical dictator who oppressed his people, and let his sons run amok terrorizing any one they wished, simply on a whim.  The fact that all three of them are dead was a gift to the Iraqi people.  But the fact the war we brought to them cost the lives, according to the organization, Iraq Body Count,  of between 97,267 and 106,146 civilians as well as the deaths of over 4400 military Americans.  Many of these troops were killed trying to dodge the bullets and  IEDs of a no-holds-barred civil war between rival tribal and religious sects of the same religion. This circumstance lasting years does not leave one with a sense that our goals lined up with theirs.  And on both accounts, those numbers do not include the number of those wounded, maimed, left without spouses, or orphaned.

Graph of Iraqi Casualties. Image: Iraq Body Count

The truth remains that despite the last Stryker Brigade rumbling across the border into Kuwait, the war is not over.  50,000 U.S. troops will continue on for years to come.  One Iraqi official stated: “If I were asked about the withdrawal, I would say to politicians: the U.S. army must stay until the Iraqi army is fully ready in 2020,” said the Iraqi military’s most senior officer Lt. Gen. Babakir Zebari last week.

Operation New Dawn is not the end of the war.  It is a new phase.  More Iraqis will die.  More Americans will die.  The jury of historical success or failure must remain silent for years to come.  But some facts are already self-evident, and

IED Explosion in Iraq. Photo: Wikipedia/PD

both the United States and the Iraqis have paid a terrible price for the decision of one man who out of spite, a twisted sense of revenge, incompetence, delusion, or unmitigated stupidity, started the war and conned a nation into going along with it.  While the two men and their henchmen remain free who we should have focused on like a laser beam to bring the down, to put a halt to the horrible

Bin Laden & al Zawahiri. Photo: Source Unkn

carnage they continue to spread around the world, a thousand opportunities were squandered by that administration to end the reign of terror those men and to pay for their murderous crime against the American people.  For that, George Bush, 43rd president of the United States, should be forever judged most harshly.

But What of Hope?

The old saying goes, “You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.”  But sometimes through dogged determination, one can take the worst possible situation, and through hard work and creative thinking and planning bring some degree of good out of the bad.

This will be the paradox of the Iraqi war.  For all the wrong reasons we invaded Iraq.  The people our leaders believed would welcome us instead hated us even more.  The people freed from the masochism of Saddam Hussein instantly split from the suppressed religious and tribal fractures that Saddam had used constant brutality to hold together to control his regime.  We unleashed a monster of internecine savagery, an unintended consequence for which our leaders were totally unprepared or had any contingency to deal with.  For years we, the great liberators, were literally trapped by the rage going on around us, trying to bring order in a nation so spiritually shattered that they wanted to kill us so that they could kill each other more quickly.

Despite all that…despite all that, the soldiers of a handful of countries that came to stand beside us, and our American troops, figured out ways to bring hope to the Iraqis.  A million mistakes were undoubtedly made, but we are a people, or should I say a coalition, that don’t give up that easily.  Yes, the other countries withdrew their forces, including the British, who had been the second largest contingent, before the fighting was truly over.  But to their defense, many of their leaders saw the obvious and clear turning of events in Afghanistan, and moved their resources to that troubled land, where now they continue to fight alongside of our forces as they attempt to save Afghanistan from another Taliban regime, capable of a brutality that exceeds anything Saddam could have dreamed of many times over.

As the combat troops left last night, the question very much remains whether Iraq, is truly ready to embrace the new dawn our military has so optimistically chosen to call the next phase of the mission.  The answer may be that it ends in collapse and civil war, where millions might die this time.  It is my prayer that will not be the result, but I cannot predict the future.  It appears though that the sheer hatred the Iraqis demonstrated against the U.S. at the time of the invasion has tempered.  Though the rivers of mistrust of Americans and that the majority are Christians, runs deep, as the years have passed and the combat operations and firefights have subsided, our soldiers have had the chance to show the humanity that exists beneath the uniform.

Iraqi Child Kissing U.S. Soldier. Photo: AP/John Moore

Perhaps the chance to be human, to show kindness and even respect, after so many years of fighting has turned out to be irresistible to both the Americans and the Iraqis.

If that is true, then there is hope.

Dumbing Down the POTUS

Featured

This post is not about George W. Bush.  Really.  Although he had a role in my thesis.  This post is about our current president, Barack Obama.  I don’t want there to be any confusion about that.

It finally struck me yesterday what the GOP is up to regarding the November elections, after four events, three of which were unusual, filled the majority of my day.

They were, in this order:

  1. I watched two hours of Fox News shows at the behest of my friend, Dr. John Bogen, who is politically as conservatively moderate as I am liberally moderate.  Many of the themes I discuss below were the primary topics of those shows.  (If you are a regular reader of Extreme Thinkover, you will remember John’s very fine posts last fall on the H1N1 Pandemic, both regarding vaccinations and his advice how to understand H2N1 H1N1 (thanks, John!).
  2. I read an article about how the White House allowed President Obama’s passport–yes the President’s passport–to be photographed to counter the ongoing idiocy of the so-called “birthers” who obstinately cling to the totally false accusation that Obama was not born in the United States.  The issue of people believing the President is a Muslim is so far off the scale of absurdity it doesn’t even get its own separate number.
  3. While wandering around a big box electronics store I started experiencing chest pains and deciding to err on the side of caution and went to my hospital’s urgent care.  All my tests came out negative, fortunately, but with my family’s history of cardiac artery disease I’ve earned a ticket to be the main attraction in my second stress test.  Thinking about one’s mortality is a sobering moment for anyone.  I also have health insurance.
  4. After I got home, I got to watch my favorite NASCAR driver, Kyle Busch, set a NASCAR record at Bristol Motor Speedway in Tennessee by sweeping the three races of weekend.

It was during the race it hit me what the conservatives are doing to try to defeat the Democrats this fall and to discredit not only the president but the presidency in every way possible for their advantage. Why during the race?  Maybe it had to do with the vagaries of a car race, the strategies, and the ever-present reality that each driver and his car only has so much control over what is happening to them.  Someone else makes the smallest of mistakes and you can be out of the race with your car a pile of scrap metal in a fraction of a second.  Or maybe it was just dumb luck.

You will remember, quite painfully if you are a person with any capacity to carry on a civil conversation with someone you disagree with, the Cirque de Chaos we had to endure during the Congressional recess town hall meetings last August over the Tea Party and health care and carrying guns around in public like it was the Showdown in the O.K. Corral.  This year, there’s hardly been a whimper over this.  That’s because the new strategy is much more subtle and the Far Right learned one lesson: viewer fatigue.  By the end of August last year, the “scream at your politician” gambit had backfired; most Americans get fed up with toddler-type tantrums very quickly.  Simply put, the Far Right overplayed its hand.

The plan this summer is to make the president look dumb.  Also incompetent, if possible, but definitely dumb.

Why?  Because Barack Obama is probably one of the smartest presidents in the history of the nation in terms of sheer intellect.   So the way to attack him is to create, in this case, two exceptionally dumb fabrications about him: he wasn’t born in Hawaii, and he is Muslim, and then keep feeding those very stupid lies by constantly just hinting about them or have pundits “debate” the issue on TV and radio.

Dumbing Down the POTUS. Image Courtesy Motifake: www.motifake.com

http://www.motifake.com

This strategy works because there is no rational way to defend against it.  You can’t “put this one to bed” because there is no effective counter-strategy.  So the Republican leadership, now held hostage by the Far Right Wingnuts, can just keep the topic alive by continuing to feed their constituents who have bought into it.  And the way you do that is very simple: whenever the question is asked, you deny it, but ambiguously.

Last year, the Far Right tried shouting and threats of revolution.  It fell flat on its face.  This year they are trying lies and innuendo.  It’s a big gamble for the GOP because the Tea Party and other Far Right groups are much like a political multi-headed Hydra each with its own idea of who should be in control and what the outcomes should be.  But the Republicans lack a Hercules to control this beast.  Rep. John Boehner, Sen. Mitch McConnell, and RNCC Chair Michael Steele to a person lack the ability or imagination to keep these groups under control.  I suspect Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are hoping they can throw meat at the monster without getting eaten themselves.

The question is can the Democrats find their equivalent of a Hercules to cut off the heads, politically speaking, of the Right’s Hydra?  President Obama, in my opinion, is more than capable, as we saw him campaign for the office, but now as Leader of the Free World, his focus should be on his job, not slaying dragons.  The same goes for Vice President Joe Biden.  Sen. Harry Reid, in addition to being in the fight of his career to keep his senate seat, is the epitome of milquetoast.  Rep. Nancy Pelosi has the fire, but in addition to being speaker of the House, is in her own campaign.  The DNC’s chair, Tom Kaine, is an excellent administrator, but has wisely kept out of the spotlight.

I’ve heard more than one pundit and politician say the Democrats are disorganized and not responding effectively to the attacks from the right.  That may or may not be true.  It may be the Democratic strategy is to let the Far Right, with all their fractures run their course, and when they begin to collapse, pounce with the equivalent with a sledge hammer against a glass window pane.  In reality it would not take much for the Republican Party to implode upon itself.  The GOP’s structure is much more precarious than they are letting on.

In the meantime they are going to attempt to make the president look dumb, out of touch, incompetent, a threat to the American Way of Life.  He is none of those things, so eventually the truth will out.  I continue to read the polls with a huge grain of salt.  Now I know what I’m looking for, I’ll be able to tell more clearly what is happening below the surface.  November 2, 2010 is still going to be a very interesting election day.

Where the Wild Things Are–Reading the Polls

Featured

Tuesday night, September 14, 2010: The final day of the big primaries prior to the general election in November.  I’m sitting watching the results come in.  My network of choice tonight is MSNBC.  It’s just so much fun watching Rachel Maddow narrate the primary like it was a Super Bowl.

Statistics during the election season are thrown around like cheap bead necklaces at a Mardi Gras parade.  Polls are quoted like they mean something and are perfect predictors of the future.

Well, I’m going to tell you something the politicians and pollsters and pundits would prefer you don’t know:

Polls Results Can Be Stretched Like Bungee-Jumping.

Yep, its true.  And I can give some simple examples.

You can follow along.  But open a new window in your browser so you can click back and forth more easily.

First click here on Pollster.com.  This should take you to the 2010 National Congressional Ballot. This is for the House of Representatives only.  What we’re interested in is the polling chart.  It should look like this:

2010 National Congressional Ballot. Image: Pollster.com

So, how do you read this mess of dots and lines?  The dots are called a scatter plot and each one represents a poll taken on a certain day or period of days (usually 2-3).  The date of the poll is on the horizontal line and the percentage Republican (red) and Democratic (blue) is on the vertical line.  The squiggly lines in the middle are called a trend line and represents the mid-point of the dots for that day.  For those of you who may have taken statistics some time in the past, this is also called a linear regression. The colors represent the same political parties as the dots.  Correction: Dr. John Bogen, an Extreme Thinkover contributor, corrected my error in labeling the trend line as a “linear regression.”  Although the trend lines are based on regression formulas, I should have labeled it as Pollster.com calls it, a “trend estimate.”  For more info on Pollster’s statistical methods for trend estimates, click here.

Now take a moment to go to the Pollster.com site and look at their “live” chart.  Each dot will open a fly-by box telling you the pollster, date and the results.  Pretty nifty, huh.  There is also an expand box in the upper right hand corner if you want to open the chart to fill your screen.  The features still all work.

What, then, does this chart, as presented, convey?  Notice the date begins in November 2008, at the time of the Presidential election and covers the time since then.  Here the trend line is easier to read because you can see the ups and downs of the popularity of each of the two major parties over the past two years.

If this chart was the only one you looked at you would conclude that the Republicans have made huge gains beginning about May 2010 and now hold a 47.1% to 40.6% lead over the Democrats.  And you would be wrong.  Something is missing.  First of all what about the undecided voters?  Where are they?  How many of them are there? What is their trend?  For that answer, click here.

A new set of black dots with a trendline appears on the chart representing those voters who answered “undecided” on who they plan to vote for.  You can also see that as this year has progressed, the line has trended just slightly upward, and only since August have more of the people made up their minds.  As of today though, the undecideds are still 10.4% of the total, which is larger than the gap between the Republicans and the Democrats.  This is where it gets interesting.

I submit that in this gap is where the wild things are, to reframe the title of Maurice Sendak’s beloved children’s book.

Reading the gaps is where the information about the most dynamic trends in the electorate are.  Follow me on this.  Go back to the original chart.  You should already have the Red, Blue and Black trends open.  On the footer is a button titled “Tools.” Click on it and it will open another footer just above with six different choices on it.  Click on “Filter.”  This will open a small window with three check boxes: Live phone interviews, automated phone (i.e. robocall) interviews, and internet.  Place your cursor on each one and you will get a list of “filter options.”  Notice on the first option, Live phone interviews, there is an arrow in the top right hand corner.  This option has three pages and we’ll use them.

We want to narrow our polling data to the most relevant and the highest chance for honest answers.  To do that, based on my criteria (you are free to choose your own), I say let’s eliminate the internet surveys, first.  They are very hard to get a true random sample and very easy to lie on.  Next, let’s eliminate the robocalls, too.  Even though the calls go out to a random sample (supposedly) it is very easy to lie to a machine.  That leaves us with the live interviews.  These surveyors, you will notice are familiar big name pollsters, who have a reputation to uphold, and nearly all of them publish their survey questions and results online for free access for anyone interested in reading them (which would include geeks like me).   We want to cull some of these, still.  They are the pollsters for both political parties because there is a greater chance they will ask weighted questions that favor their side.

So, uncheck the internet, robocalls, and on the live call pages every pollster ID’d with either a R or a D.  Now we have a select set of pollsters who are as neutral as possible and use real people to talk to voters to decrease the chance for lying or misrepresentation.

One more thing.  We really only want to look at the results for the current primary season.  So again, click on tools and then on “Date Range.”  On the left date, click on the month and set it to “01″, the day, “01″ and the year, “10″ and then click on the blue “Set Range” button.

Look at your results on the chart now.  The polling results have changed.  The Republicans sit at 47.7%, the Democrats at 41.1% and the undecided at a whopping 17.1%!  This, I would suggest is a much clearer picture of the state of the electorate regarding the races in the House of Representatives.  By eliminating those polls that introduce bias into the big picture, either by the way they are administered, or by the way they are designed to benefit their candidates, we can see that the November election is far less certain than most pundits and politicians are leading us to believe.

The fact that apparently over 17% of the electorate is still vacillating about who they will vote for in the general election means the predicted gains by the Republicans has to be called into question, the predicted losses by the Democrats has to be called into question, and the outcomes across the country will very possibly be different than is now being predicted.  It may also mean that the gains or losses may be greater than predicted and one party or the other end up with a significant lop-sided outcome.

But one principle in polling must not be forgotten.  Each poll is a snap-shot in time and by itself can be either an accurate or inaccurate reflection of the voters’ will. It is also important to remember the truism that all politics is local and as Dr. Bogen also points out, the undecided percentage is likely to be smaller on the local scene.  He also rightly suggests this local phenomenon, all things being equal, favors the challenger.   This same principle applies to groups of polls as well because they are aggregates of local polls.  Political trending, although becoming more sophisticated all the time still cannot reliably predict the outcome on election day every time.  We have far to go to reach the algorithmic precision of Isaac Asimov’s Foundation “psychohistory.”  In the mean time we  have to search for the data where the wild things are.

Krugman Verifies the Bungee Cord

Featured

I’m sitting in the SFO airport waiting for final leg home from a week in San Diego at the National Disciples Pastors Conference.  Getting caught up on Paul Krugman’s NYT blogs.  Just read this: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/not-over/.  He uses the same Pollster.com I used in my last post.

Just sayin’.  More when I get home and a good night’s sleep.  Typed this on my Droid, by the way.

UPDATED: The Political Poll Bungee Cord: What a Difference Three Weeks Make

Featured

As American as apple pie, pie chart, that is.  

 

U.S. Political Party Affiliation. Image: Public Doman

On September 14, I published this poll chart below on the so-called national ballot for the House of Representatives from Pollster.com.  It appears obvious to any observer that the Democrats (indicated by the blue trend line) were losing ground as fast the Republicans were gaining it.  But looking inside the data, plus getting out the ol’ Excel spread sheet and doing some analysis of my own, I realized that the national poll was missing some key factors.

For one thing, the national poll aggregate is made up of individual state race polls and then computed using specific criteria applied by Pollster.com (the old adage that all races are local races is true).  I also knew that the aggregate contained data compiled from a wide range of methodologies, as well as polls that were directly tied to political parties, who, even with the best intentions, will often introduce biases into their questions that favor positive responses for their candidates.

Here is the national aggregate House poll chart from September 14:

 

2010 National Congressional Ballot. Image: Pollster.com

 

For the purposes of our discussion, ignore the earlier results.  Just look at the roller-coaster for both parties since January 2010 through the present.  May appears to be the moment of truth for the Republicans and they continued to increase in a nearly linear fashion from then on while the Democrats declined on a similar downward slope.

Not so Fast!

In my previous post on this topic, titled, Where the Wild Thing Are I made this comment:

If this chart was the only one you looked at you would conclude that the Republicans have made huge gains beginning about May 2010 and now hold a 47.1% to 40.6% lead over the Democrats. And you would be wrong. Something is missing. First of all what about the undecided voters? Where are they? How many of them are there? What is their trend? For that answer, click here.

In that post, I then led the reader through the process of using the Pollster.com User Tools to come up with a much different looking trend line because it eliminated all the polls that either were of questionable reliability or directly tied to a political party.

On September 26, I spent an evening working on generating some of my own statistics using the polling results from the Pollster.com website.  Here is my Excel chart of the aggregate data, all polling groups included, my results came out at 47% Republican and 44% for the Democrats:

 

National Congressional Poll Aug-Sep 2010. Data Courtesy Pollster.com

 

By carefully watching the movement of the poll results and tracking the changes in the gaps, I became more convinced that the trends were changing, that it was possible the Democratic candidates were gaining, although I could not estimate how much.  One factor likely appeared to be the ending of the primaries, and the results from those races, if one ignored the pundits and the party-motivated spokespeople, I wanted to see what the trend was emerging.  It was time to fire up the Excel and do a bunch of number crunching and running through the Chart Wizard.  Except the new Excel doesn’t really have a chart wizard, so I fortunately know how to build the charts, having done it several thousand times having used one form or another of Excel since 1992.

At this point if you want to read the wonkish discussion and statistical analysis you can go to that page by clicking here.

The trend in the chart above confirmed my gut.  There had been an upturn for the Democrats but also for the Republicans.  One limitation of every chart is to decide what it means.  A trend line, in this case a “moving average,” does give one a picture of change, but does not communicate what is pushing the change.  The meaning, in one sense, is secondary.  I was interested in the trend, because the dynamics pushing the trend begins with individuals.   And as I pointed out in my post, The Black Poll Wars, Part II, the concept of one person, one vote no longer accurately describes the inner process of the American voter.  Rather, a theory I dubbed “isovoting” is based on the assumption that,

The transformation of the vote into a compilation of isovotes [that is, the subpersonal meaning the person assigns to different issues that must be reasoned into a single vote on the ballot]  is the key to understanding the American Electorate…The Uncertainty Principle [as defined by Heisenberg] shows that the isovotes cannot fit the Classical Statistical models for voter behavior. Like quarks in atoms, isovotes behave in dynamic ways that cannot be predicted with certainty either before or after they are observed, and that the very behavior of the survey taker will have a direct affect on the nature of the isovotes, especially with regard to the person assigning meaning to them, creating a new future for that person’s set of isovotes that did not exist prior to being polled on his or her preferences.

In short the uncertainty naturally built into the isovote process each person goes through when voting is too complex to discern, and components within the isovotes can change, sometimes affecting the others and sometimes not.  Therefore, following the trending becomes the only reliable methodology to ascertain the what will possibly take place on November 2nd.

That trend is beginning to emerge, but with caveats discussed below:

 

House General Ballot Chart 3 October, 2010. Image: Pollster.com

 

This scatter plot with the trend line, covers the same length of time as the first chart in the post, so neither of them are as sensitive in representing the  change over the past two months as the second chart I built using Excel.  Unfortunately, the flash function of the Pollster.com chart cannot be copied onto this post.  However, you can look at the same time frame, with all polling organizations represented by clicking here.  The gap between the two parties has shrunk to 44.2% for the Republicans and 42.8% for the Democrats.

The results get even more interesting, though, when you eliminate the less statistically reliable polls (which I include as the internet polls and the robocall polls; the first being difficult to ensure true randomization, and the second on the basis it is easier to lie to a computer voice asking the questions than it is to a real interviewer).

Bungee Jumping With the Polls

The trend using this second set of criteria can be viewed by clicking here.  The trend lines now have crossed with the Democrats taking the lead by a 45.8% to 44.5%. But whether this set of percentages is really good news for the Democrats depends on three factors.   First, how many people are registered as democrats and will vote as a faithful member of the party.  Second how many of those individuals will vote in the election.  And third, the most difficult questions to answer is how many people who are not Democrats, who either identify themselves as Independents or are Republicans who plan to cross party lines with their vote, will vote Democratic.  These caveats are not difficult to ascertain, but reading the subtleties of the trending, since it is always in flux is much harder to determine.  Therefore, it is possible that despite a percentage majority showing in the polls, the party with the upper hand in terms of percentage may still end up losing more races than it wins.

 

Voting--The American Way. Photo Courtesy: www.etches-johnson.com

 

Concluding Remarks

Using the considerable resources of Pollster.com and the Gallup Polling organization, we can come up with some interesting speculation about the coming election.  For example, we know roughly how many people are going to vote, 46.8 million Democrats and 46.4 million Republicans, a total of  93.2 million voters.  The percentage difference is 50.2% (D) to 49.7% (R).  That’s a tiny difference of only 466,000 voters compared to the national scale.  But that analysis is actually not correct, because these numbers represent the categories of voters, D, R, and I that will vote either Republican or Democratic.  Tucked inside the party’s totals are  14.7 million Independents who will vote Democratic and 18.9 million who will likely vote Republican in this election.  That is much larger gap of 4.2 points in the favor of the GOP. Another factor we can look at is registered voters, who are more likely to vote, and numerous polls distinguish between registered and likely voters.    I analyzed the polls that interviewed registered voters and came up with 31 surveys.  Plotting out those surveys, I came up with the following chart:

 

Data Courtesy of Pollster.com

 

Note: for an explanation of the R² number, please click here

UPDATE: Since I wrote the post I came across this very illuminating article on the issue of choosing “likely voters” in contrast to “registered voters” as the survey sample on the Huffpost Pollster (The Huffington Post has just acquired Pollster.com and integrated its sites into Huffington’s), by Mark Blumenthal (who originally founded Pollster.com).  I recommend you read through his article.  He gives a nicely framed explanation of how pollsters choose who to survey and it is written for the general reader: “Likely Voters: How Pollsters Define and Choose Them.”

After reading Blumenthal’s article, I recalibrated the filters on the National Congressional Ballot on the Pollster site to only include those who surveyed registered voters.  To see the result, click here.  The results contradict the unfiltered chart that shows the Republicans up by over 7 points.  Instead by looking at the registered voters (which I hold are still in the highest percentage of all voters) the Republicans hold the thinnest of margin at 45.3% over the Democrat’s 45.0%  Statistically speaking this is a virtual tie.

Is the trend line good news for the Democrats?  Yes and no.  Any time one party gains ground and passes the other in the number of people who say they will vote for them, that is cause for at least cautious optimism.  But looking at the visual slope of the lines in the chart above does not indicate the Republicans have begun to dramatically slump.  A week from now, they could just as easily stopped the small downward slope and recovered  to  move above the Democrats again.  The positive factor for the Democrats is the R² of their trend is significantly stronger than the Republicans.  In other words, it may be evidence of more “oomph” behind the upward change in direction.

We are down to three weeks and counting.  The fun continues unabated.

33 Men

Featured

 

A Banner of the 33 Trapped Miners. Photo: Courtesy CNN.com

 

33 Men

Once again, in the face of what could have been an unfathomable tragedy, the triumph of the human will, the willingness to act out of our most profound altruistic urges, the borders of nations, the barriers of language, the walls of politics, the tribal constraints of false definitions of race have all been surmounted. We stand as one people rejoicing in the rescue of these 33 ordinary men who have survived an unprecedented historical moment. And their will to live, survive and persevere becomes a living testimony to the strength of all humanity–when we put away our petty divisiveness and choose to live as one people on one planet.

In this TV grab taken from a video released by Chile’s Presidency, trapped miners celebrate inside the San Jose mine in Copiapo, Chile, Friday Sept. 17, 2010. Drilling equipment pounded its way into one of the caverns where 33 miners have been trapped for a month and a half, completing a bore hole ahead of schedule on Friday and raising hopes that the men can be pulled out earlier than expected. Source: Springfield News-Sun (AP Photo/Chile’s Presidency)

Making The Skies A Little Friendlier

Featured

Disclosure: I have no business relationship with the two online services that I endorse in this post.  I am endorsing them based on my experience with their products.   One provides their service free of charge, the other charges a one-time fee.  My endorsement is purely voluntary.

Airliner with Boy. Photo: Source Unknown

Flying Ain’t What it Used to Be

The days of flying as an experience that was both elegant and comfortable are gone forever.  It was losing ground for the past twenty-five years or so, but after 9/11, and the subsequent changes for security that have been imposed, the pretense of flying commercially as a fun way to travel was abandoned.  Flying has, in one respect, become a metaphor for our society’s changes as well.  The “Haves” who can afford to fly first class or business class, are treated with some semblance of the old days.  The rest of us get to fly in the section euphemistically termed “coach,” but which I simply call the “trash-compactor” area.

The purpose of this post is not to rant about the decline in service or the dismal state of airline passenger quality or comfort.  I want to discuss two applications, one for so-called smart phones and the other a website. These two applications are a little ray of sunshine in an otherwise dismal sky.

Flight Track by Mobiata

Flight Track Icon. Image Courtesy of Mobiata/Flight Track

Over the course of the past two months, my wife and I flew several times (unfortunately never together) for business or educational purposes.  I have a Motorola Droid and was looking for an application (app for short) that would allow me to keep track of the airplanes in which we would be flying, and to be alerted to changes in flight status, delays, gate changes, etc.  After perusing all the flight tracking apps available for the Droid, I decided to purchase Flight Track (FT).  It was rated 4.5 stars by other users.  The app has been downloaded in the 10K-50K category and has received nearly 600 comments.  The developer of the app is Mobiata.  The price for the app is$4.99 USD. The main features are:

  • Easy entry of Airline and flight number.
  • Correcting and deleting flights is also easy
  • Live flight status and gate info
  • Home screen widget with latest flight status
  • Live flight tracker maps (can overlay Google maps for a more realistic view). The maps can be zoomed in or out, and also panned.
  • The aircraft’s position is fairly accurate, not quite real time, but close. (I suspect this will get better over time)
  • During flight, the aircraft’s speed and altitude are displayed as well as the time elapsed since takeoff.
  • Arrival status and gate information that is automatically updated during the flight.  Or (like I experienced in September 2010 during my layover at KSFO), the airline changed both the aircraft and the gate, necessitating my having to move to a completely different concourse.
  • An upgrade is available to import data from TripIt.
  • FT is available for basically all smart phones OS: Android, Blackberry, Palm,  iPhone, and iPad.

Additional features I liked were: FT will run in the background and notify you of  status changes even though you are working on something else.  It updates itself the moment you turn on your phone after landing.  You can activate FT the night before you take off and it will notify you of the flight’s status and any changes that have been made prior to the flight.  If you live in a large city and have an international airport this can be a valuable notice to receive, especially if the flight’s gate or boarding time is changed.  My one criticism, which is common to numerous apps, is that it sucks up a lot of battery juice when you are running it in the background.  On the other hand, getting notice of changes between your arrival and departure can be very helpful. It rarely causes a Force Close, which I rate as an app that plays well with others.

I rated Flight Track with  5 stars after using it for three trips.

Douglas DC-3A N25673 Built 1940 Continental Airlines. The Grand Dame of Airline Travel. Photo Courtesy: FlightAware & ebdon

FlightAware: Live Flight Tracking

When travel by air began to become affordable for the average citizen, the Douglas DC-3 was one of the main reasons for that transformation.  Durable, relatively inexpensive to maintain, a sturdy air frame and easy to fly, were among its attributes, although its passenger capacity was limited to between 21-32 occupants.  Nevertheless, it had a pressurized cabin, cruised at 150 mph with a service ceiling of 25,000 feet, and a range just over a thousand miles. For more information on the DC-3 and its illustrious career, click here.

FlightAware Logo

I discovered FlightAware through the great weather site, Weather Underground. (Please note that I use a Wunderground widget for my blog.  Thanks, Jeff!)   I’ve had a subscription with them for years and rely on their forecasts, as well as an ever-expanding range of services (like what the weather is going to be for the next NASCAR race, and the link to the race site so you can keep tabs on the weather radar during the race  This is important stuff. Go #18!).  And since Wunderground’s author is Dr. Jeff Masters, who in a previous life flew on the hurricane hunter aircraft, Jeff has been consistently adding new aviation-related services to the site.  When he added FlightAware, I knew it would be a very reliable source for information.

How things have changed in the airline industry since the DC-3 was the queen of the skies!  And FlightAware is one of those changes.  Unlike Flight Tracker above, FlightAware is designed to provide a wide range of online services for both the passenger and pilot (private, commercial or military).  Their basic offerings are free, but one can register without cost for another tier of services   For the occasional flier, one can enter your flight numbers and airports into FlightAware, and its aircraft tracking feature will show you, pretty close to real time where the plane is along its route.  Here’s a short list of the services they offer:

  • Live Tracking (by several different categories, plus helps if you don’t have all the flight info at your fingertips).
  • Flight Planning: a wide range of services designed to assist the private pilot
  • Pilot Resources: IFR route searches, weather maps, mobile METAR/TAF info
  • Photos: Thousands of photos from people around the world.  Many are professional or near professional quality.  If you like planes and want to look at pictures in just about every imaginable context, you will love this!  I did.
  • Sqauwks and Headlines:  A place to sound off and also get the latest news on the flight-related industry
  • Discussion:  This is not your typical blog reaction site.  This page offers announcements, as well as places to respond organized into categories.  Now that’s a pleasant discovery.
  • Commercial Services:  Here you’ll find the business connection for FlightAware and the many services they offer.
  • About FlightAware: Provides some history and background on the company:

Founded in March of 2005, FlightAware was the first company to offer free flight tracking services for both private and commercial air traffic in the United States. FlightAware launched public operations in late 2005 and quickly became the most popular flight tracking service in the world.

FlightAware’s proprietary flight arrival time algorithms combined with FlightAware’s powerful, intuitive, responsive, and reliable web-based interface yield the most capable and useful flight tracking application and service. FlightAware has offices in Houston and New York.

I’m waiting for is FlightAware to add the Android OS.  That way I could have both Flight Tracker and FlightAware available any time I might need them.  So, Dan Davis (CEO) and Matt Baker (VP Aviation Marketing) I’m thinking it’s time you sat down over a cup of coffee and planned out how to get your software developers on the stick to put out versions for Android, Blackberry and Palm.  Oh and don’t forget about iPad, too.

Time for Wheels Up

I’ve got two great products here.  And though they are similar in some of their services, they are distinct enough from each other that I found using the two together was even better.  I give Flight Tracker and FlightAware two thumbs up and both are well worth your time to check them out.  The days of luxurious and elegant flying are gone forever.  These two apps, however, help take some of the stress out of flying.  And for me, that’s saying something significant!

The well-prepared pilot never leaves anything to chance for a successful flight. Photo Courtesy: FlightAware & hottubpoet

Hey NBC & WSJ–What’s With Your Poll Report?

Featured

Today NBC and the Wall Street Journal released a new survey conducted by the polling company Hart/McInturff.  MSNBC.com’s deputy political director, Mark Murray writes,

The GOP’s ‘likely’ advantage

In the survey, 50 percent of likely voters say they prefer a Republican-controlled Congress, versus 43 percent who want Democrats in charge.

Last month, Republicans held a 46 percent to 43 percent advantage among likely voters on this question.

The GOP’s current seven-point lead, McInturff observes, is on pace — historically — to result in a shift of power in Congress. “The Democrats, with two weeks left, are facing very, very difficult arithmetic.”

Yet among the wider universe of registered voters, Democrats hold a two-point edge, 46 to 44 percent, which is up from the 44 percent to 44 percent tie in September.

But Hart calls that lead “hollow,” because not all registered voters will participate, especially in a midterm election.

Indeed, among those expressing a high interest in voting this midterm season, Republicans hold a 13-point advantage on the generic ballot, 53 percent to 40 percent.

So, as I often do, I clicked on the link to the published survey results and read it through looking for the results described in the article.  First time through I thought I missed this 50% to 43% advantage of the Republicans over the Democrats.  So I read it again, now looking line by line where that percentage comparison came up.  I couldn’t find it.  Okay, so one more time, very deliberately reading through the survey.  Nada.  What I did discover were two very interesting questions that belie a different mood in the electorate.

Keep in mind this was a survey of 1000 registered voters, which, as I have explained in previous posts, I hold to the theory that registered voters provide a more reliable sample and predictor of which way the election is more likely to go.  In two weeks we’ll know.

Let’s look first at question Q11a:

Q11a:   What is your preference for the outcome of this year’s congressional elections — (ROTATE:) a Congress controlled by Republicans or a Congress controlled by Democrats?

The result favors the Democrats 46% to Republicans 44%. That is mentioned in the quote above.  It’s also within the published margin of error of +/- 3.10%.  One could say, therefore, it’s a wash, but there is some interesting info in the trends.  The median (the midpoint of the 11 surveys NBC/WSJ has conducted since January 2010 for the Republicans is 44% and the Democrats, 43%.  Now that is tight!  The slope of those eleven surveys for this question is also small, 0.21% for the GOP and 0.25% for the Dems.  Not what you might write home about.  But still, when you apply those numbers to tens of millions of voters, small changes can make the difference.  It also shows that the Democrats are perhaps not in quite as bad a shape as the pundits have been droning on about month after month.

But there is more.  Question Q12A reads:

Q12a: If you had the choice in your congressional district, would you be more likely to vote for a (ROTATE:) Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, or  Green Party candidate for Congress?

Since the smaller party candidates are at best wild cards, we can’t make a prediction if those who claim affiliation will actually vote for them.  But here, we find the responses again favor the Democrats over the Republicans, 44% to 41%.  Unfortunately, the survey does not provide the historical results of this question.

If you have looked at the published survey results, you might have noticed a number of questions are missing.  So, we can perhaps infer that NBC and the WSJ decided the most interesting information in the survey they wanted to keep to themselves, which is their prerogative since they paid for it.  And perhaps that 50% Republican advantage is among those survey items that were, shall we say, redacted.  But if the Democrats are in such dire shape going into the election and the survey shows that is very clear, why bother with cutting questions out of the published report?  Wouldn’t a reasonable person, or especially a partisan one, such as the Wall Street Journal’s clear editorial preference for Conservatives, want that information right there for everyone to see?  I can’t answer that question, but I do find it perplexing.

Nevertheless, there is enough information to ponder the strength of the GOP’s “surge” as reported.  My updated graph with the trend lines still shows the Democrats in a stronger growth curve:



Registered Voters Surveys 18 Oct 10. Data Courtesy HuffPost Pollster

I will be eagerly looking forward to the next batch of polls to be released.  Each data point provides a world of information about might or can happen on November 2nd.

Virtual Deficits in a Virtual Economy

Featured

It seems like a simple enough question: What is money made of?

 

The Spanish "Piece of Eight" 16th-17th Century. World's First Global Currancy. Photo: British Museum, London

The answer, however, is complex, very complex, in fact.  So complex that I am only going to briefly address it.

Money, historically, has been whatever a group of people have decided was an acceptable currency to trade for goods and services.  Here’s the definition from Wikipedia:

Money is any object that is generally accepted as payment for goods and services and repayment of debts in a given country or socio-economic context. The main functions of money are distinguished as: a medium of exchange; a unit of account; a store of value; and, occasionally, a standard of deferred payment.

Money originated as commodity money, but nearly all contemporary money systems are based on fiat money. Fiat money is without intrinsic use value as a physical commodity, and derives its value by being declared by a government to be legal tender; that is, it must be accepted as a form of payment within the boundaries of the country, for “all debts, public and private”.

The money supply of a country consists of currency (banknotes and coins) and demand deposits or ‘bank money’ (the balance held in checking accounts and savings accounts). These demand deposits usually account for a much larger part of the money supply than currency.  Bank money is intangible and exists only in the form of various bank records. Despite being intangible, bank money still performs the basic functions of money, being generally accepted as a form of payment.

500 Mixed Medieval Coins. Offered by Dorchesters.com

So, assuming the definition of money is accurate, that “fiat money” is apparently the “gold standard” (of course, gold is no longer the standard for basing the wealth or value of a country’s economy), is “intangible and exists only in the form of various bank records,” my opening question can again be asked: What is money made of?

The whole question of deficits in the United States budget got me to thinking, money has become virtual.  At least almost virtual, in that now money is dynamic, a form of energy of sorts, that can move as photons through fiber optics or as electrons through a copper line, arranged on silicon microchip, or as a radio wave broadcast to a antenna tower or to a satellite thousands of miles into space and back.  And that leads me to ask another question:

How much is an electron/positron worth?  Or a photon?  Or a radio wave?

Show Me the Money! Graphic Representation of a Photon creating an Electron and a Positron. Image: David Horman

Take a look at what (graphically) is the reality of our money today.  When I get paid, my company transfers my “pay check” to my bank account using electrons, which are stored as organized electrons inside a silicon chip that is connected to other microwires.  When I go to the grocery store or the gas station and enter the code for my debit or credit card organized packets of electrons flow to my account, checks to see that I have sufficient electrons arranged to virtually verify there is enough electronically defined money in my account that it can subtract the correct amount and then add it to the store’s account.

That raises an interesting question.  Is the deficit real or virtual?  Are the words being thrown around that we are trillions of dollars in debt based on reality?  How do we really know what the deficit is, if it exists at all, beyond a vituality that has no tangibility?

As the nation with the largest Gross Domestic Product in the world, what would happen to the country, indeed the world, if we hit the reset button?  And can anyone really prove what would happen?  It’s not like we have to open Fort Knox and hand out gold ingots to all the money we supposedly own ourselves?  Where is it written in stone that we have to pay huge sums in interest on this virtual debt?  And if it is only written by an act of legislation, why can’t it be changed?

Many economists state that we are in a liquidity trap.

In its original conception, a liquidity trap results when demand for money becomes infinitely elastic (i.e. where the demand curve for money is horizontal) so that further injections of money into the economy will not serve to further lower interest rates. Under the narrow version of Keynesian theory in which this arises, it is specified that monetary policy affects the economy only through its effect on interest rates. Thus, if an economy enters a liquidity trap, further increases in the money stock will fail to further lower interest rates and, therefore, fail to stimulate.

Dr. Paul Krugman, Nobel Prize Laureate in Economics, Princeton University professor and New York Times columnist, has stated that inflation targeting as the solution to a liquidity trap, “most nearly approaches the usual goal of modern stabilization policy, which is to provide adequate demand in a clean, unobtrusive way that does not distort the allocation of resources.” (Krugman, 2009).

A second Nobel Laureate in Economics, Joseph Stiglitz (Columbia University), shares Krugman’s perspective :

[G]overnments can improve the outcome by well-chosen interventions. Stiglitz argues that when families and firms seek to buy too little compared to what the economy can produce, governments can fight recessions and depressions by using expansionary monetary and fiscal policies to spur the demand for goods and services. At the microeconomic level, governments can regulate banks and other financial institutions to keep them sound. They can also use tax policy to steer investment into more productive industries and trade policies to allow new industries to mature to the point at which they can survive foreign competition. And governments can use a variety of devices, ranging from job creation to manpower training to welfare assistance, to put unemployed labor back to work and cushion human hardship.

The key issue, in light of our living in an age in which money is virtual, that it is almost a literal description of currency to call it electrons or photons, the rules for how to manage the debt and the interest we pay on it is for all intents and purposes, purely arbitrary.  At the same time, the rules provide a basis for the orderly exchange of goods and services. Despite this need for order, the pressure on the American public continues to grow.

If, for example, Congress decided to decrease the amount of interest we pay on the national deficit by even half a percentage point (it is now approximately 3%) it would pump billions into the economy, freeing up the suppression of demand especially on the middle class.  It would be a de facto tax break that might result in the reduction in the deficit more quickly.

 

Debt as a Percentage of GDP: USA, Japan, Germany. Image Courtesy: Alex1011.

I’m still thinking about this idea and its implications.   It might be unworkable.  It might be conceptually accurate but not possible to implement.  But as you can see from the chart above, the level of public debt as of 2009 stands at about 62-63% of the nation’s GDP.  And though the U.S. has the largest economy in the world with a GDP of $14.26 trillion over three times that of Japan and Germany, that percentage roughly calculates as ≈$8.9 trillion.

CORRECTION to my original conclusion:

As of today, the United States’ national debt is $13,795,134,710,938.49.  The total interest bearing debt for the country in October 2010 is 3.047%.  This interest rate has been falling by a few tenths of a percent year by year.  For instance, the interest in October 2008 was 4.009%, and a year later, 3.362%.  These decreases represent substantial billions of dollars of relief.

Still, the debt itself is a crushing reality.  TreasuryDirect.gov provides an easy to understand explanation of what the debt and deficit are and how they are managed on a year to year basis:

What is the difference between the debt and the deficit?

The deficit is the fiscal year difference between what the United States Government (Government) takes in from taxes and other revenues, called receipts, and the amount of money the Government spends, called outlays. The items included in the deficit are considered either on-budget or off-budget.

You can think of the total debt as accumulated deficits plus accumulated off-budget surpluses. The on-budget deficits require the U.S. Treasury to borrow money to raise cash needed to keep the Government operating. We borrow the money by selling securities like Treasury bills, notes, bonds and savings bonds to the public.

The Treasury securities issued to the public and to the Government Trust Funds (Intragovernmental Holdings) then become part of the total debt. For information about the deficit, visit the Financial Management Service web site to view the Monthly Treasury Statement of Receipts and Outlays of the United States Government (MTS).

The question I ponder is why is the United States budget designed so it is forced to “borrow money to raise cash needed to keep the Government operating”?  In a reality of virtual money, what is the purpose of this system, which from my perspective appears to be at best archaic and at worst  a system of financing to guarantee an eventual national financial implosion?

Is the debt real or virtual?  Is the money we supposedly owe ourselves tangible tender or bank fiat money?  If it is the latter, what is to prevent us from taking a revolutionary step of redesigning what the dollar really is?  As I asked at the beginning, how much is an electron worth?

Watch for more in the coming weeks.

START Treaty: When Will We Ever Get a STOP Treaty?

Featured

.

The New START Treaty: When Will We Ever Get a STOP Treaty?

A Guest Post by Dr. John Bogen, M.D.

The First Atomic Blast "Trinity" Taken by Jack Aeby. July 16, 1945. The only color photo taken of the blast. Photo: PD

Rich Lowry, Editor of the National Review wrote an op-ed column titled  A Poor START for the online political website, RealClearPolitics on November 22, 2010.  Lowry questions why the New START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty), signed earlier this year by U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian Federation President Dmitri Medvedev, is being promoted as such a crucial issue by the Obama Administration that requires immediate ratification by the U.S. Senate before the end of the lame-duck session in December.

Lowry concludes that “the administration wants the treaty because it thinks it makes the Russians feel good and fosters a ‘reset.’ The benefits of reset are overrated, though. Yes, the Russians voted for the fourth round of U.N. sanctions against Iran, but only after watering them down along with the Chinese. They have made it clear they won’t support more stringent sanctions outside the U.N.”

START’s History

U.S. Pres. Richard Nixon & Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev at the signing of the SALT I Treaty in 1972. Photo: Nixon Presidential Library

The history of the START goes back over forty years to 1969, when negotiations began for the original SALT I (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks) Treaty between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). This ultimately culminated in the signing of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 1972.

In 1979, U.S. President Jimmy Carter and Soviet Premier Leonid Brezhnev signed SALT II, which was not ratified by the U.S. Senate in part due to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan later in 1979. Nevertheless, both countries agreed to abide by the terms of the treaty until 1986, when, per Wikipedia, “the Reagan Administration withdrew from SALT II after accusing the Soviets of violating the pact.”

U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987 signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which eliminated certain intermediate-range missiles for the primary purpose of enhancing the security of Western Europe.

START I, signed in 1991 by U.S. President George H.W. Bush and the last Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, expired in December 2009, and with it, among other things, verification provisions that each country was actually in compliance with the treaty. (START II was signed by United States President George H.W. Bush and Russian President Boris Yeltsin in 1993 and was subsequently ratified, but never activated. A START III treaty was negotiated, but was never signed.)

Russian Pres. Putin and U.S. Pres. Bush signing the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), better known as the "Moscow Treaty," 2002. Photo: The White House Archives.

The Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), better known as the Moscow Treaty, was signed in 2002 by U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, further limiting the numbers of nuclear warheads, yet failing to contain verification provisions. SORT expires in December 2012.

President Obama, who ran on a platform of a nuke-free world, took office in January 2009, and had his administration negotiate with the Russians a New START treaty as a follow-on to START I and SORT. This was signed in April 2010.

Lowry asks a legitimate question in his op-ed piece, why the sudden rush for ratification of New START?  As noted above, past treaties have been adhered to without formal ratification. The Senate and in fact the entire Congress faces more pressing issues, such as deciding on an extension of the Bush (43) tax cuts and dealing with the economy, not to mention immigration reform and energy policy.  Isn’t the New START a relic of a Cold War that came to an end almost twenty years ago with the dissolution of the old Soviet Union in 1991?  And in light of the growing nuclear threats from Iran and particularly North Korea dominating the news on November 23, 2010, why is the president pushing so hard for ratification of an obsolete treaty that does little to make the world safer from nuclear conflict?

We Should Be Negotiating “STOP” not START

Personally, I think any treaty between the U.S. and Russia that falls short of completely eliminating nukes is meaningless. Both countries have no desire for war let alone nuclear war.

There exists a new global war, to be politically incorrect, between a growing list of nations and Muslim extremists. Nuclear powers including the U.S., Russia, China, India, Britain, France, Israel, and Pakistan all face conflicts with radical Muslims. These jihadists have also murdered hundreds in Spain, Turkey, Indonesia, the Philippines, and several African nations. And that doesn’t even count Iraq or Afghanistan. Regional hotspots also exist with rogue nations such as North Korea having recently acquired nukes and Iran widely believed to be endeavoring to do so.

U.S. Pres. Obama and Russian Pres. Medevev signing the "New START" treaty, April 8, 2010, in Prague, Czech Republic. Photo: Courtesy AP.

So, I believe New START is irrelevant in today’s world. The U.S. and Russia are moving towards smaller arsenals through attrition and both countries do not have the money to keep the numbers up. Regardless of the treaty, both countries still have enough nukes to destroy the world many times over. Does it really matter if you have 2,200 or 1,550 or 500 or 100 nukes? This treaty is obsolete even before it has been ratified. Inspections could be extended without even mentioning numbers, and the numbers would come down on their own through obsolescence.

Completely eliminating nukes from the arsenals (except for maybe a token number just in case they are needed for example, for asteroid mitigation–not unlike the stocks of smallpox kept secure in the U.S. and Russia, needed for the manufacture of vaccines should the disease reappear somewhere in the world) would be a bold step the U.S. and Russia could take.  This might reduce the desire for nuclear proliferation throughout the world, or at least embarrass rogue nations by making them appear less civilized (e.g. “We are civilized. Nukes are so ‘yesterday.’”).

Even if the U.S. gets nuked someday by a terrorist bomb via a shipping container smuggled into a port city, or by an ICBM from a rogue nation, the U.S. won’t respond indiscriminately with a nuke.  And that is the biggest reason to abandon New START – a treaty designed to reduce yet continue the obsolete military doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD).

Trident II-D5 Nuclear Capable Missile Submarine Launch. Photo: U.S. Navy/PD

The current conflict over New START ratification between Democrats and Republicans is purely political posturing and is meaningless from the national security standpoint. I disagree with Senator John Kyl (R-AZ) trying to get more money (which we don’t have) appropriated for modernization of our nuclear arsenal. However, he does have a valid concern that Russia wants to limit the U.S.’s ability to field an anti-ballistic missile system, which most certainly would be for protection against limited missile strikes from rogue nations, rather than to defend against Russian attack.  I also disagree with the Democrats for making this treaty out to be more important than it really is, and who just wish to deliver a foreign policy victory to President Obama, following his recent lackluster Asian and European trips. The political void of the November-December lame duck period is about as empty as Washington D.C. is every August – much ado is made about nothing.

Ratification of New START should hardly be the highest priority for the Senate when the economy, unemployment, tax rates, and the deficit / debt are far more pressing issues. The Congress and President Obama should get their priorities straight. And so that the Russians do not feel ignored, I would begin negotiations on START IV, a.k.a. STOP (as in STOP ALL NUKES), a much bolder push to lead the entire world away from dangerous and destabilizing nuclear weapons.

We Have Seen His Star in the East–Myth or Astronomical Event?

Featured

.

.

Star of Wonder–Transformed from Myth to Astronomical Event?

 

The Star of Bethlehem? No, it's Canopus, 2nd Brightest Star in the Sky and a Specular Stand-in. 310 Light Years Distant. Image by D. Pettit taken from the ISS. Photo: NASA

.

Prologue

This is a story that starts in the wrong place.  They’re my favorite kind.  And the wrong time.  That’s even better.  A story that starts in the wrong place and the wrong time has to be interesting.  There’s something to be said for predictability, but it rarely makes for a good plot or an intriguing ending.

This story does not have those disadvantages.  Some people have believed it was true.  Others believed it was false.  Others, still, believed it was myth, of uncertain veracity, but a beautiful, even elegant narrative.  For two millennia, Christians have believed it was part of a miracle.  Others, of different faiths, may have acknowledged it as a lovely story, but of no spiritual significance.  For the past four hundred years, as men and women have studied nature in new and innovative ways, and expanded our understanding of the Earth and the sky into a cosmos unimaginably large and old, the story’s credibility declined, seemingly moving toward the status of a fairy tale.

All of this, while true, is not the start to which I was alluding.

The Bethlehem Star? No, but Another Beautiful Candidate. 3rd Brightest Star. And It's a Double Star; Its Companion is a White Dwarf.  Photo: NASA.

The Bethlehem Star? No, but Another Beautiful Candidate. It is Procyon, 3rd Brightest Star. And It's a Double Star; Its Companion is a White Dwarf. 11 Light Years Distant. Photo: NASA.

.

First, Some Historical Background

The Babylonian Cosmos. Image Courtesy: Gavin White. From: Babylonian Star-Lore, 2008. Click on the image for a larger version.

Around nine to ten thousand years ago, the human race, Homo sapiens sapiens discovered a problem.  It might have been earlier, but the record left by humans before that is very hard to read.  White (2008) in his book Babylonian Star-Lore, suggests that Babylonian astrology began as early as 15,000 years ago, although he states that the practice of astrology was quite different than the modern version.  It relied on mathematical calculations written on clay tablets and the earliest tablets have been dated to the 7th or 8th Century, BCE.  So, I’ll suggest ten thousand years, with the caveat that date might need to be adjusted with the next archaeological blockbuster discovery.  The problem was the Earth.  More specifically, the ground.

At this point I need to dispel one very important misconception: the fallacy of modernity.  The individuals I to whom I am referring are modern humans.  Same body, same brain, same capacity for intelligence, problem solving, or IQ.   Just like Albert Einstein, your neighbor Justin, who wears only faded NASCAR t-shirts, your eccentric Aunt Lizzy, or that beauty Angelica or hunk Chad (depending on your hormonal drivings) who in high school you never had the nerve to ask out.

This is the paradigm I want you to remember: ancient ≠ primitive.  Got that?

Back to our discovery.  At some point in the ancient past, one of our ancestors had the revolutionary thought that the ground was substantively different from the sky.  This was not a “well, duh,” moment.  It was a paradigm shift, perhaps capable only due to the superior huge frontal cerebral cortex of the Homo sapiens.  The shift was beyond the observation of a day/night cycle, although that would have been part of it.  This shift, like the differentiation between the sense of the boundary between my body and not-my-body, changed the human perception between earth and sky.

.

The Sky is a Problem, a Big Problem

If This was the Bethlehem Star, it Would Have Really Gotten Everyone's Attention. It isn't. This is Wolf-Rayet 104, a Totally Strange Double Star, But This Time, Both Stars are Massive. 8000 Light Years. Photo: NASA/Keck Telescope, Hawaii

Stuff comes out of the sky.  Rain, snow, hail, clouds, wind, fog, as well as birds and bugs.  Some of those things are good, even edible.  Bad things like volcanic or range fire smoke and ash, dangerous wind blowing debris and biting things can come out of the sky, too.

Some things, most things actually, in the sky are beyond reach.  The Sun, the Moon, the stars, and the wandering stars.  Some stars appeared to streak across the sky; others appeared mysteriously out of nowhere glowing with a dim head and a long tail.  And rarely, a flash of a new star in the night that soon disappeared.  Or every once in a while there was an unexplainable event in which the Sun seemed to be consumed by a black disk, turning the day to dusk and all the birds stopped singing.  The same thing happened to  the Moon, its regular phases interrupted, a dark shadow crossing its face, then glowing a blood red before being released from its captivity.

The regular cycles of those things in sky that are out of reach is what we are interested in.  We live on the ground.  We can’t fly like the bugs or the birds.  We can’t live under water, either, but that is not the focus of this discovery.  Living on the ground, as we do, we know a lot about the ground.  Most of what lives on the ground keeps us alive.  Some of the other things that live on the ground can also kill us, but that, too, is secondary to our discussion.

On that day that one very bright modern human looked at the ground, maybe sifting a handful of dirt through his or her fingers, and then looking up at the sky, squinting at the sun or  gazing at the bright swath of starlight of the Milky Way, and said the equivalent of  “Huh, now that’s interesting,” and human understanding shifted forever.

From that moment, the science of astronomy was born, as well as those of geology and biology.  The problem was, earth and life were tangible.  The sky, however, was a complete mystery.

.

What was the sky?

Supernova AD 1054. Chaco Canyon Petroglyph. Photo: Richard Goode, Porterville College, Calif.

Yes, that was the question: What was the sky?  What were the lights in the sky?   The daytime sky and the nighttime sky were so different.  Why was that?  Why did all the lights in the sky appear in the East, move in an arc reaching a highest point that changed with the season and then always set in the West?  But what about the stars in the Northern sky that never rose nor set?  For some of our observers, however, not knowing they lived below that line we now call the equator, the lights in the sky looked quite different, still rising and setting East to West, but those stars that never rose nor set were to the south.  Of course, there were to main players in the diurnal cycle.

The Sun, the greater light to rule the day, its brightness so intense to dare a glance of more than a fleeting moment brought pain, even blindness.  At the same time, it brought the warmth of the day, its risings and settings regular, though half of the time, the days would grow longer and half of the time shorter, and with it the corresponding warmth and seasons.  The earth tuned itself to this great annular cycle, of living and dying, growing and seeding, warming and cooling.  Our ancestors had figured out that part even before the start of our story.

The Moon, the lesser light to rule the night, possessed a soft glow that one could study without risk; its phases regular following the seasons decreed by its daytime master, its face never changing. Yet at intervals beyond comprehension, it, like the Sun, would be covered with a shadow, at times in part, at others completely.  Still the phases of the moon was so reliable that as humans began to cultivate their food, not just gather it, the Moon’s monthly journey and phases became an essential resource for the planting, growing and harvesting the crops.

.

The Dilemma of the Wandering Stars

Of the night, though, what of the Wandering Stars?  The first a fleeting spark always near the Sun’s rise or setting. Next, brighter than the others, one of the mornings and one of the evenings, at times so bright it cast a light that caused shadows. Another with a glow of angry red, appearing out of nowhere and growing into a dominant light every two annual cycles.  A fourth, a great golden giant stately moving through the heavens night after night.  Also a fifth, whose trek seemed like that of an old one slowly working its way through the constellations.  And some, it is said, saw a sixth, dim grey-blue phantom only on the rarest of nights.  Against the apparent immutable backdrop of the other lights at night, why did these few shine but not twinkle like the others, and how, against all reason, did they change their direction in the sky and track back toward the East, then inexplicably again reverse and march toward the West?

Milky Way Band. Photo Courtesy of John Gleason/NASA

What was the sky?  Why did some of the lights form patterns against the black velvet backdrop of night?  What was the swath of light that cut across the sky from horizon to horizon?  What was the force or cause of their motion?  What were the faintest clouds of light, while others seemed to cluster into groups distinct from the random spread of most of the stars?

One might say the ancients had plenty of time to work this all out.  Day after day and night after night, if they chose to pay attention, they could discover patterns and recurring risings and settngs as the year progressed from the shortest days to the longest.   On every continent where humans collected, they in fact did pay attention, and observed the patterns and motions.  What they decided those observations meant and what caused them, was another thing altogether.

.

The First Astronomers

Sunburst Petroglyph, Chemehuevi People, near Lanfair, CA. Photo Courtesy: Donald Austin & NASA

To explain the sky, both day and night, these earliest of astonomers drew upon the source of information they understood the best: the ground and the sea, and the abundant life that inhabited both.  Those were the things they would touch.  They made the very logical assumption that the sky was made from the same things the earth and oceans were.  They couldn’t have been more wrong.  At the same time they couldn’t have been more right.

I must again remind you of our one rule: ancient ≠ primitive.  The observers devised theories about how the earth, sea, and sky came into being, using the “materials” to which they had access.  We call these descriptions of the creation of the world, myths.  That is, if we are honest, modernocentric, even arrogant.  It can result in our overlooking key facts and observations, assigning to them to the status of fable rather than seeing myths for what they were: descriptions of the origin and  forces of nature and life.

.

The Aztec Creation Story: Mother Sun Dismembered

The Aztecs provide a perfect example of a creation account that follows their observations of the natural world:

Quetzalcoatl: Aztec Lord of Morning Star & Wind

The dualistic gods Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca, lightness and darkness, looked down from their dwelling in the sky at the water below. Floating on top of the water was an enormous Earth Monster goddess who devoured all things with her many mouths, for the goddess had gaping mouths at the knees, elbows and other joints.

Everything the twins created, the enormous, floating, terrible, insatiable goddess ate. The twin gods, normally implacable enemies, agreed she had to be stopped. They transformed themselves into two enormous, slithering snakes, and slid silently into the dark, cool water, their cold eyes and flicking tongues seeking her body.

One of the snakes wrapped itself around the goddess’s arms and the other snake coiled itself around her legs and together they tore the immense Earth Monster goddess in two. Her head and shoulders became the earth and her belly and legs became the sky. Some say Tezcatlipoca fought the Earth Monster goddess in his human form and the goddess ate one of his feet, therefore his one-legged appearance. Angered by what the dual gods had done, and to compensate for her dismemberment, the other gods decided to allow her to provide the people with the provisions they needed to survive.

Tezcatlipoca: Aztec Lord of Death, Creator of Fire, Night Sky, & Warriors

From her hair were created the trees, the grass and flowers; from her eyes, caves, springs and wells; rivers flowed from her mouth; and hills and mountains grew from her nose and shoulders.

The goddess, however, was unhappy, and after the sun sank into the earth the people would often hear her crying. Her thirst for human blood made her weep, and the people knew the earth would not bear fruit until she drank. This is the reason she is given the gift of human hearts. In exchange for providing food for human lives, the goddess demanded human lives.  Source: James W. Salterio Torres.

.

The Sumerian Creation Myth: The Mother Goddess Gets Dismembered

Though the price of human sacrifice causes us to shudder, the battle with the Earth Monster goddess, with her defeat and dismemberment is hauntingly similar to the Sumerian story of the defeat of Tiamat:

Tiamat possessed the Tablets of Destiny and in the primordial battle she gave them to Kingu, the god she had chosen as her lover and the leader of her host. The deities gathered in terror, but Anu, (replaced later, first by Enlil and, in the late version that has survived after the First Dynasty of Babylon, by Marduk, the son of Ea), first extracting a promise that he would be revered as “king of the gods”, overcame her, armed with the arrows of the winds, a net, a club, and an invincible spear.

And the lord stood upon Tiamat’s hinder parts,

And with his merciless club he smashed her skull.

He cut through the channels of her blood,

And he made the North wind bear it away into secret places.

Markuk slaying Tiamat. Bas relief on stone.

Slicing Tiamat in half, he made from her ribs the vault of heaven and earth. Her weeping eyes became the source of the Tigris and the Euphrates. With the approval of the elder deities, he took from Kingu the Tablets of Destiny, installing himself as the head of the Babylonian pantheon. Kingu was captured and later was slain: his red blood mixed with the red clay of the Earth would make the body of humankind, created to act as the servant of the younger Igigi deities.

Source: Wikipedia–Tiamat

Two creation stories, having so many parallels even though those who devised them lived on opposite sides of a planet they did not know as such, and who never had had contact with one another.

The ground, the sea, the sky were all the world.  Thousands of years would pass before the problem of the sky would again be addressed.  The untouchableness of the sky would create a new question, without which, this story could not continue in Part 2.

 

Image Courtesy of www.christmasgifts.com

We Have Seen His Star in the East–Part 2

Featured

Star of Wonder-- Myth or Astronomical Event?

A Stellar Event…Strangely, Not So Unexpected.

In Part 1, I suggested that the story of the Star of Bethlehem is one that starts in the wrong place and the wrong time. I see that as an asset, for perhaps that contradiction contributed to both its lasting power and to its veracity. In the previous post, we looked at the creation myths from the Aztecs of Mesoamerica and from the Sumerians of Mesopotamia. These narratives were created by peoples on opposite sides of the Earth who never had contact with each other. Despite that, their creation stories have unmistakable and remarkable similarities that suggest that there is an archetypal human story, following the models about which Joseph Campbell wrote extensively.

The Star of Bethlehem, which appears only in the Gospel of Matthew, is an anomaly. One of the unsolved mysteries of the Nativity narratives is that the star is not mentioned in the Gospel of Luke. Other than the opening passages of Genesis the writers of the Bible simply seem to have no interest in the sky, except metaphorically. Stars are lights in the night sky that are compared to something earthly or are evidence of God’s creative power. The Hebrews, however, did have an organized cosmology:

Hebrew Cosmology Illustrated. Photo source: unknown

 

The remarkable contrast of the above Hebrew model of the universe is clearly evident when compared to those of the Aztec’s and the Sumerian’s: In Genesis, there is a complete lack of violence in the act of creation. Few other religions have a similar cosmology in which an Earth Mother-goddess does not have to be destroyed and her various body parts used to make the earth, sky and humans. The ancient Hebrews had knowledge of these various stories from Mesopotamia and from Egypt, but in the Genesis account, those elements do not appear. For example, this Egyptian version (one of many Egyptian origin myths) demonstrates the more common world view of the Beginning:

 

Egyptian Creation Myth Illustrated--This Picture is based on the "Heliopolis Cosmogony," one of several dominant myths in the Egyptian Pantheon.

The Problem of “The Sky.”

I also suggested that humans began to differentiate the sky being distinct from the land and the oceans perhaps around circa 4300 years ago. Gavin White (2008), in his book Babylonian Star-Lore, maintains that “Babylonian astrologers started to export to their neighbors as early as the 13th century BCE” (p. 7). He goes on to contend that the development of natal horoscopes required a level of mathematics that was compiled in the 8th and 7th centuries BCE, with the first modern equivalents finally appearing in the 5th century, or 2500 years ago. It is this assertion that raises the prospect of historically credible ties to planetary observations by Matthew’s Magi, and the possibility that the Star of Bethlehem’s discovery, or rather interpretation of a sky-based observation, was based on their millennial old texts and maps of the constellations.

These particular Magi were likely among the most highly educated individuals from any civilization, and familiar with astronomy from the known regions of the world. That would include Greece, where we must take a brief trip to meet the man who changed the sky and the universe four hundred years before the birth of Jesus.

To set the stage, I return to the question, “What is the sky?” White shares my view that these ancient cosmologies are neither crude nor primitive:

Today this “flat-earth” cosmology is generally belittled as being rather “primitive” and as far as it is given any attention it is relegated to the kindergarten of metaphysical speculation. This is unfortunate, as the model is actually a rather elegant presentation of archaic man’s view of himself and the universe in which he acted and had his being. It is a complex view of the world, one full of awe that utilizes the mysterious language of symbolism, where every element is a part of an interrelated network of forces. This model also underpins the rationale of celestial divination and magic, mankind’s first attempts to foretell and forestall the shape of things to come. (p. 21)

The tools of those attempts included defining the constellations, plotting the motion of the planets, phases of the moon, vital because they were tied to the seasons, but of course eclipses: lunar, more common than solar, the unexpected darkening of the day often believed to be a portent of evil or disasters.  To many in the ancient world only comets might inspire a greater fear.

From China to India, Persia to the Mediterranean, Egypt across the great Sahara of North Africa, Asia Minor, Greece, the expanse of the Roman Empire all the way to Britannia, the great celestial scroll of the night sky unrolled from horizon to horizon, open to be examined, its mysteries to be plumbed, and the fate of humans read in its aetherial language.

Sometime around the 7th century BCE, in Greece, the question of the sky rose once more, and a startlingly new answer was ventured. What if, these renegade philosophers dared to suggest, using their emerging expertise in mathematics and geometry, the sky was not the abode of the gods? What if the sky was a place, just like the earth, that the Sun, Moon and stars, even the ones which wander, were places? And if that were even possible, how far away were these places? What caused them to move around the earth? And if they moved, what if the Earth moved, too?  The intellectual battle raged for over 400 years, but no one could seem to find that one all-important key to prove whether it was right or wrong.

 

The Greek Geocentric Cosmos. Photo: Source Courtesy, A.H., 1996.

These were dangerous questions, on the level of heresy, but we’ll come back to that in a moment.

The Sky Problem Solved–But 1700 Years Too Soon!

Aristarchus of Samos

Those willing to think about daring questions at times come up with extraordinary answers.  One such radical was Aristarchus of Samos, a mathematician and astronomer who lived circa 310-230 BCE.  Samos, a volcanic island in the Aegean Sea, lies in the archipelago that separates modern Greece from Turkey.  An older contemporary of Archimedes, he was known among his generation as “the Mathematician.”

According to Sir Thomas Heath, who published Aristarchus’ full text of ”On the Sizes and Distances of the Sun and Moon” into English (1913, 2004), “There is not the slightest doubt that Aristarchus was the first to put forward the heliocentric hypothesis. Ancient testimony is unanimous on the point and the first witness is Archimedes, who was a younger contemporary of Aristarchus, so that there is no possibility of a mistake. Copernicus, himself admitted that the theory was attributed to Aristarchus, though this does not seem to be generally known” (p. 301).

Archimedes, to his discredit, did not accept Aristarchus’ heliocentric theory and campaigned against it. Aristarchus’ idea was not theologically popular either in some circles. One Cleanthes attempted to indict the Mathematician “on the charge of impiety for putting into motion the Hearth of the Universe… ” (Heath, p. 304). What enraged Cleanthes was Aristarchus used geometry to prove his hypotheses: “by supposing the heaven to remain at rest and the earth to revolve around an oblique circle, while it rotates, at the same time, about its own axis” (Ibid.). No one knew how prescient this hypothesis really was, until seventeen hundred years later another mathematician named Copernicus reached the same conclusion after studying Aristarchus’ text , and a second, 150 years after him, one named Galileo.

The Magi: The Hubble, Sagan, and Hammel of Their Age

What is the connection to our Christmas Star? Aristarchus used star charts and calculations developed by the Babylonians centuries earlier. Sir Thomas presents a number of examples where Aristarchus used, what he called “Chaldean lunations,” basically books of tables that all mathematicians of the era would have as a standard in their libraries (p. 314).

The Magi, it is reasonable to infer, would have read Aristarchus. Mathematically he was an “Einstein” of his age, his texts were in circulation, and even though they likely would not have accepted his heliocentric hypothesis, just like modern astronomers who still read Copernicus’ and Galileo’s works, they would have studied his math proofs and geometry to predict lunar and solar eclipses, and to calculate “The Great Year,” “which is completed by the sun, the moon, and the five planets when they return together to the same sign in which they were once before simultaneously found” (quote from Censorinus AD 238; Ibid, p. 316).

That very high level of geometric expertise would have been invaluable in calculating planetary conjunctions with a high degree of accuracy.  Furthermore, the ability to correctly forecast the birth of a king was the Gold Medal of astrology/astronomy. Whoever they were, the Magi were convinced they had gotten this one right, and with a level of confidence so strong they were willing to travel from their homes somewhere east of Jerusalem, command an audience with King Herod and tell him right to his face!

Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We have seen his star in the east and have come to worship him. (Mt 2:2, NIV)

Saying that to a reigning monarch is the kind of thing that could get you beheaded in short order. What stayed Herod’s hand? Perhaps the sight of this from an east-facing palace balcony:

Bethlehem Star 12Aug -03 Jerusalem 0210hrs. Star Chart by TheSky6 Serious Astronomer Edition. The proof, as they say is in the pudding. This is a natural sky view of the proposed Star of Bethlehem. See if you can spot it without scrolling down to the annotated version.

A Historical Event Reconstructed out of a Myth: The Power of Good Science and an Astronomy Software Program

Michael Bakich, a Senior Editor of Astronomy Magazine writes in the January 2010 issue:

The biblical account says that the wise men spoke to Herod about the star. Neither Herod nor his scholars knew what they were talking about. No other Bible verse or secular writing mentions the star. What was it? Could it be Matthew, the only gospel writer who mentions the star, wanted to prove to his readers what he knew from reading the Old Testament? I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh; there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Scepter shall rise out of Israel… (Num. 24:17). Did the writer of Matthew invent a story to fulfill this prophecy from Moses? Most historians don’t think so (p. 37).

The solution is most likely a planetary conjunction. It is not, in the end, the definitive answer, nor does it subtract the mystery and miracle of that night.

It was the Star of Wonder. And if this particular conjunction or cycle of conjunctions that occured in 3 BCE signaled the birth of the Savior, how we can rejoice what a clever God we worship!

Bethlehem Star 12Aug -03 Jerusalem 0210hrs with Annotations. Star Chart by TheSky6 Serious Astronomer Edition

One can only imagine what was going through the minds of the Magi as they pointed this astronomical event out to Herod and his astrologers, going over their data and calculations. We know what was going through Herod’s mind.

The conjunction would have been very bright. Jupiter was shining at a magnitude of -1.8 and was at 99.98% phase full (think full Moon), and Venus was at a shadow-producing magnitude by itself of -3.9 and 93.38% full phase! Regulus by contrast would have almost seemed dim at its very bright -1.38 magnitude, and Sirius, the brightest star in the northern sky at -1.44 magnitude was glowing high in the SW sky.

Star of Bethlehem with Magi Card

After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was. Matt 2:9.

Merry Christmas and may the Blessings of the Christ Child Come to You and Your Loved Ones.

 

Image Courtesy of www.christmasgifts.com

Extreme Thinkover: 2010 in Review

Featured

.

Extreme Thinkover Received a Very Nice 2010 Annual Report from

the “Helper Monkeys” at WordPress.com:

.

The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:

Healthy blog!

The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.

Crunchy numbers

Featured image

The average container ship can carry about 4,500 containers. This blog was viewed about 16,000 times in 2010. If each view were a shipping container, your blog would have filled about 4 fully loaded ships.

In 2010, there were 33 new posts, growing the total archive of this blog to 135 posts. There were 355 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 36mb. That’s about 7 pictures per week.

The busiest day of the year was August 9th with 349 views. The most popular post that day was About Extreme Thinkover.

Where did they come from?

The top referring sites in 2010 were community.nytimes.com, WordPress Dashboard, facebook.com, righthealth.com, and en.wordpress.com.

Some visitors came searching, mostly for serenity, serenity movie, grunewald, tcu horned frogs, and galileo’s telescope.

Attractions in 2010

These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.

1

About Extreme Thinkover September 2008
1 comment

2

Serenity Movie Revision: Saving Wash’s Life June 2009
1 comment

3

Grunewald’s “Resurrection” April 2009

4

 

Galileo’s Telescope: the 400th Anniversary, August 25, 1609 August 2009

5

.

Go Horned Frogs! November 2009

.

Thanks WordPress for a great blog site!

The Good Herd

Featured

.

To Your Health…

Updated: 23 January

With my apologies to the great humanitarian, Pearl Buck, whose 1931 novel The Good Earth won her the Pulitzer Prize in 1932 and the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1938, it’s the  influenza season and time to get…yes…a flu shot.  I’ll explain the herd allusion below.

First of all if you have any reservations about vaccines and a purported connection to autism, (as well as the MMR vaccine [measles, mumps, rubella], and Crohn’s Disease [an extremely painful bowel disorder]) you may put your fears aside. Really.

.

A Pernicious Lie Finally Crushed

This month, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published a major investigative article in three parts by English journalist Brian Deer, titled Secrets of the MMR Scare: How the vaccine crisis was meant to make money.  The author details one of the most pernicious medical scams ever conceived and perpetrated virtually on the whole world, leading to millions suffering needlessly, not to mention the thousands of deaths from these diseases or complications related to them as a result of the patient and or family refusing to receive the vaccinations.  Add to that the fears of millions of others thinking they should mistrust vaccines in general (and now many will never give up that incorrect perception) compounding the suffering and deaths on annual basis that will continue because of one man’s incomprehensible lack of conscience and insatiable greed.  And as for those who decided to follow him…  It is my opinion that a new circle in Dante’s hell needs to be constructed for the likes of these.  As all health care providers will tell you, vaccines do carry risks, but in comparison to what this one English doctor did, they are minuscule.

.

Please Get Your Flu Shot–There’s Plenty of Time

.

.

The CDC has a new program this winter called “Take the Pledge“  It’s a quick and fun way to declare your solidarity with the millions of Americans who get their annual shots. Dr. John Bogen, MD, an Extreme Thinkover guest author, states,  “The shot is a cheap ‘insurance policy’ against missing a week of work or having to stay home from work due to a sick child.  It is covered by Medicare and most insurance plans. Why? Because the shot reduces overall health costs.  Also, even if you are in good health and could withstand the flu yourself, getting your shot reduces the number of children, chronically ill, pregnant, and elderly who get the flu: populations that are more susceptible to the complications and deaths from influenza.”  I took the pledge on the day I wrote this post.

I already got my shot, since I work at a hospital.  Not only am I protected from influenza so are my family, friends, coworkers and patients. The CDC stats show a low incidence of last year’s H1N1 Pandemic strain- this year’s vaccine protects against influenza A 2009 H1N1 & H3N2 and influenza B, the three main influenza strains shown by surveillance to infect humans this season. I urge you to get your shot, too, as soon as possible.

So, what’s with this “herd” reference in the title of the post?  Immunologists use the term “herd immunity” to describe when enough of a susceptible population has gotten vaccinated plus those who have contracted the disease and subsequently have natural immunity to create a “herd” large enough to mostly be immune to that pathogen the next time it comes around.  Dr. John helps us understand how the herd is created:

If each sick person transmits the illness to less than one other person, transmission stops.  Basically, if enough of a population is immune either through prior infection or vaccination, transmission is inefficient.  It isn’t as if the herd is completely immune, just that a critical mass is reached such that rampant infection doesn’t occur.  Sporadic cases still do occur from infectious contacts both outside and within the herd.

Of course, viruses that cause the flu and colds continuously mutate, so the challenge to keep up with the bugs will never end.  That makes getting a shot all that more important.  You never want to get behind the curve in the race against the germs!

So despite the fact we humans like to think of ourselves as pack animals, like wolves and lions, when it comes to your health, being part of the herd with immunity acquired by a vaccine is definitely the best option!  Need an image to help fix the idea in your mind?  Imagine you’re part of this stately elk herd in the mountains of Idah0!

 

Elk Herd in Idaho High Mountain Valley. Image: www.idahoriverjourneys.blogspot.com

My thanks to Dr. John for contributing his medical expertise to help make this post accurate and up-to-date.  DW

Democracy: The Universal Solvent

Featured

Updated: 19 Feb 2011

.

This post is dedicated to the Egyptian Coptic Christians who participated in the protests in Tahrir square, largely ignored by the press, but claiming their ancient heritage as Egyptians, stood along side of their fellow Muslim citizens.

***********************************************************************

In 8th grade science we were taught that water was considered the universal solvent. That is, given enough time, water would dissolve almost everything.  Water inexorably works its way into every crack, nook and cranny, saturating the soil, seeping through the dikes and dams built to try to hold it back.  In that sense, water will dissolve or penetrate any barrier it meets or finds a channel though which it can flow if given enough time.

In North Africa and the Middle East a new manifestation of that concept has appeared. The flowering of democracy and freedom among the populace to break the grip of autocratic and repressive theocratic regimes seems to be a gathering force that politically and socially is having the effect of a universal solvent against retrenched and decades long rule by dictators or monarchs. The water of democracy has not only found the cracks in the façade of those rulers who by force have imposed their will upon the people, but it has opened up channels and holes in those walls and is flowing with historically-unprecedented force.

First we saw Tunisia, which did not demand our attention immediately, although it should have. The success of the revolution, remarkable for its lack of violence, did make us sit up and take notice. The collapse of the government in a matter of days and the exile of the strongman ruler, President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, were accomplished without the revolutionaries possessing guns.  In an ironic contrast, according to the Gun Rights doctrine espoused by millions who practically deify the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution here in the United States, Tunisia’s gunless should have been inconceivable let alone successful.

Then came Egypt. For eighteen days we held our collective breath as the unarmed protesters daily came in waves into Tahrir Square demanding President Hasni Mubarak’s resignation, a new democratic government, a new constitution, and a reduction in soaring food prices.  Each successive day we watched entranced, despairing that night the hated police attacked the protesters, who had managed to conduct their demonstrations with virtually no violence. Then finally, with stunned disbelief we again allowed ourselves to hope the cause might succeed for the Egyptian people when the army began taking very visible action to protect the protesters and take the reins of power from Mubarak and his cohorts. Though many questions remain, Egypt was transformed into a proto-democratic state in just over two weeks. Once again a government was toppled without the people being armed to the teeth and having no equivalent to the U.S. 2nd Amendment in their constitution. Bringing down a government without a heavily armed populace is not supposed to be within the realm of the possible.

Jordan’s King Hussein, educated in America, saw the events unfold and voluntarily began to institute democratic reforms. Whether they will be enough to satisfy the force of the democratic waves pounding against the shore of an autocratic monarchy remains to be seen. But here we have a third instance where the true power of the ideals of democracy works into the hearts of the oppressed and the realization of that dream does not require an armed populace.

Now we are again holding our breath as we watch the protests and demonstrations in Bahrain, Yemen, Palestine, Libya, Algeria, and most importantly, Iran.  The regimes of those autocratic and theocratic states are resorting to using brute force in their attempt to make the price of protest and dissention too high and to preserve their iron-grip on the status quo. What will the final outcome be?  Only time will tell.  None of these countries have a 2nd amendment on the right to bear arms.

There are, in my assessment, two broad consequences regarding bringing down a government by force. The first, when the population has unlimited access to firearms, an scenario is set up that will either almost certainly be a protracted or bloody revolution, or worse, an even bloodier civil war.  In recent years we have seen the horrendous conflicts in places like Rwanda, the breakup of Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka, the Sudan, Somalia and Chechnya and East Timor, to name a few.

What we have witnessed in Tunisia and Egypt in the past few weeks is incontrovertible evidence that revolution by an unarmed populace does not require years but weeks, and does not require the blood of thousands. It also does not require that populace be armed with guns. Unfortunately the protests claimed the lives of a few dozen who were caught in the fringe of rage staged by the ruling regime’s police and their operatives.

But in recent history, this is not the first time we have seen a revolution succeed largely without violence. We watched two decades ago, transfixed, by the collapse of East Germany, and then to our greater astonishment the disintegration of our Cold War super-power adversary, the Soviet Union.  Poland and Czechoslovakia broke away from the Warsaw Pact and had their own versions of bloodless revolutions.  Czechoslovakia in particular separated into to two countries, The Czech Republic and Slovakia without a civil war.  Hungary voted to leave the Warsaw Pact with an 85% majority, as did Bulgaria, Estonia, and Latvia. Romania was the only Eastern European country to have a bloody revolution as part of its citizens overthrowing the government, ending in the execution of the dictator Nicolae Ceauşescu and his wife, Elena.

I cannot predict the outcome of the current protests for democratic reforms in these other nations, but I have confidence in the universal solvent of democracy.  The tide has turned. Even against massive state violence, as has happened in Iran and Bahrain, where the protesters are beaten back for a while, the regimes’ blindness to the unequalled strength of the democratic ideal will ultimately be their downfall.

The right to bear arms as a part of the Great American Experiment, as guaranteed in the Constitution in the context of the power of Democracy and Freedom, is appearing more and more like one of our greatest failures when placed against these historical events. We endured the horrors of one Civil War, and I can see no rationale that excludes a similar nightmare and threat to the Union should a group of radically discontented  people decide it is their right to overthrow the legally elected government by force.

Such action would be treason because all the other parts of the Constitution, which are more important than the 2nd Amendment, are the solid foundation we enjoy as a nation of laws as well as providing for the orderly transfer of power every eight years at the most, ensuring that democracy and freedom remain the keystone of The Republic.

What we have seen in the events unfolding in Africa and the Middle East is that the true power of Democracy and Freedom comes from the hearts of their people and not from their having all the guns in the world.  It is a lesson we Americans, particularly at this moment in our own history, need to understand where the reality actually lies.

Dr John Bogen contributed to this post.

Less of Our Light for More Star Light

Featured

I have participated in the GLOBE at Night program sponsored by the National Optical Astronomy Observatory (NOAO) for several years and continue to support it for two vitally important reasons:

As an amateur astronomer, light polluted skies wash out both the quality of what can be observed and can radically reduce the number of stars and other celestial objects that can be seen.  Light pollution affects all visual telescopes, no matter how large they are.  That is why the world’s greatest observatories are almost always built on very high peaks in very remote places far away from cities.

 

Light Pollution from the Large Binocular Telescope Observatory, Mt. Graham Int'l Obs., Arizona. Photo courtesy of Marco Pedani & University of Arizona

Every photon created by artificial light requires a human-manufactured source.  Measured in what is called “kiloWatt hours” (kWh) the electricity that is used to create unnecessary light (overlighting) is a nonrecoverable expense.  We waste billions of kiloWatt hours every year, costing us billions of dollars in the production and service used to create the light that wasn’t needed to begin with.  As we think about our energy production and the price paid to create the fuels to generate it (coal, oil, gas, hydro, nuclear–even solar, wind, wave, geothermal, and other cutting-edge energy-producing technologies require huge costs to meet our power demands), just the amount lost to light pollution cannot be justified from either a perspective of economic sustainability or the stewardship of the earth’s finite resources.

 

Large Binocular Telescope. Currently the world's largest optical telescope for total combined aperture, 16.8 meters, 662 inches (55.16 feet). Mt Graham Int'l Obs., Arizona. Photo courtesy of John Hill and LBTO, University of Arizona.

I invite you to join in the effort to change this one vital part of preserving our natural resources, not just those from the Earth but also those of the sky.  Please watch the short video, and then read the letter from Dr. Constance Walker, PhD*, Director of the GLOBE at Night campaign, and then follow the links to join in the fun of walking out your front door, looking up (I’ll bet you haven’t intentionally looked at the sky in a long time!), and with the very user-friendly GLOBE at Night instructions, instantly become an important participant in a global research project with such important implications.

Please note that the results for people living in the Northern Hemisphere must be submitted by April 4, 2011!

Note: Any connection between exposure to artificial light at night and cancer remains under investigation. The statement in the video represents that of the producers and not necessarily the views of Extreme Thinkover or GLOBE at Night.  See links below for more information**.

.

Join the 6th worldwide GLOBE at Night 2011 campaign:

March 22 – April 6

With half of the world’s population now living in cities, many urban dwellers have never experienced the wonderment of pristinely dark skies and maybe never will. This loss, caused by light pollution, is a concern on many fronts: safety, energy conservation, cost, health and effects on wildlife, as well as our ability to view the stars. Even though light pollution is a serious and growing global concern, it can be one of the easiest environmental problems you can address through responsible lighting on local levels.

Participation in the international star-hunting campaign, GLOBE at Night, helps to start the process of addressing the light pollution issue locally as well as globally. The campaign invites everyone all over the world to record the brightness of the night sky. The campaign runs from March 22 through April 4 in the Northern Hemisphere and March 24 through April 6 in the Southern Hemisphere. The campaign is easy and fun to do. First, you match the appearance of the constellation Leo or Crux with simple star maps of progressively fainter stars found.  Then you submit your measurements, including the date, time, and location of your comparison. After all the campaign’s observations are submitted, the project’s organizers release a map of light-pollution levels worldwide. Over the last six annual 2-week campaigns, volunteers from more than 100 nations contributed over 60,000 measurements, 30% of which came from last year’s campaign.

To learn the five easy steps to participate in the GLOBE at Night program, see the GLOBE at Night website. You can listen to this year’s 10-minute audio podcast on light pollution and GLOBE at Night. Or download a 45-minute powerpoint and accompanying audio. GLOBE at Night is also on Facebook and Twitter. (See the links at the end.)

The big news is that children and adults can submit their measurements in real time if they have a smart phone or tablet. To do this, you can use the web application. With smart phones and tablets, the location, date and time are put in automatically. And if you do not have a smart phone or tablet, there are user-friendly tools on the GLOBE at Night report page to find latitude and longitude.

For activities that have children explore what light pollution is, what its effects are on wildlife and how to prepare for participating in the GLOBE at Night campaign, see the Dark Skies Rangers activities. Monitoring our environment will allow us as citizen-scientists to identify and preserve the dark sky oases in cities and locate areas where light pollution is increasing. All it takes is a few minutes during the 2011 campaign to measure sky brightness and contribute those observations on-line. Help us exceed the 17,800 observations contributed last year. Your measurements will make a world of difference.

Primary Mirror, Gran Telescopio CANARIAS, world's largest single aperture, 10.4 meters, 664 inches (55.3 feet). Photo courtesy GTC & ORM, Canary Islands

Primary Mirror, Gran Telescopio CANARIAS, currently the world's largest single aperture optical telescope, 10.4 meters, 664 inches (55.3 feet). Photo courtesy GTC & ORM, Canary Islands

.

GLOBE at Night: http://www.globeatnight.org/

Star Maps: http://www.globeatnight.org/observe_magnitude.html

Submitting Measurements: http://www.globeatnight.org/report.html

Web App for Reporting: http://www.globeatnight.org/webapp/

Audio Podcast: http://365daysofastronomy.org/2011/03/07/march-7th-globe-at-night-2011/

Powerpoint: http://www.globeatnight.org/files/NSN_GaN_2011_slides.ppt

Accompanying Audio: http://www.globeatnight.org/files/NSN_GaN_2011_audio.mp3

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/GLOBEatNight

Twitter: http://twitter.com/GLOBEatNight

Dark Skies Activities: http://www.darkskiesawareness.org/DarkSkiesRangers/

The Milky Way as you've probably never seen it under excellent dark skies. View inludes Sagittarius, Libra, Scorpius, Scutum & Ophiuchus from Cerro Tololo, Chile. Photo courtesy of W. Keel, Univ. of Alabama at Tuscaloosa.

*Constance Walker, PhD, director, GLOBE at Night campaign (www.globeatnight.org)
chair, International Dark-Sky Association Education Committee
chair, IYA2009 Dark Skies Awareness Cornerstone Project
member, Astronomical Society of the Pacific Board of Directors
associate scientist & senior science education specialist, NOAO
.

Quantum Hope

Featured

.

Oh, no, not THAT word!

Put the word “quantum” in a title or sentence and people get nervous.  Perhaps their eyes glaze over and they hope that it will go away.  Some stop reading and skip to another article.  Others are so disconcerted by the mere appearance of the term they can’t read another word and turn on their TVs, frantically looking for reruns of The Simpsons, or Family Guy, or better yet, Oprah.  Comfort food delivered by cable. Having placed “quantum” in both the title and the first sentence, however, those folks won’t have gotten this far.

So if you are still reading, you are among a small minority who are surprisingly brave and tenacious.  For most of you, however, I still need to allay one other fear: math.  Take a deep breath.  No math.  Please, though, don’t turn off your brain.  I’m going to suggest something that is indeed within the realm of quantum theory, but from a perspective few quantum physicists would entertain.

Consider this a treat.

If you aren’t sure what the quantum in quantum physics entails, I can provide a basic definition by offering a simple word picture.  It’s a matter of scale to describe the universe.  On the very big end is cosmology.  That’s what the giant earth-based observatories,  optical, radio telescopes, and space telescopes (like the Hubble, and the Kepler and the soon to be launched James Webb), look deep into space to better understand.  Cosmologists are interested in our  Milky Way galaxy, the galaxies in our neighborhood (we have a really BIG neighborhood) and further out from there to the whole universe.  Astronomers and astrophysicists study the cosmos, the biggest stuff out there.

Quantum physics studies the small end of the universe, smaller than atoms: subatomic particles with great names like quarks, Fermions, leptons and bosons, down to the smallest of the small, called a “bit” (The bit is still theoretical and is also considered a function of entropy. Click here for an explanation [Warning: Contains math formulas]).  They also study how those subatomic particles fit together and work to make the matter we can see.  And that is what a particle accelerator like the Large Hadron Collider at CERN straddling the border of France and Switzerland is designed to do.  Remember in The DaVinci Code, where the story starts in this giant underground building?  That’s CERN.  Particle physicists and quantum physicists study the small stuff and the forces that make them work.

What does this have to do with hope?  Everything, actually, but you’ll have to read just a bit more.

Quantum physics and cosmology have one goal in common.  They both want to figure out how the very large relates to the very small.  They want to discover how the smallest quantum bit is the building block for the universe (and maybe a whole bunch of other universes, too, but we’re not going there in this post).  This great quest is called the search for the Theory of Everything, or for short, The Big TOE.  Seriously.  Yeah, you can laugh.

Everything, however, is not scientifically measurable.  Life is one of those things.  I know we can create machines that can detect life and perhaps how much life exists a one place, but life as a phenomenon in the Universe is not measurable.

The whole notion is confounding, and has been the topic of debate among we humans well before the beginning of the Scientific Revolution with the publication in 1543 of Copernicus‘ manuscript, “On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres.”   For example, Aristarchus of Samos, who lived CA 310-230 BCE, published the first treatise on the heliocentric model of the solar system, On the Sizes and Distances of Sun and Moon, which was then suppressed by the Greek religious authorities of his time because it did not match their beliefs about their gods and life in the universe.  That has a familiar ring to it.

For Half a Millennium…

The past half a millennium, from Copernicus to the present, we have struggled to decide not just what the universe is made of, but what it is at all.  It is the driving force in cosmology and quantum physics.

For those of us who are people of faith, we have also struggled to decide not just what life is made of, but have equally struggled to assign meaning to a concept that seems pervasive to all humans that we label spirituality.  And the greater challenge has been to assign meaning to our religious beliefs and their long-held sacred foundations.   As our understanding of both the Universe and Life have changed (yes, I am deliberately capitalizing both words to communicate that in this context I am seeking to convey a sense of cosmic wholeness) our search for meaning has not gotten any easier.  Why after thousands of years of consciousness in this earthly setting, do we still not understand either?

Diarmuid O’Murcho, who has written extensively about defining a “quantum theology“, states,

The universe knows what it’s about.  That it does not make sense to us humans, that it often baffles us to extremes and undermines all our theories and expectations, is not a problem for the universe; it is a problem for us.  We, therefore, impetuously conclude that the universe does not care about us or about anything else…Instead of viewing it all as mindless, why not work with the idea that it is mindful? (Evolutionary Faith, p. 199).

Even as I write the words of O’Murcho’s quote, I admit they sound strange, foreign, even counter-intuitive to me.  My intellectual world has never regarded the universe as mindful.  Neither has my theological world.  Perhaps, though, that has been the problem, my problem: I have viewed these two worlds as separate, distinct, and although I may have been able to conceptualize them as meeting, like two pieces of plate glass. When pressed against each other they have a cohesiveness, but they are still to pieces of glass stuck together.  In the world of the quantum reality, there is no reason for that to always be so.  In fact, it may be that it is only rarely so, because in quantum theory, boundaries and internal existence are not bounded or exist in the way I perceive them.

Spirituality, Cosmology & the Quantum Conundrum…

I come, then, to my most difficult and confounding question.  If I can believe in a mindful God who created a quantum universe, why do I assume that this mindful Creator did not create a mindful Universe in the same way that humans (therefore, me) were created: In the image of God?

If I allow myself to just for a moment to adjust my reality to that perspective, I realize that I see, though in a glass darkly as St. Paul says when he talks about hope (not just love, 1 Co. 13:15), a reason for hope in a universe otherwise devoid and incapable of such mindfulness:

Life is the universe’s sole expression of hope, for without life the universe cannot contemplate its existence, and without hope the universe does not exist.

.

The First Image of the Universe as We Never Can See It, Because Our Eyes Cannot See in Microwave Wavelengths. Image: COBE, Goddard Space Flight Center, http://mather.gsfc.nasa.gov/cobe/science.html

Hail Endeavour and Her Crew!

Featured

At this moment I’m sitting in my living room watching the coverage of the final launch of Endeavour.  What a magnificent craft she is!  I salute her and all those brave souls who have entrusted her to carry them to the threshold of the universe. God speed, Endeavour!

Space Shuttle Endeavour Landing with Drogue Chute Deployed. Photo: Nasa.gov

.

The Final Launch of the Orbiter Endeavour

.

Endeavour in Her Element...And Hard at Work. Photo: JPL/NASA

And here is a nice photo of the replica of the HMS Bark Endeavour, Captain Cook’s ship under full sail.  It looks large because of the tall masts and the sails, but in reality, the original was 106 ft (32 m).  By way of comparison, Orbiter Endeavour is 122 ft/37 m long (not counting the main external tank, which is 154 ft/47 m).  A number of years ago I had the chance to tour the replica of the HMS Endeavour.  It is a wonderful ship and a fascinating look at history and brings home how difficult the crew’s life was day after day.  No real amenities.  No mission control, and years at sea to circumnavigate the earth instead of 90 minutes.

The HMS Bark Endeavour, Full Size Sailing Replica. Photo Courtesy: thevilloz.com

Correction Update: Much to my embarrassment in my original post, I misspelled “Endeavour.”

We’re All Still Here: The Fallacy of Predicting the End of Time

Featured

.

Like a thief in the night…

.

There are four reasons–four very distinct reasons–why people like Mr. Camping are always wrong about predicting the end of time by scouring the Book of Revelation for secret clues.  By the way, the proper biblical term for “The End of Time” is the Eschaton, not the culturally popular “apocalypse,” which means “to pull back the veil.”  This error is based on confusing the Greek word “apocalypsis” used for the Book of Revelation, with the word that means the “end”: eschatos.  In some editions of the Christian Bible, Revelation (please note the word is singular not the plural “revelations” as many call it) is titled “Apocalypse of John.”  Unfortunately, the genre of literature in which the Book of Revelation is classified is called “apocalyptic literature” and not “eschatological literature,” a fact that adds to the confusion.  Here is the list:

  1. The knowledge of the End of Time is exclusively reserved for the Mind of God.   In the Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 24, which contains Jesus’ teachings on the “end of the age,” Jesus explicitly states that “No one knows the about that day or hour,  not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mt 24:36, NIV*).  Point One: Christ did not know the time of the End.
  2. Since the First Century, Christians have yearned for the return of Christ.  Even St. Paul, early in his ministry. believed that Jesus would return in his generation.  This belief figures prominently in Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians, and his instructions to them strongly suggests they were actively debating the return of Jesus in their time.  Some had even quit their jobs.  And though Paul, himself, believed Jesus would return in his lifetime ( later in his life he realized that this likely would not be the case), nevertheless, he cautioned the Thessalonians not to let it cause division among themselves and also not to behave as if there were no tomorrow.  Literally.  To emphasize his point, he writes, “About times and dates we do not need to write to you, for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night” (I Thess 5:1, NIV)  Point Two: Paul the Apostle, nor any of the other apostles, knew the time of the End.
  3. Nowhere in the Book of Revelation is there a definable, historical, sequence of events tied to the narrative that points to a specific knowable day in the future.  It just isn’t there.  The reason is so simple it’s almost ridiculous: That day was not revealed to John.  Revelation is written in the first person as a series of visions given to John.  Not once does Christ nor the angel that guided him through those visions reveal the date of the End. In chapter 16:15, Christ is once again quoted: “Behold I come like a thief! Blessed is he who stays awake and keeps his clothes with him…” (NIV) In fact, knowing the date is irrelevant to the whole message of Revelation.  The true message of Revelation to Christians of all generations is: Endure, Overcome, and Endure Patiently. That however, has not stopped Christians in every single generation since Jesus walked on this earth from trying to “unlock” the mysteries of Revelation and predict the exact day the End of Time will begin.  Mr. Camping joins a very large, and very frustrated legacy of people who have discovered that what Jesus said in Matthew, chapter 24, indeed was the truth.  In 2008 I wrote an outline of Revelation for a program curriculum at my church.  You can access it by clicking here: The Revelation to St. John. Point Three: The Book of Revelation is not about predicting the End of Time, it is about how Christians are to live until The Day of the Lord.
  4. In light of the first three points, the final reason is: You can’t outwit God.  What Mr. Camping failed to understand, and in a deeper sense, discern, as one of the most important theological truths in Christianity, is that we cannot know when the Day of the Lord will be.  Notice I am not using the term “Day of Judgment.”  The Day of the Lord will take place in God’s timing.  The date of that day is not secreted away in the text of the Bible.  Jesus, himself, said he did not know the day, as did St. Paul and St John.  The reason for teaching us about the Day of the Lord is to help us live according to the gospel of Christ, not to stop living trying to anticipate that which cannot be known.  Point Four: You can’t outwit God. The Day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.
*NIV: New International Version.

is the cloud dumbing us down?

Featured

A certain company known for its often astonishing leaps forward in user-oriented personal electronics announced yesterday its latest innovation that allows its customers to integrate all their devices (of course, manufactured by said iCompany) in the “Cloud,” the world wide web formerly known as “the Internet.” It can once again be said what they’ve done is leading the industry.

However…

I found myself oddly troubled by this announcement, not because it is innovative, because it certainly is, but because it is an innovation that potentially has a dark side. In this brief post I have two questions about computing in the Cloud.

First, when I store a document, say this blog post, which I can rightly claim is my intellectual property, on the Cloud, are my rights as an author protected and do I own that digital document, even though I am storing it on rented server space somewhere in the world? If someone who “owns” that space I am renting either goes out of business, or decides they don’t like what I’m writing and storing, what protection do I have to retrieve my documents or prevent them from being misused or destroyed?

Second, as iCompany and others create more innovations to simplify the use of their products, aren’t they pushing the user further away from the true complexity of the device, and in the name of convenience, really dumbing us down, all the while marketing their products as being the epitome of chic techno-saavy?  What is the technological saavy required for a device, when all you have to do is turn it on and tap the touch-screen?  Beyond that, however, the user has no idea, and really is obstructed from knowing how that product works.

When I was a kid, I had a transistor radio. All I had to do to operate it was turn it on and move the tuning dial to listen to my favorite radio station.  No more difficult than using the typical mp3 player, really.  The difference is, though, if I was interested in how it worked, I could save up my allowance and go to the local Radio Shack and buy a kit to build one.  I can safely guess that if you went to your local iStore, or even a modern Radio Shack, you can’t find a kit to build a real iWhatever.

So I ponder these issues. I, like everyone else who uses the latest digital technology, is faced with answering these questions. Or choosing to ignore them to be part of the techno-chic.  I’m typing this post not on my regular computer, but on my smartphone. Guilt by association, I confess.  However, do I get to defend myself by stating I don’t own any products by the great iCompany? I didn’t think so.

Oh, and the issues of security and privacy in the Cloud? That requires an entirely different post!

Extreme Thinkover– A New Look–Still Extremely Thinking Over!

Featured

Change is good.  If you’ve worked like I have in an industry such as health care, you also know that change is the only constant.  You either decide change is good or you end up decompensating physically and emotionally into a nervous wreck.  I started Extreme Thinkover (XTO) nearly three years ago to have an outlet for my desire to write in a public forum–and to better deal with that whole change thing, myself.  What I discovered is that  blogging occasionally is like writing your diary and posting it on a billboard next to a major urban interstate.  On the other hand, it is also an amazing personalized bully pulpit from which to express your opinions and advocate for issues you hold to be of great importance.  And then, sometimes it’s just a outlet to write for fun, to be funny, maybe sarcastic, or even tender and reflective.  So that’s why I write XTO.  My interests vary widely, and that is my intent to continue for the next phase of Extreme Thinkover.

Blogging, though, is just not about the words.  It is also about the look.  The look of the theme is as important as good writing.  Our brain’s occipital lobe, where vision is located is second in size only to the frontal lobe where reason and thinking are.  We know by seeing.  We know by thinking.  In blogging we get to put integrate them into words and pictures.  Together, the two are key to what makes us human.  And that is what makes blogging in both it’s verbal and visual dimensions so very interesting and powerful.

I look forward to your joining me on my journeys in blogging.  My most special thanks goes to my daughter for her professional expertise in helping me choose and design the new Extreme Thinkover look.  My wife’s expertise with PhotoShop produced the classy visually-captivating header.  And thanks to WordPress for this new theme and all their support for their bloggers!

David

Five Books +Plus One: What’s On Your List?

Featured

I recently discovered The Browser, a literary website with the tag line, “Writing Worth Reading,” which has a feature called “FiveBooks.”  I found it a brilliant and straightforward idea.  They invite experts from a wide variety of fields to be interviewed on the five books that influenced them most in their professional development.  What I found particularly engaging is that the books listed by those individuals are by no means limited to their profession or field of study. Often, the person being interviewed would place a book read during adolescence as seminal in his or her direction in life.

While I was reading the interview that led me to “FiveBooks” to begin with, I kept thinking that we who are not world renown experts would have lists that are just as interesting, because the stories coming out of the impact of the books in our lives is just as compelling.

Here’s my idea, then:  I invite you, my readers, to submit your list of books that had a profound influence on your life and the reasons for that, not solely professionally, but from a much broader perspective of the development of who you are as an individual.  How to do that?  I explain below.

Giving The Browser full credit for their “FiveBooks” idea, I came up with a twist to make it distinctive: Five Books +Plus One.  Don’t think this, though, is just a play for a list of six books.  The twist is to choose the book for the “+Plus One” that far outweighs the influence of the others, a magnum opus, so to speak, from which you have essentially and existentially organized your life.  Makes it not quite so simple, doesn’t it?

I’m working on my list.  I can tell you already, it isn’t as easy as it sounds.  But I also think we need to have some basic rules.

Update 28 June: I’ve got the first draft of my list.  I’ve got to think about it for another couple of days before I finalize it and write up my post.

Although I wish I could extend an invitation to anyone who might read this post to send me her or his list and have it published as a guest author on Extreme Thinkover, the nature of the blogosphere today requires a more prudent approach.  So, I’ve decided to set up eligibility criteria and some easy to follow ground rules:

Eligibility:

  1. Any reader can submit a list as a Comment (see the Rules below, please).  Those comments will be approved using the same criteria for civil discourse that I use for all Extreme Thinkover comments.  But: See #3!
  2. Extreme Thinkover subscribers, and my Facebook and “The Intersection” friends can submit their list as a comment, or email me at Extreme Thinkover (click on the “Contact me” link just under the header) if you would like to be featured as a guest author–Which I really hope that you’ll do!
  3. If you fit into #1 above, and you’d like me to consider posting your list as a guest author, write me at Extreme Thinkover (click on the “Contact Me” link above) and we can talk about it.  I’m always interested in meeting new folks.

The Rules–So We Have Apples-to-Apples Lists:

  1. Each book on your list has to be one that you’ve actually read.  The whole thing.  Kindle and other electronic reader versions are permitted.
  2. Works from any historical period are allowed, as are works of poetry, and religious texts.  Excerpts from historical works are not acceptable.  And for the sake of continuity, the Christian Bible or Jewish Bible are both considered one book in their entirety, though they are compilations of individual “books” and letters. The same standard will apply to other religious texts, as well.
  3. One book from a published trilogy or series is allowed.
  4. Graphic novels that are original works are allowed.  Graphic novels that are taken from a published print work are not; again, the idea is to have read the book.
  5. Musicals, opera, masses, and other musical pieces are not allowed.  It’s a great idea, but for this invitation the focus is on the printed word.
  6. “Cliff Notes” or “I saw the movie” rationalizations are not allowed.  This goes especially for those who might put Star Wars or the Lord of the Rings Trilogy (and the like) on their list.  If you haven’t read the published book, you can’t put it on your list.  I will, however, make the smallest exception for Star Wars Episodes 4-6.  It was difficult to find the novelization of those movies in the early years, but the screen plays were published.  So, if you’ve read the screen play for any of those specific episodes, I’ll allow that.

How we’ll get your list ready to publish:

  1. Reading is one thing, but part of the fun of blogging is doing some writing yourself.  For each of your five books, write between 100 and 300 words about the influence of that work on your life.  For your “plus one” book, feel free to write up to 500 words on its singular impact on who you are.  I put the word limits on for two reasons.  One, you’ll have a clear idea what length to make your comments, and two, it requires you to be disciplined in your writing (a most important skill to learn for effective writing) and not ramble on for page after page.
  2. If you don’t feel confident in your writing skills, I will be more than happy to help you edit and fine-tune the commentary for your list of books.
  3. No deadline.  I see “Five Books Plus One” as a continuing series over the coming months.  And you may have yours ready before I do, so I’m not going to hold off publishing someone else’s list before mine.

Come On! Take a Risk and Send Me Your List!

It will give you something unique to do rather than watching the summer reruns on TV.  But more importantly, as I said above, the books on your list and the story of how those books influenced you as a person is a compelling narrative.  No life is really ordinary because every life is unique.  That’s what I think makes your “Five Books +Plus One” list as important as any “expert’s.”

One caveat.  I have to reserve the right to decline to publish a given list and/or comments that do not meet the standards for civil discourse on Extreme Thinkover, or does not meet the rules as outlined above.

My List: Five Books +Plus One

Featured

Origins of the Book: Nag Hammadi Codex Collection. Among the Earliest Known Codices Extant (Book Binding rather than Scroll). Dated to ca. 200 C.E. Discovered in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, December 1945. Photo: PD.

Well, here you have it.  My list of “Five Books +Plus One.

Sometimes having to live by your own rules is harder than one would think.  This was one of those cases.  I realized that a few of the choices I easily could have included were not books but articles from periodicals or chapters from books.  As tempting as it was to cheat, I didn’t.  I’m not even mentioning them here as kind of a back door way of saying, Oh, by the way, these were the “also-rans” and here’s why. The other issue, as I’m sure not a few of you have also encountered is the sheer volume of books we have read during our life-times. Thousands is not a stretch of the reality.  How do I winnow all those down to just six?  It was not an easy process. I even resorted to staring at my bookcases and mentally inventorying what was there.  It turned out not to be all that helpful.

Here’s my list, roughly in chronological order as I read them.  It may surprise you; to some degree, it did me:

  1. Foundation by Isaac Asimov
  2. Identity, Youth and Crisis by Erik Erikson
  3. The Church by Hans Kung
  4. Organizational Ecology by Michael Hannan and John Freeman
  5. The New American Standard Bible

My “Plus One”

  • The Black Hole War by Leonard Susskind.

Foundation by Isaac Asimov. Published in 1951.

This is the cover of my first copy of "Foundation."

I have often said that Isaac Asimov taught me how to Think (capital “T”). Other than the Bible, I have read it through more than any other book.  I bought my first copy from a grocery store book rack when I was 15 or 16 and it changed my life.  Foundation is an unusual story in the Science Fiction genre because it is about a group of people, facing the collapse of a galactic empire, who Think.  Calling themselves “psychohistorians” they developed a complex logic and math-based system of predicting events in the future.  No magic, no Force.  Smart people thinking about almost hopelessly complicated assumptions and outcomes.  Did they get it right?  You’ll have to read the book.

I wanted to be a psychohistorian, not so much for the ability to reason out the future, but to be able to explore human behavior in its most deep and subtle implications.  To that end, I pursued psychology.

I can describe two huge influences Foundation (a series Asimov stretched into fourteen novels) had upon me.  First was the inspiration of learning how to Think, to stretch my mental capacity through creative and logical thinking and education.  Once you learn how to do that, all of life in its almost infinite variabilities becomes fascinating.

The second impact was to ask the question: What does it mean to be human?  Isaac Asimov in his nonfiction works said that was the central theme of Foundation.  He was a humanist, but an optimist who saw that through our common humanity we have the ability to overcome the many inhumanities we inflict upon one another and make ourselves into a better species—even if he did use robots to help us along that journey.  That optimism struck me as a teenager, and I carry it as a core of who I am to this very day.

Identity, Youth and Crisis by Erik Erikson. Published in 1968.

Thinking about all of the books I read as an undergraduate as a psychology  major (even though I graduated with a major in Biblical Studies, with minors in Psychology and General Science, due to the Northwest Christian College curriculum structure in 1976), I had the hardest time narrowing this chapter in my life to just one book.  I decided, finally, on Erikson’s Identity, Youth and Crisis, for three reasons.

First, Erikson’s idea of human development and epigenetic life stages has been a key part of my professional life, even today. Though the stages have been modified, the essential concepts have stood the test of time.  Other authors, including those writing about spirituality and religious development have built on Erikson.

Second, out of a handful of books that shaped my self-identity as a “psychologist,” Identity, Youth and Crisis rightly belongs at the top of that list.  That was not an easy decision to make because the also-rans were very influential as well.  But as I thought about which of them I had returned to over the years, Erikson came in first.  The only way I can think of to describe its impact is that after I read this book, I “became” a psychologist, and through it, as I entered first seminary and then my masters in counseling program, Erikson continued to be of special importance.

So, third, I returned to Identity, Youth and Crisis in my masters in counseling program at the University of Oregon (1981).  My second year, I elected to do a reading and conference course, and chose to read Erikson as my topic.  Even though I read six of his most influential books, I started again with Identity, Youth and Crisis.  It was the anchor for the term.  I still keep my copy handy on my book shelf.

The Church by Hans Kung.  Published in 1968.

This is the choice that surprised me.  As I pondered which books have had the most profound theological effect on me, it came down to three.  One was out of my heritage as a Disciples of Christ, two were written by Catholics.  Hans Kung, one of the Catholics, won.  Why? Similar to what I noted above, it is the book I have returned to most often over the years because it is the book that was most transformational in my personal and professional development as a theologian.

Hans Kung, a German theologian has been in trouble with the Catholic Church for nearly half a century.  He’s an iconoclast of sorts, and writes things that are transparently Protestant, and therefore the Holy See takes a dim view of his views. I have read that Kung and the current pope are not on good terms.  Nevertheless, when I read The Church, I could hardly put it down.  Kung’s grasp of the history of the church, the context from which doctrines and practices arose were so eloquently explained that by the time I got to the end of it, for the first time, I finally had a clear concept of “Church” in my head, and one from which I could see how Disciples’ theology clearly fit into. The “Church” and “the church” finally made sense, and that is saying something.

Little did I realize at the time that the chapters on Catholic sacraments and things like the priesthood and Apostolic Succession, would be a necessary reference in my work, but even now, The Church is my first reference when I encounter another confusing Roman Catholic belief or practice, which after 15 years still occasionally happens.  We don’t have to tell the pope I’m using Kung to check his facts.

Organizational Ecology by Michael Hannan and John Freeman.  Published in 1989.

  I spent eight years working on my doctor of philosophy degree at the University of Oregon, studying Higher Education Policy and Management and graduating in 2002.  One would think that at least one book in higher education would make this list.  Two almost did.  When I got to my dissertation research, however, the foundation of that work took an unexpected twist.  Blame that on my advisor, Dr. Paul Goldman.  He took a kernel of an idea I had and put it into a context that ended up with my not only getting to do cutting-edge research, but also got my dissertation published in the internationally renowned Journal of Educational Administration.  That twist was Organizational Ecology.

In a nutshell, Organizational Ecology is a branch of Organizational Theory that examines how institutions survive in the ecology of their organizational environment.  It assumes that organizations either thrive or wither depending on how well they can access the resources that “feed” their mission and productivity.  It is a very organic model, parallel to biological ecology.  It also assumes that institutions have a life span, and theorizes how they can replicate themselves across generations.   This very developmental perspective for me was a perfect fit.

Organizational Ecology changed the way I think about the institutional world.  It was a touchstone in the process of researching and writing my dissertation that changed how I think.  Literally.  The greatest moment of amazement I experienced as I finished the dissertation manuscript was the realization that the way I think had been organized into something completely different than when I began.  In one respect I had this sense that I had taken a step toward being a psychohistorian.  It was the last thing I expected to gain from earning a PhD.

The New American Standard Bible.  Published Originally by the Lockman Foundation in 1960. Authorized Updated Version Published in 1995.

It is a well-known aphorism in biblical studies that every translation of the Bible is a collection of compromises.  This is true and generally accepted, even by those scholars who believe the Bible is literally the Divinely dictated words of God. For the rest of us, the issue takes a different path.

I find value in reading a variety of translations because I understand the nature of the compromises that went into each version.  Knowing that different translations and paraphrases reflect the theological perspectives of their editors makes each a much more interesting read.

For me, I find The New American Standard Bible my version of choice.  I got my first copy of the NASB when I was 16 years old.  I still have it and use it frequently (which is a testament to the quality of its manufacture and binding, as much as to my affinity for its text).  The NASB was designed to be a Bible that was as close as possible to being a literal translation of the original Hebrew and Greek, to also be as theologically neutral as possible, while at the same time being written in excellent English.  To be honest, they got the literal and neutral parts better than the English.  The readability, however, was significantly improved when the bible was updated in 1995.  To this day I have yet to find another translation of the English Bible that does a better job of presenting the first two, even as they work on getting the English part more polished.

I suppose some of my readers are wondering why I didn’t talk about how the Bible has been the spiritual bedrock of my faith. The answer is simple. This is a list of books that have influenced my life, not a spiritual autobiography.  And why didn’t I make it my +Plus One choice?  Doesn’t it deserve that special distinction?  The answer again is simple. It was a compromise.  I wanted to highlight The New American Standard Bible as the translation that has profoundly influenced my faith and life for over forty years.  Therefore, I decided it belonged in the list of Five, those books that have been my most important standards for shaping me as a person and as a professional.

As for my +Plus One.  I’ve decided to put that in a separate post, as Part 2.  I listed it above.  Now you can ponder why I might have chosen it for that distinction.

Boehner Blink?

Featured

Question #1 regarding the Federal Budget Debt Ceiling Limit Talks is are we hurtling toward a disaster on August 2?

Although the actuality for the U.S. Government and economy (depending on which pundits you choose to believe), may be more political than a real fiscal disaster, the political war of words has escalated to an incredible intensity.

Anyone paying the least attention to the rhetorical clashes between the political parties–and their internal factions–knows that the positions on both sides have been hardening, although perhaps ossifying (even fossilizing) might be more appropriate.

August 2, 2011 has become an temporal Great Wall of China (yes, I get the irony of the comparison).  Imagine two opposing armies charging headlong toward it from different directions, oblivious to fact the wall is not going to move.  Even though they hit the wall at the same time, the damage they inflict upon themselves will be enormous.  Evidently, only in the split second after the crushing blow of charging warriors into the wall begins, will the generals of both armies realize the magnitude of their mistake.  The Wall, though, won’t be hurt much at all.

In this game of chicken with an unmovable object, however, something unexpected has just happened.  Rep. John Boehner, Speaker of the House, perhaps, has blinked. The New York Times reports (9 July):

Citing differences over tax revenues, House Speaker John A. Boehner said on Saturday night that he would pull back from joint efforts with President Obama to reach a sweeping $4 trillion deficit-reduction plan tied to a proposal to increase the federal debt limit.

Huh.

Now.  Who’s paying attention?  Will the Republicans, both the Mainline and the Tea Party factions trust Boehner’s judgment and unexpected move?  Is their iron-will to resist compromise, in the end, a strategy they can hold up as a prize, not only in congress but with their base?

Will the Democrats pull back from their headlong rush into the wall as well, and trust that the President’s growing pressure on Boehner to soften his position is having an affect that will meet their political goals regarding the deficit cap, as well as those for the Federal Budget and the economy in general?

We’re going to find out in just a few days.

NASA Misses Its Own Historic Moment

Featured

1:30 a.m. PDT.   I’m sitting in my living room watching NASA-TV in the middle of the night to see the space shuttle Atlantis’ final landing, and with it, the end of the STS program. But the most important factor in Atlantis last touchdown is it also signals the end of the United States’ manned spaced program. 

I have a few opinions to express over this turn of events.

On a practical note, I’m wondering why NASA decided to end this historic flight in darkness, when the vast majority of Americans are still in bed (leaving only a handful of hardcore flight watchers willing to sacrifice sleep to say we were there). It gives one pause to ponder why NASA decided it was better to sneak Atlantis back down earth under cover of the pre-dawn gloom rather than plan a final landing with a huge celebration to tout the value and successes of putting humans into space?  It is my studied opinion NASA has, once again, been its own worst enemy with regard to publicizing its accomplishments.

My other thought sitting here is having the full awareness that we as a country have ceded our predominance in human flight, a fact that the Russians, Chinese, Indian, Japanese, and European space agencies can only consider an enormous gift to their programs. They will undoubedtly continue to accelerate their efforts to exploit the infinite and rich discoveries that await those first humans who have the vision and courage to push past the bonds of low earth orbit. 

It deeply grieves me to know in my lifetime, I witnessed both the beginning and the end of my country’s foray into that great human endeavor to explore above the sky and beyond the finite limits of our oceaned world. 

But my grief is tinged with frustration, because it didn’t have to end this way. In fact, it shouldn’t be ending at all!

Hospital Food for the Mind

Featured

Okay, let’s get one thing straight. This post is not about hospital food even though I work in said institution and eat its food almost daily.

I’ve decided to create a new sometime feature on Extreme Thinkover that I’ll write on my lunchtime sitting in our dining room eating hospital food. That’s the hook. Pretty simple, but these posts will mostly be short on account of the time constraint of my lunch time.  Get it? Good.

Here is intallment #1:

The debt ceiling.

If I were a member of congress, I’d vote no.  Why?

If Sen. Mitch McConnell is smiling, anyone with the slightest leaning toward progressive and responsible government should be running screaming in the opposite direction.  That smile means he just defeated the White House and the Democratically-controlled senate.

Put that all together and you have guaranteed a horrendous piece of legislation that will generate some of the worst intended and unitended consequences in the history of the country!

I agree with NYTs columnist Paul Krugman that this bill is a disaster. I’d add a disaster based on a delusional Zeitgeist fueled by those whose political self-centeredness creates a whole new clinical diagnosis above narcissism. Perhaps it could be named TEA: Terribly Egopolitical Agitators.

 

I strongy disagree with PK, however, that the only stance is to be a stiff-backed progressive, and being a centrist is a bad thing. If we had a significant number of centrists in Congress supporting the president, I contend we might not have ever gotten into this ugly extremist versus extremist battle-royale to begin with.

Update:I received a note from one of my readers that my use of the phrase “tea bag” is a code word for a particular sexual act, something I was not aware of. So, yes I rewrote part of the post. I wanted to convey my consternation, not make a veiled peurile insult. Even though both Houses passed the bill and President Obama will sign it, I still would have voted “no.” DW.

Hospital Food for the Mind

Featured

Gallup didn’t call me for their USAToday poll on the Debt Ceiling bill.  The results indicated Democrats and progressives were more positive about the final product than Republicans and Tea Party members, a fact I find incredulous.  I would have been ready to give the pollster a detailed account of my thorough displeasure over the mess this bill just created.  And that’s my take being firmly on the progressive side of the opinion scale.

Let the Backfiring Begin!

One group is stumped over what happened.  Tea Party members report being dissatisfied by the bill by 80%. Despite the fact their faction acted as a curdling agent in the legislation, rendering it both unpalatible and inedible but still force-fed into law, they don’t like it.  Granted, the bill did not force the virtual dismantling of the federal government or wipe out their most despised social programs. Nevertheless, I have this sneaking suspicion that they really believed that once they had hijacked the bill, they could force their will onto the rest of the Congress Backfire #1.

Backfire #2 appears to be that the global stock markets were already weakened and skittish from the Great Recession. Near panic from the debt ceiling fight, they took one look at the junk attached to an otherwise one-page piece of legislation and that anxiety blossomed into a full-blown state of apoplexy and, among other things wiped out $ billions in the Tea Party adherents’ investments and pensions.  And, of course that crash pulled in the rest of us thanks to their gross inability to understand Macroeconomics 101.

Numerous backfires will continue to create havoc in our politics. The final one I’ll mention in this post is the credibility of conservative agenda. Magnified and distorted a thousand times by the Tea Party’s first, and we can only pray, last congressional disaster visited upon the Union, their believability has been reduced to next to nothing.  They won’t get it, of course. In fact I expect them to be noisier at least through the 2012 general election. But as the backfires continue to damage the country at home and abroad, their chance to be a sustained political voice will be muted more and more.

The tragedy for the rest of us is the consequnces we will be forced to endure. The Tea Party won’t get that either.

Hospital Food for the Mind

Featured

I had to be in a meeting at lunch yesterday, so I didn’t get to write this post in my normal manner: thumb-typing on my smart-phone between bites of food.  I hope that doesn’t affect the quality of this piece.  I have a question:

Is the Presidency of the United States obsolete?

Up front, I’ll admit that perhaps if I was more impressed with President Obama’s performance in the job, and thought that even one individual in the Republican pack of hounds bounding and baying after his job was truly qualified, I might not even ask the question.  That not being the case, however, I am asking the question: Is the presidency, as one of the three constitutional pillars of our Union, now an obsolete political paradigm best abandoned and replaced by something else?  Or anything else?  Okay, that second question is just for the sake of rhetorical sarcasm.

Here’s my beef with the current situation.  I was always taught that the three branches of government in the United States were specifically designed to provide a balance of power, and that principle was to be inviolable to the degree that no one branch could supersede another.  This idea is based on that handy little political doctrine called the Separation of Powers.

Looking back over my lifetime, I generally place the beginning of this nightmare on the near-destruction of the Constitution by Richard Nixon. Ever since it seems we have been sliding toward a full-blown night-terror (the infamous pavor nocturnus) complete with an Incubus sitting on our national chest.

I would suggest that as the country has become more politically partisan, like a fault-line sending up waves telegraphing a coming earthquake, the election process has absorbed those toxic seismic waves. Apparently closest to the fault-line, the Judicial Branch has become all too often no more than a political equivalent of the Roman Coliseum, fought over by the conservatives and liberals in Congress–the Legislative Branch–the floor of each chamber devolving into an arena for ideological gladiating.  Only, there’s no emperor to give thumbs up or thumbs down, and so they just go on bashing each other, oblivious to their complete abdication of their Constitutionally sworn oath to govern.

Gone, in my humble opinion, is my confidence that the Justices of the Supreme Court (and the lower courts they oversee), selected once as the best of the best, view their appointment as a sacred duty to ensure their decisions rise above the everyday fray of American politics.  Yes, I know in reality it was never quite that noble, but in prior generations there was at least a generally accepted principle that the people who wore the robes and sat at that bench comprehended the high calling to which it is enshrined in the Constitution.

As for Congress, any sense of statesmanship is long gone, of dignity–even though they put on a show of being polite most of the time through gritted teeth–and an utter evaporation of “the loyal opposition.”  Factionism has permeated both the House and the Senate because factionism has permeated our political culture.  We have created this incubal demon through the ballot box and I fear it is only the beginning of a great price we will pay as a country for this gathering divisiveness.

So what of the presidency?  With the continuing deterioration of two of the three branches of government, can we expect the Executive Branch to weather the temblors and quakes unscathed?  I just do not think so.  The Legislative Branch’s warfare shows no sign of abating, even as we teeter on the verge of a double-dip recession. The Judicial Branch has become a hammer used by well-funded special interest groups to sledge their will into law, regardless of the damage they do to the rest of us.

Can one man or woman effectively push back the crumbling pillars to maintain the Constitutional integrity of the office of the President of the United States, like a reverse-Samson holding up the walls and roof, sparing the Philistines from certain death rather than bringing down the edifice upon them?  I don’t know the answer to this question.  Would the parliamentary model of governing be better?  Looking at all the problems our best international friends have (e.g., Great Britain) in managing that approach to government, I would not be eager to jump to that solution.  Nor would I ever endorse the fractured model currently used by the Russians in which two people apparently share power, but not really, but the one who is supposed to be the subordinate has figured out a way to actually control the other one and…  God protect us from a mess like that.

We are rushing headlong into another general election season (not that you can tell any difference, because the 2012 election has been in full-gear since the moment Barack Obama was declared winner in November 2008).  If I could work my will upon the country, the presidential election season would start six months before the actual date.  No one would be allowed to campaign.  No one, individual or business, would be allowed to contribute money to a candidate.  Political Parties would have to hold their nominating conventions 90 days before the election.  No political ads could air for any candidate or for any party until the parties had nominated their candidates.  I’ve got more to say on that, but it will have to wait for a later date.

Is the presidency obsolete?  Again, I don’t know the answer to that, but I know that it is every bit as battered as the other two branches of our government, and because of that, the future of the Republic is at stake.

I do hold one hope.  I continue to believe that we the people, by voting and exercising our right to petition our government, can reverse this earthquake of factionalism.  We are not beyond saving the Union.  But the day is upon us in which we must begin to do just that. To end this national night terror we must push the Incubus of Factionalism off of our chest, and, most importantly, wake up!

Hospital Food for the Mind

Featured

Bernanke, Jackson Hole and the Importance of Being Wrong

And, lo, from the great wilderness, from the antlered gate of the Hole of Jackson, the voice of the Fed, the high priest of the economy, Ben the Reserved has declared what the fortunes of our land shall be; and verily he has declared that it shall be pathetic and the fault of those who…who…who…well, those whose fault it truly is, but now that we are mired in the trap of non-liquidity and are bound ever lower, his hands are tied. And great will be the suffering of all the people. All the people who don’t have a substantial personal fortune, anyway.

I’ve got a question.  How can everybody who declares they have the true answer to our current national economic morass be right? Doesn’t somebody get to be wrong; doesn’t somebody have to be wrong, when opposing theoretical positions and hermeneutical assumptions are irreconcilable? Ben Bernanke, as head of the Federal Reserve doesn’t automatically get to be right about the future of the economy simply by virtue of his office.  Alan Greenspan, his predecessor, is Exhibit #1 for the fallacy of that attribution.

Two Economists Fighting Over Who's Wrong. Photo: Yellowstone National Park

Even a brief foray into the cyberland of pundits, op-ed columnists, and bloggers reveals that every single one of them believes he or she is right about his or her solution to our economic woes.  The reason these folk cite for their veracity is that they can point out who is clearly wrong and therefore is an ignoramus. Only rarely does one find an inspired author who actually is working from a model that has been tested under the withering scrutiny of scholarly review and has been further field tested on the roiling surf of economic reality.

The ultimate test for intellectual honesty would be to have all these very-certain self-proclaimed para-ignoramuses stand under the great antler arch in Jackson Hole, during a wild Wyoming thunderstorm with its hurricane force winds and recite the principles of their economic “truth,” on the superstitious belief that if all they were blowing was just hot air, that would dislodge one of the antlers and…the result wouldn’t be pretty.  That’s certainly much more humane than pseudo-presidential candidate Rick Perry’s lynch mob approach. Of course, he has jumped head-first into the pool of para- ignoramuses who believe they are right because they can point out people who have to be wrong.  Perry evidently has exceptional talent for pointing out who is wrong, along with great hair, but that’s another post.

The World Famous Antler Arch of Jackson Hole, Wyoming. Yes, they are real antlers. I've been there and walked through the arch. Note that I survived. Photo Courtesy: ALifeLessSweet.Blogspot.com

So, who’s going to be wrong? That in my mind is far more important with regard to our pathetic economy than who’s right. To sneakily slip in a biblical allusion, we really need the tares to be winnowed from the wheat.

The facts are that someone is wrong about their economic model/dogma/delusion being the one that will revitalize our economy. They need to either get out of the way or in an act of self-preservation we need nudge them out of the way so the folks with the model that will be guaranteed to work can get their economic engine running in high gear.  That we truly need.

From the pronouncements of Ben the Reserved, it’s increasingly clear that the folks who wrong are getting wronger by the day. After all, the economy stuck in pathetic is just plain wrong.

Detail of Antler Arch, Jackson Hole. Photo Courtesy Jackson Hole Chamber of Commerce

Trollish Tirades

Featured

Trolls (Internet):

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2]extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] The noun troll may refer to the provocative message itself, as in: “That was an excellent troll you posted”. While the word troll and its associated verb trolling are associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels subjective, with trolling describing intentionally provocative actions outside of an online context. For example, mass media uses troll to describe “a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families.”[5][6]  Source: Wikipedia.

Paul Krugman, (New York Times columnist, professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton University, and 2008 Nobel Prize laureate in Economics), on his NYT blog “Conscience of a Liberal” recently posted a short, curt message regarding the constant flow of comments he receives written by “trolls.” See the above definition.  Still thinking about my previous post “Hospital Food for the Mind: Benanke, Jackson Hole, and the Importance of Being Wrong,” I realized that trolls fall into the category of ignoramuses I referred to there.

Krugman’s ongoing problem with the troll attacks is that he writes as a pundit as well as an economist. His often pointed remarks and his notoriety as a Nobel Prize winner make him a high-profile target for those who do not see eye-to-eye with him.  This is not a surprise.  Trolls have often been historically portrayed as quite large.  All of us familiar with the Lord of the Rings movies, along with the Harry Potter series also know the wide range of images in which they are portrayed. The point being that by their very stature rather than character or intellectual capacity, mythological though they may be, trolls can’t see eye-to-eye with anybody.

Battle Troll from Lord of the Rings. (c) New Line Cinema. Photo: allthetests.com

Since trolls were certain to respond to Krugman’s banning them (the fact that doing so would reveal themselves probably never crossed their minds), I, too, decided to write a comment.  I know what you’re thinking, but I’m not a troll. I’ve have had numerous comments published on Krugman’s blog (22 to date) so I’m a known quantity on the positive side of the equation, even when I disagree with him. He decided, however, not to publish any comments.  I don’t blame him, really.  But I’d written what I though was a pretty good comment, so I present it here.

Reply to “Trolls:”

It seems counter-intuitive–or just odd, if you like—to comment on this particular post.

The trolls (although I fancy your use of the term “ignoramuses” in a recent post) seem to have three flaws in their character. First, they have no capacity to understand either irony or sarcasm.  Therefore, they won’t understand this comment.  Second, because they think they are completely right, they also believe they are clever enough to slip one of their tirades past your anti-troll sensors…or perhaps they are just oblivious to the fact you can read and recognize their M.O.  Finally, they think they are right, not because they have ever studied economics or whatever else you happen to be writing about, but because they can point to who is wrong.  That’s very important.  They know they are right because they know you are wrong. That’s their rule: you have to be wrong.  About everything, it would seem.

Troll from Harry Potter (c) Warner Bros. Photo: http://www.flixster.com/

That creates an interesting dilemma for the trolls (along with certain pundits, bloggers, etc.).  The problem, of course, is that here we have two diametrically opposed solutions on how to fix the economy. Everybody can’t be right.  Somebody gets to be wrong.  Somebody has to be wrong.

This probably keeps them up at night agonizing over the prospect that they aren’t the ones who are right, even though they believe they must be right, because if they get to be wrong, then you get to be right.  And based on the negative reaction to your recent comments about Texas (from not just the trolls, but pundits and certain economists clinging to failed models), it looks like that their growing sense of anxiety about getting to be wrong escalated into a full-blown panic attack.  They, of course, won’t get that either.

Afterthought: Trolls looked a lot different when I was a kid…

Troll Toy (c) RUSS

West Coast Universe

Featured

The pursuit of life, liberty, and liberality…

Hello there from the West Coast Universe.*  This summer I’ve been blogging using the occasional series I’ve called “Hospital Food for the Mind,” which was based on the simple idea that I was writing short pieces during lunch from the dining room of the hospital where I work**.

It has long been recognized by all sorts of -ologists that regionalisms run deep in the cultural genetic structure of the country.  In the years since the National Media began using the Red State/Blue State concept for their political and election broadcasts, the visual impact of those disparities have been accentuated.  Added to that, the recent constant media chatter about “The Beltway” referring to the “alternate reality” of Congress and the Administration inside the Beltway highway ringing Washington, DC, the term kept popping into my mind. The more I thought about it the more I liked it and I decided to try it out in place of Hospital Food (admittedly, which still gets a bad rap even though my hospital has a classically trained chef running the kitchen).

I had to have a more evolved operational definition for WCU (see, it shortens nicely, too). After giving that some consideration I came up with the tag line: The pursuit of life, liberty, and liberality.

Yes, it’s a twist on the phrase from the Declaration of Independence: “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”  I want to convey, however, a new twist, a XTO twist, so to speak, with a not so subtle reference to being liberal.  In many parts of the country, being labeled a Liberal is the equivalent of being labeled a dirty pinko commie (the fact dirty pinko commies no longer exist is largely irrelevant to those who do the labeling.  They know one when they see one).

I chose the term “liberality.” For one thing, it conveys a different sense of what being liberal is.  Those who find it necessary to sneer when they are forced to say the word out-loud will have to really work at extending that to liberality.  And for those who religious beliefs are welded to modern fundamentalist conservatism, they will be faced with the discomforting fact that the very concept of liberality is rooted deeply in biblical theology.

The Hebrew prophets, Jesus Christ, and the Apostles of his Gospel made it clear: liberality toward the care of our neighbors is the highest calling set out by God.  There is not, I assert, even one prohibition in scripture for the role of government—a government of, by, and for the people in particular—to care for those very people and for the taxes of those people to be used to provide that very care (in the sense of loving one’s neighbor as oneself).

To those who think they can challenge my knowledge of the Bible in this regard, let them try.

So, I’m offering my thoughts from here in the West Coast Universe, a place where those who are progressive and liberal in their politics live and thrive.  It is a land of patriots who are proud to be Americans without apology or compromise, unbowed by the radical Right.

We see our Inalienable Rights as the pursuit of life, liberty and liberality.  That’s the essence of the West Coast Universe, at least here at Extreme Thinkover.

#####

*I can’t take any credit for coining the term “West Coast Universe.”  A Google search came up with just over 260 hits of the phrase used in one form or another from a variety of sources around the world.  I can offer the disclaimer that my use is not affiliated with anyone else’s and is solely for the purpose of commentary on Extreme Thinkover and under fair use not intended as an infringement on any copyright or trademark.

**The SMS policy of my hospital prohibits naming it unless I provide a disclaimer on every single thing I write as being my opinion and not necessarily theirs.  Since I find this policy ludicrous and an infringement on my 1st Amendment Right to free speech, I refuse to list the organization by name in any of my online sites.  It’s their loss, really.  I like the organization otherwise, and would write all sorts of nice things about it.

A Modern School

Featured

With President Obama throwing down the gauntlet daring Congress to pass his American Jobs Act legislation, including $30 billion allocated for the repair and refurbishing of American schools, I decided it was time for me to weigh in on the subject.  More specifically, the school buildings of the American education system.  Back to that in a moment.

I’ve been thinking about this topic for a number of months.

The American Education Revolution of 1916

The title of this post is nearly 100 years old.  It wasn’t a book written by John Dewey (1859-1952), who led the progressives to reform education in America, and is still widely read by students and scholars of education.  No, this was the title of a small work by his contemporary, Abraham Flexner (1866-1959).

A Modern School was published in 1916, and had a major influence on the huge revolution taking place at the time in our nation’s education from the top to the bottom. Flexner argued, and successfully for that matter, that the Classics as The Foundation of education were out of date.  He foresaw the United States as a growing economic power, that despite the huge emphasis on manufacturing and industry fueling the national economy that propelled us through WWI and later WWII, the country was inexorably moving toward an urban and white collar world.  He was largely right; the Classics never really recovered as the core of the nation’s curriculum and we indeed became financially the most powerful nation on earth.  He stated,

It follows from the way in which the child is made, and from constitution and appeal of modern society, that instruction in objects and in phenomena will at one time or another play a very prominent part in the Modern School. It is, however, clear that mere knowledge of phenomena, our mere ability to understand or to produce objects falls short of the ultimate purpose of a liberal education. Such knowledge and such ability indubitably have…great value in themselves; and they imply such functioning of the senses as promises a rich fund of observation and experience. But in the end, if the Modern School is to be adequate to the need of modern life, this concrete training must produce sheer intellectual power. Abstract thinking has perhaps never before played so important a part in life as in this materialistic and scientific world of ours,—this world of railroads, automobiles, wireless telegraphy, and international relationships. Our problems involve indeed concrete data and present themselves in concrete forms; but, back of the concrete details, lie difficult and involved intellectual processes. Hence the realistic education we propose must eventuate in intellectual power.  Source: Abraham Flexner, “A Modern School,” American Review of Reviews 53 (1916): 465–474.

Bits

Flexner’s day, however, has come and gone (and Dewey’s, too, but Flexner’s vision has truly run it’s course). There is an emergent paradigm for which America’s youth must be educated.  It is my opinion as an educator, however, that they will not receive that essential new pedagogical foundation.  In fact, we are already at least twenty years behind.  If you think that the key to education is still, “Our problems involve indeed concrete data and present themselves in concrete forms; but, back of the concrete details, lie difficult and involved intellectual processes. Hence the realistic education we propose must eventuate in intellectual power,” you haven’t yet switched paradigms, either.

Why such a radical breaking with these giants of American educational history?  Bits. Simply put, the virtual reality created by cyber-bits has dissolved, for all intents and purposes, the structures and pedagogical foundations of American education, of global education, really.  I would submit that we aren’t teaching our children how to live and work in this new reality, and will go so far as to say we don’t for the most part even know how to teach them what they will need to know this afternoon let alone tomorrow or next year.  Flexner’s world dominated by “intellectual power” has evaporated like so many quarks into the quantum foam.

The Building is the Curriculum

It is said art imitates life.  In the same vein, schools imitate reality.  Their architectural design imitates the work place.  Their schedules imitate the daily routine of the nation.  Their curricula imitate, since Flexner and others, America as the urban and financial powerhouse of the world.  That world is crumbling before our eyes at an astonishing speed.

So, I am pondering the question, should we really refurbish and rebuild our schools in the way President Obama envisions?  I support passage of the AJA.  I strongly support students having school buildings that are safe, enhance the learning process, are energy efficient, etc., etc., but will that $30 billion be trying to repair that which can no longer serve these functions in this new paradigm?

Consider that the school building is a teacher, too. As a manifestation of the Flexner paradigm, our schools are far past retirement.  Add the way we teach our teachers, to the degree our teacher education conforms to the Flexner model, we are preparing them exclusively to teach in those outmoded buildings.  They will not know how not to teach in those schools. Teaching in a sparkling new building with the most up-to-date technology money can buy will make no difference in the alternate universe of the emergent digital paradigm.

What if we did the most radical thing imaginable: Tear down all those worn out schools and design new ones to reflect the new paradigm that is ruled by the  bit, the byte, where those who command the power of Virtuality have truly been educated in “A Modern School.”

Hey, Mister, Can You Spare a Job?

Featured

A Post in the “A Modern School” Series

The unemployment situation in the United States is dismal.  Take a look at this graphic published in the New York Times September 17, 2011:

Poverty and Unemployment in the United States. Graphic Courtesy The New York Times

To my way of thinking it is incomprehensible that the human suffering caused by this economic nightmare would be considered acceptable by a single individual in Congress, but that indeed appears to be the case.  My motivation for writing this post is, however, not to slam either party for the abdication of their constitutionally sworn sacred trust to govern (although I admit I just did that very thing).

Instead, I want to look at an emerging storm that is the consequence of the situation.  As each month passes, for those who are out of work there is an assumed degradation of their skills, their ability to be “shovel ready” the moment they get that call to show up on Monday for work at their new job.

The impact of this Great Recession, as some call it, is multifaceted. Yes, the facet we hear most about  is the economic impact.  Another facet, however, continues to grow and become increasingly important: how do we reeducate the fourteen million out-of-work individuals whose job skills are either rusty or their job has disappeared altogether?

I suggested in my previous post, “A Modern School” that not only are American schools not prepared for the emerging age of Virtuality in terms of the way we construct our buildings, we are equally unprepared in the way we educate our teachers.

Add to this growing storm fourteen million adults whose job skills are degrading at an incredible rate as they sit idle, who will not just need retooling for the last place they worked, but will need comprehensive educational transformation, something we are not prepared to provide in any meaningful way, and we are in a huge amount of trouble.

Some will say, well, that’s what the community colleges are for.  The answer to that is yes and no.  Community colleges are an invaluable resource for a wide spectrum of jobs, but their ability to meet this demand is limited.  By their very nature they are institutions that are tied to their local constituents and serve often very specific missions within the community where they are located.

It is also reasonable to assume that the network of community colleges cannot absorb even half of the currently long-term unemployed.  Like the public schools, they do not have the resources, faculty, or staff, to admit numbers of that magnitude, let alone be radically restructured, themselves, for teaching these adults how to successfully work in the age of Virtuality.  Even if it were possible to for half the unemployed, 7 million!, to get the financing to enter community colleges, the schools simply could not accept anything close to that number.

America’s education crisis, let’s just be honest and call it what it is, is made far worse by this unemployment disaster, amounting to another sucker punch to the recovery.  I have little confidence that the current political atmosphere has any capacity whatsoever to either comprehend or take the action needed to reverse this rush toward the waterfall of educational disaster.

The great tragedy is that we have in every state the university and college education scholars fully capable of not only figuring out what we need to do, and along with the other professionals working in the schools themselves, equally prepared and willing to do it.  Will they be given the green light?  I’ll keep posting on this topic but I’m not holding my breath.

America the Entertained

Featured

We Americans are undergoing a cultural transformation. I know in many respects that is hardly news. What I’ve been observing though is a confluence of streams of those changes in ways that suggest they are picking up speed, not unlike several rain-swollen rivers coming together to create a massive flood as it works its way down-stream.

It’s difficult to characterize all the subtleties of this growing torrent, but for purposes of this post I’m going to focus on three of these streams in the context of our national demand for endless entertainment. I’ll leave the non-entertaining analysis to the sociologists.

Let’s start with politics, specifically the debates by the Republican presidential candidates.  It seems to me the behavior we have observed not only by the candidates, but the very format and “rules” for these televised events is no longer a forum in any classical sense for a debate, that is, a discussion of genuine public policy positions the candidates hold on the important issues facing the nation. Instead, they have been converted into political theater, orchestrated bash and trash sessions analogous to two teams scrambling for a fumbled football, the referee-pundits at the opposite end of the field, commenting on what they think they observe eighty yards away.

The result takes little effort to parse. Read more…

The Nuclear Club Nobody Wants to Join

Featured

For Video Credits, Click on the YouTube Link.

When I was born three nations had nuclear weapons: The United States, Great Britain and the Soviet Union.  By the time I graduated from high school, that group of three had grown to only five, with the addition of France and the People’s Republic of China.  Since that time only four more nations have been added to that list, India, Pakistan, North Korea and (despite on-going denials) Israel.  Currently, through the NATO nuclear weapons sharing program, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Turkey have U.S. nukes in their possession. None of these five countries however has the capability to build their own atomic weapons.

Building an atomic bomb is not easy.  In fact, it’s beyond really hard.  Most people think that is preferable.  Very preferable.  Except there are, of course, those who want one so bad, those meaning in this case, a country, they will go to any length to manufacture their own.

For years, we have worried about North Korea and its psychotic leadership, first in what appears to be a case of intra-genocide by starvation of the entire nation, with the notable exception of those in power, to spare no expense to build their nuke, and second, now they have it, the fact they only need to toss it over the DMZ and a substantial percentage of the South Korean population is annihilated.

To date, they have been contained, probably due to the North Korean autocrats needing to keep enough of the citizenry alive so as to provide the labor for their military and their personal extravagances, so the only bargaining chip they have with the world is to not act on their sabre-rattling rhetoric to procure enough essential supplies of food and oil to maintain their horrendous status quo.  It also is relevant that another source of their restraint, to date, is having the Great Chinese Fire Dragon on their northern border that could annihilate the entire country with their nuclear arsenal should the Kim boys misstep.

Actually, the Chinese know they wouldn’t even have to use any of their nuclear weapons. Simply amassing a few million Red Army soldiers on the line between the two countries would send a message even the highly deluded Despot in Pyongyang would understand.  Well, maybe.

Here’s my question: For how much longer will the United States be the only nation ever to use a nuclear weapon in an act of war continue?  Read More…

.