commentary on the passing parade

Agree? Disagree? Tell me

My Other Blog

 
WHAT TWO BOOKS MIGHT TELL US

If you sometimes wonder -and I’m sure you do - how some idiots ever get elected to public office - and worse - get re-elected to public office, you might find a clue to the answer in the current New York Times Best Seller List. There you will find an affirmation of Lincoln’s commentary on fooling people because once again, the con artist formally and currently known as Kevin Trudeau, is on the list with his latest scam. You remember the first one . The book about "Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You To Know About." "They" of course being everyone in the medical profession from pharmaceutical companies down to your local ambulance driver, who don’t want you to know that you can cure anything from ingrown toenails to every possible kind of cancer with "natural" cures, because it would put them out of business with their unnatural medications and operations and therapies.. And enough people ran to their bookstores to get this miracle revelation on the New York Times Best Seller List. I wrote about it here two years ago - on August 24, 2005.

Now Mr. Trudeau is back with another revelation about the vast medical profession conspiracy that is preying on millions of us desperately trying to reduce our avoirdupois. There is of course a weight loss "cure" that the conspirators have gone to great lengths to keep hidden from us - but intrepid Kevin has pierced their defenses, stripped away the clouds of secrecy and revealed all in his new, best selling tome - "The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don’t Want You To Know About!"

I have to admit that I haven’t read either book. I base my assertions that they are scams on what I’ve read about Mr. Trudeau, some of which I mentioned in my August 24, 2005 comments. And also, of course, common sense. But based on the number of these scam books that he’s been able to sell, I would imagine that he’s tapped into two thirds of Mr. Lincoln’s description of "the people." And I don’t doubt that he’s working hard on trying to get to the level of fooling all of the people all of the time. Probably with a book about "The Magic Gasoline Pill "They" Don’t Want You To Know About." You fill up your tank with tap water and just drop in a pill. One pill for each full tank.

So what do the sales figures for this latest scam tell us about people who shell out their hard earned dollars to fill Mr. Trudeau’s coffers? Could they be the same people who respond to offers from Nigeria to share millions of dollars with you - if you will only give them some information about your bank accounts? So that they can deposit the millions of course. And/or - could they be the kind of people who believed that John McCain fathered a black baby with a prostitute and so voted for George Bush - or believed that Senator Max Cleland, of Georgia a decorated veteran and triple amputee "broke his oath to defend and protect the Constitution" and so voted to replace him with Saxby Shambliss?

You have to wonder about the mental capabilities of people who are gullible enough to shell out money for a road map to a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow - and you have to hope that they are among the less than half of eligible voters who never vote. But considering the outcome of the 2000 South Carolina Republican Presidential primary and the Georgia election for the US Senate in 2002, it doesn’t seem likely. And that’s damned scary.

Another book whose sales figures might tell us something about our fellow citizens isn’t on any best seller list - mainly because it isn’t available yet. But from all the talk about its content, it likely will be a hot item.

Last year, two academicians created quite a stir with an article published in the London Review of Books - the theme of which was that the Israeli Lobby didn’t just exert influence on American foreign policy - it managed to influence it negatively - to cause the United States to conduct its foreign policy in a manner that was not in its best interests!! ! Now the authors - University of Chicago professor John J. Mearsheimer an Harvard professor Stephen M. Walt, have expanded the effort to produce a book sized condemnation of this evil influence.

As with the original article, the impending appearance of the book is causing angry reaction from supporters of Israel, but my interest - in the context of this particular blog entry - is who will shell out the necessary bucks to buy a copy of "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy"? I suppose there will be some supporters of Israel - including members of AIPAC (the evil lobby itself) - who will be willing to spend a buck or two to see what might have been added to the original U.S. academic version of "World Rulers By Proxy" - about which I wrote here on October 23, 2003.

O.K. My 10/23/03 piece was a tongue-in-cheek commentary on a speech by retiring Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who actually was asserting that ancient anti- Semitic canard about Jews ruling the world. Some job they’ve done with their power - letting themselves get slaughtered by the millions and then setting up a tiny sliver of a country that is under permanent siege. Of course, maybe that’s why they need to exert all this influence on U.S. foreign policy - because they’ve done such a lousy job of ruling the world and that little country needs a lot of help.

I’m not saying that Mearsheimer and Walt’s book is comparable to the rantings of Mahathir Mohamad, but thematically, the two are close - both attributing the ability of Jews - and, in the Israel Lobby case, supporters of Israel - to exert extraordinary influence on others. Influence so strong that it causes those being influenced to act in a manner that is actually harmful to them. Mearsheimer and Walt may not have consciously drawn upon such historical beliefs and accusations, but they seem to have managed to re-state them in a supposedly scholarly analysis of American foreign policy.

So who will buy this book and what will it tell us about them? There will be the obligatory library purchases of course. And the few curious Jews and evangelical Christian supporters of Israel who might want to see what has been added to the original article. But beyond them - whom? I suspect it will be Americans who - silently or vocally - agree with at least some part of the book’s premise. Maybe that we give far too much financial support to Israel. Many of those people think if we reduced or cut off aid to Israel, they would actually have more money in their pockets. You’ll probably find their names on those Nigerian lists. Others believe that less support of Israel - much less - would make for a more peaceful Middle East - and perhaps reduce the threat of terrorist acts by Islamic extremists. Most of them are probably on those Nigerian lists too.

I wouldn’t go so far as to label anyone who rushes out to by this book as being anti-Semitic. But I would suspect that overt and covert anti-Semites will be among the buyers and that others who would tell you that their displeasure with Israel and with our support of the Jewish state has nothing to do with anti-Semitism - have a tinge of that sick bias buried deep inside their psyche - perhaps even without them being aware of it.

As with the buyers of Mr. Trudeau’s scam books, you have to wonder if those who perhaps will make "The Israel Lobby" a best seller are among the less than half of eligible voters who go to the polls - or the majority who don’t. But in this case, it probably won’t matter. Echoing the assertions of Mearsheimer and Walt when you’re running for office isn’t likely to get you elected - and if you’re an incumbent, it could get you un-elected!!

So I guess there is an "Israeli/Jewish influence" in American politics after all. People who band together to try to keep Israel bashers out of Congress and who have had some successes with such efforts. Which I consider a good thing. I just wish supporters of John McCain in 2000 and Max Cleland in 2002 would have had the same measure of success. If "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" doesn’t become a best seller, maybe Mearsheimer and Walt can turn their attention to those two races and explain what evil influences were at work there to the detriment of the United States.
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/30/2007 08:05:00 PM

 
VICK’S DOG DAY AFTERNOON

I hadn’t planned to record anything about Michael Vick. As a lover of dogs, his disgusting behavior sickened me beyond belief - as does any similar story that surfaces - and far too many have surfaced in recent times. Apparently, the alleged "sport" of dog fighting is alive and well in the Chicago area - as is cock fighting. To my mind, people who derive pleasure out of seeing animals tear each other to pieces are littler more than sub-humanoids - not worthy of membership in the human race. I look at them and don’t recognize them as members of the species to which I belong.

But I feel compelled to say something about Michael Vick because, incredibly, people are coming to his defense. Yesterday I heard a so called "progressive" radio talk show host say that Vick shouldn’t be judged so harshly because of the influence of his background. He was raised in the inner city. He had a rough childhood. Dog fighting wasn’t frowned on where he grew up. You can’t compare the behavior of someone who was raised in the projects with someone raised in an affluent suburb. And on and on ad nauseum.

New York Knicks guard Stephon Marbury, doesn’t think it’s a big deal. People hunt and shoot deer, he says. Dog fighting is like that - just a sport - albeit a behind closed doors "sport." Yeah Stephon. We shoot deer - and if they don’t fall down in a manner that pleases us, we either hang them or electrocute them as punishment.

The Atlanta NAACP "regrets" that Vick entered into a plea bargain. They wanted him to beat the rap. They says that he is "being persecuted" - more so than he would have been had he killed a human - and that above all he is "redeemable." (Read, he should be allowed to get back to playing football for millions of dollars as soon as possible)

It is truly astonishing that any civilized person could offer any kind of defense for what Vick did. It wasn’t just that he was involved in the horror that is described as "dog fighting" - but when dogs didn’t "perform" to Vick’s and his fellow sub-humanoid’s satisfaction - they were punished by being tortured to death - by hanging or electrocution or by other inhumane methods that we may never know about.

If there are any crimes that are worse than murder - they are the crimes committed against those who have no ability to defend themselves - who are totally at the mercy of adult humanoids. And those are crimes committed against children and against helpless animals. I make no distinction between the two. Torturing a helpless animal to death is as evil an act as torturing a human child to death. Vick is an adult human and a multi- millionaire. He doesn’t live in a ghetto surrounded by poverty and violence. There are no pressures on him to engage in acts of violence against helpless animals. There can be no defense for what he has done - and he deserves whatever jail sentence he gets.

Yesterday, I heard people praise Vick for his words of contrition following the entry of his guilty plea. "He spoke from the heart" I heard people say. "He wasn’t reading from a prepared statement." Maybe it would have been better if he had been. I have no doubt his lawyer either coached him or urged him to express remorse after the court appearance. After all, the judge isn’t bound by any plea agreement and made that clear to Vick. He could get the maximum of five years. The sincerity of his apologies and expressions of remorse are factors that the judge will likely consider in deciding on a sentence - and I have no doubt that Vick was made well aware of this. And I’m sure he was doing his best to sound as remorseful and as sincere as he could as he delivered his "from the heart" statement.

But as I said, I think he would have been better off had his lawyers prepared something for him to read - because what he supposedly ad-libbed is now available to be read and analyzed and re-listened to - and to me it reveals a total lack of understanding and acknowledgment of the horror of his behavior. He apologizes to "all the young kids out there" for "my immature acts" "And, you know", he says, "what I did was very immature so that means I need to grow up." Right Michael. Torturing dogs to death isn’t malevolent and obscene. It isn’t diabolic and depraved. It isn’t sickeningly evil. It’s "immature." And then he tells us that what he did was a "mistake!!" "I feel like we all make mistakes" he said. "It's just I made a mistake in using bad judgment and making bad decisions. And you know, those things, you know, just can't happen."

So laughing and cheering as dogs tear each other to pieces is "immature’ and hanging or electrocuting them if they don’t tear each other to pieces with sufficient viciousness is a "mistake" and "bad judgment." But then "we all make mistakes" don’t we?

And of course, on his way to the big house, he has "found Jesus." If you’re looking for Jesus, the best place to look is inside the nation’s penitentiaries, because that’s where so many of our murderers and rapists who reside there - particularly those who have a chance at and are seeking parole - have been able to "find" him. I think there might have been a glimmer of a possibility that there was some sincerity in his words of remorse -that he was actually sorry for what he did and not that he had been caught - if he hadn’t thrown in the "found Jesus" bit.

What I would suggest as appropriate punishment for Vick isn’t legal but it involves at least two pounds of calf’s liver, eight or nine dogs who haven’t eaten for a week, his presence - and all those ingredients in a small, confined space.

And oh yes - permanent suspension from the National Football League.
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/28/2007 03:26:00 PM

 
WHEN YOU’RE IN YOUR NINETIES AND YOUR NAZI PAST CATCHES UP WITH YOU - WHAT SHOULD BE YOUR PUNISHMENT?

This not a subject that I ever thought I would be writing about.

There are some moments of history that we should never forget - and there are some despotic acts that should never be forgiven. Those are words that describe one of the great horrors of history - the Holocaust - the deliberate slaughter of six million European Jews. We should never forget that it happened and we should never forgive those who were responsible and who took part in the slaughter. There should be no statute of limitations for murder.

But can you assign a number to "no limitation?" The Holocaust began in the thirties and ended when World War 11 ended - 62 years ago - how long is that - two generations? Yet participants in the Holocaust are still being found, prosecuted and deported from the United States. One has to wonder why it would take so long to track down ex-Nazis or Nazi collaborators or anyone who played an active role at the concentration camps where the slaughter took place. Yet, since the Nuremberg Trials in the late forties, efforts to bring war criminals to justice has proceeded at a snail’s pace - and because of that, as the occasional ex camp guard is unmasked, we find that they are doddering old men - some not totally sure of who they were and what they might have done. And so it begs the question - should we still be looking for them and deporting them to their countries of origin? What are we gaining when we find one and press for and succeed at deporting them?

I lost some distant relatives in the Holocaust. They were people I never knew but got to know in a sense through one or two who survived and were tracked down by my brother. So in some small way, aside from the fact that I am of Jewish heritage, I have something of a personal stake in the business of seeking justice for the long dead victims.

And then I pick up my paper and read about the latest criminal to be uncovered - Vladas Zajanckauskas - a Massachusetts man who belonged to a Nazi unit that helped liquidate the Warsaw ghetto.

He was someone who allegedly took part in preventing Jews from escaping from the Warsaw Ghetto during a period of time from April to May in 1943. He is alleged to have helped guard a transit square where Jews were waiting to be transported to labor and concentration camps and to have conducted house to house searches for Jews who were hiding and to have shot Jews who were captured.

If all of that is true - a rotten son-of-a-bitch who should have been hung, drawn and quartered. The Federal Immigration Judge in the case agreed - though he didn’t use that kind of language. But he did order the criminal’s deportation -back to his native Lithuania. It won’t happen right away. Though he has already been stripped of his US citizenship, Zajanckauskas has the right to appeal the decision and that could delay his deportation by a year or two - maybe longer. By which time he will be how old? 93? 94? 95? Or dead.

The reports on the case put his present age at either 91 or 92. In either case an old man.. An old man who very likely committed despicable acts six decades ago - acts for which he probably couldn’t or wouldn’t be prosecuted in Lithuania - they were after all acts committed during a time of war and under military orders.

But people like Zajanckauskas were barred from entering the United States and becoming US citizens - if we knew about them. Zajanckauskas lied about his background and so was able to come here, gain citizenship and - from all the reports - live a pretty decent life. But now he’s been found and we want to kick him out - and here I am - a Jew who lost relatives in the Holocaust - wondering if we are really gaining anything other than symbolism by doing it.

Eli M. Rosenbaum, who runs the Justice Department office that has been tracking Nazi war criminals in the United States since 1979, said the deportation "sends the message loud and clear that anyone who dares take part in the perpetration of crimes against humanity will be pursued, however long it takes, even if that means pursuing him into old age."

In theory, I agree with him . No one who was involved in prosecuting the Holocaust at any level should ever feel beyond the reach of justice. But you have to wonder - when you find someone who has been hiding his past for decades and is as old as Zajanckauskas - if it’s really worth going all the way. He has children, grandchildren and great grandchildren who are American citizens and certainly had no connection to his evil acts. Deporting him would be as much a punishment for his family as it would be for him.

I know he has denied the charges against him, claiming that he was first imprisoned by the Germans, then was conscripted into the German army, spent his time working in the canteen at the Trawniki camp in occupied Poland and never even went to Warsaw. He’s probably lying, but I haven’t read anything about him spending his life here as a bigot and an anti-Semite and teaching such things to his children . Maybe he tried to atone for his crimes.

I don’t know the answer to these kinds of situations. I support and subscribe to the concept of never forgetting. That’s the least that the victims deserve. But when we get this far beyond the acts and the perpetrators that we uncover are as old as this one - I have to wonder if those long dead - maybe at his hands - would want to extract vengeance in this manner.
__________________________________

In case you thought I was being too harsh on the Chicago Tribune yesterday viz a viz their attitude toward convicted former Governor George Ryan - take a look at the cartoon on the editorial page today. I can’t link to it because they don’t include cartoons in their online edition, but here’s a brief description. It’s a caricature of Ryan , sitting in a witness box and saying to a frustrated judge " And a list of acceptable prisons .. and here are some sketches of my prison uniform (the cape is optional) and a menu and the type of mattress and a wake up call for around 9 a.m. and a mint on my pillow" and it fades off into unreadable print.

But the message is clear. The convicted felon is exhibiting hubris.

What kind of journalism would you call that? Do you think it might have a color attached to it?
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/24/2007 04:27:00 PM

 
GEORGE RYAN IS HEADED FOR JAIL -
And it seems the Chicago Tribune can’t wait to celebrate…..

I am not a friend of former Illinois Governor and now convicted felon George Ryan. I’ve never met him. My only tenuous connection to him is that I once voted for him for public office. But I must say that I feel more than just a tinge of sympathy for him today.

Yesterday, a three judge appeals panel upheld his conviction by a two to one vote but allowed him to stay free on bond while his lawyers pursue further appeals. What arouses my sympathy is something close to gloating in the newspaper that I read daily - The Chicago Tribune. Yesterday, the Tribune stockholders voted overwhelmingly to approve its sale to real estate mogul Sam Zell Maybe under Zell’s influence, the paper and its columnists will be more circumspect in future reporting on criminal cases.

The "gloating" over the appeals panel decision was divided between today’s lead editorial, which refers repeatedly to Ryan’s "hubris"- and a piece by John Kass, who convicted Ryan in his column before his trial ever started.. Not surprisingly, his column today bears the headline Clout trumps kids again in Ryan Case. I’m not sure how confirming Ryan's conviction can be considered an act of "clout" - but the "kids" that Kass refers to are those of the Willis family who died in an accident involving a driver who had obtained a commercial driving license illegally while Ryan was Secretary of State. The accident was caused by something falling off the rear of the illegal driver’s truck - with which the Willis vehicle collided, killing six children. The connection to Ryan was that employees of the Motor Vehicle Department - under his control - were issuing licenses that shouldn’t have been issued in return for cash bribes. The buck stopped at Ryan’s door as it well should have.

But when Ryan went on trial for corruption and other charges during his term as Governor, column after Kass column talked about the case as though he was on trial for the deaths of those children. Back on April 18, 2006 , I asked the question "WAS THERE A THIRTEENTH JUROR AT THE RYAN TRIAL? And here - sixteen months later, it makes sense to ask the same question again.

I’m not too concerned with the details of Ryan’s alleged crimes I didn’t follow the trial that closely, so I don’t really know all the fine details. I do know, from news reports and other sources, that Ryan didn’t get rich doing illegal things as Governor. There were no shoe boxes full of cash found in his office or home. (Old time Illinoisans will recognize that reference). No one raked in millions doing business with Ryan. There was undoubtedly a lot of quid pro quo, but I would imagine that is par for the course in most state governments and only becomes criminal when someone like Patrick Fitzgerald decides to prosecute.

What I am concerned about is not so much whether or not Ryan was guilty of criminal acts - but the fairness of the trial that convicted him - or the fairness of any criminal trial for that matter. In Ryan’s case, I thought an appeal of his conviction to reasonable men and women would be a slam dunk. Not to be absolved of all guilt - but to be given a chance at a second trial. I thought Ryan was a dead duck from the moment when the judge in the case, Rebecca Pallmeyer, denied him the opportunity to be tried alone. When a jury files into court and sees two people at the defense table joined at the hip like a pair of yoked oxen - as were Ryan and codefendant Larry Warner, there almost has to be an initial assumption of guilt - and it doesn’t get any better for codefendants at a trial when there are separate lawyers giving different opening and closing defense speeches and when the defenses of the codefendants contradict each other as the trial unfolds. . That denial of an opportunity to be tried alone was, in my mind, sufficient reason by itself to grant a new trial. As I wrote here on May 15, 2007, even people who are accused of acting together in committing mass murder are given the opportunity to be tried individually. Added to the shenanigans that went on with the Ryan jury, I don’t know how the majority in the appeals decision could have said anything quite as ridiculous as "the trial may not have been picture perfect" but that "the district court handled most problems that arose in an acceptable manner, and that whatever error remained was harmless."

It isn’t likely that Ryan will get the new trial that he deserves. More judges than not tend to think the way that the majority of the three judge panel look at appeals. They ignore the obvious screw-ups of a case that leap out at we non-legal but practical thinking lay people - and concentrate on whether or not the judge acted within what they consider to be appropriate legal parameters. Even though the two judge majority in this case said that the evidence was "overwhelming" - all too frequently appeals are brushed aside for maniacal technical reasons, making sense to no one but an appeals judge. Irrefutable evidence of innocence but some silly document was filed too late. Sorry. Off with his head!!

When Ryan finally does report to a Federal prison, I have no doubt that John Kass will write a gloating column and will likely include a reference to the Willis children - as though their family was somehow being accorded "justice" by Ryan’s imprisonment. I will consider that a sad day for justice and the rule of law as most of us would like to see it applied - and an even sadder day for the state of opinion journalism in this country
_____________________________________

Biased BBC

Speaking of the state of journalism gone awry, I wrote a piece here on March 1, 2007 entitled "Searching For News Accuracy" - pointing out that sometimes it’s hard to find in the conventional media. It certainly seems to be the case with the venerable BBC - an organization that I watched and listened to as I grew up in England. I still look to the BBC for accurate and reasonably unbiased international news that isn’t reported by other media - or at least not in as much depth - with one exception - and that is Israel and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

As an example, here is a BBC report from Gaza - the first since their kidnapped correspondent Alan Johnston was released by Hamas. Pay attention to the language and the selection of pictures - and then perhaps come to an understanding of why the BBC has spent close to $400,000 in legal fees in an effort to suppress an internal report on the organization’s coverage of the Middle East.

What do you think? Would John Kass be comfortable working for the BBC if he and Sam Zell don’t hit it off?
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/22/2007 02:47:00 PM

 
TELLING IT LIKE IT IS

Someone sent me an e-mail about the clash between Michigan State University professor Indrek Wichman and the University’s Muslim Students Association that took place last year , asking me to send it on - to spread the word so to speak. This I may or may not do, but I am certainly inspired to comment here on the affair. The e-mail that professor Wichman sent to a member of the Muslim association can be found all over the Internet - but if you haven’t read it - here it is for your convenience.

It was inspired by the Muslim students’ protest of the Danish cartoons that portrayed the prophet Mohammed as a terrorist. - which they called "hate speech." This bugged professor Wichman and he sent off the following e-mail:

Dear Moslem(sic) Association:

As a professor of Mechanical Engineering here at MSU I intend to protest your protest.

I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey ), burnings of Christian churches, the continue persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt , the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women (called "whores" in your culture)- the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France .

This is what offends me, a soft-spoken person and academic, and many, many of my colleagues.

I counsel you dissatisfied, aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave- trading Moslems to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile "protests." If you do not like the values of the West - see the 1st Amendment - you are free to leave. I hope for God's sake that most of you choose that option. Please return to your ancestral homelands and build them up yourselves instead of troubling Americans.

Cordially,

Indrek Wichman

Professor of Mechanical Engineering

The Muslim Students Association responded by asking for the professor to be reprimanded and for the university to impose mandatory "diversity training" for faculty - and for the creation of a seminar on hate and discrimination for freshmen students.

So far, the University has not taken up the student association’s demands, saying that the e-mail was private and they have no intention of publicly criticizing professor Wichman.

For his part, the professor says that had he believed that the e-mail would be made public, he would not have used such strong language. Come on professor - you know better than that. Of course it was going to be made public. But even as a private communication, I would at least have left out the last paragraph. Telling someone to "go back where you came from" when you disagree with them, is hardly the American way. Or at least it didn’t used to be.

But apart from that, I say hurrah for professor Wichman. The world wide Muslim reaction to those Danish cartoons was way beyond the pale - and university students living and studying in the United States should have known better and should have realized that someone would have told them that they were all wet when they decided to join in the protests. But probably no one expected the kind of rebuke that they got from professor Wichman.

Not surprisingly, there are people coming to the defense of the students and calling for Wichman - a tenured professor - to be fired. I came upon one site that compared his situation with that of Ward Churchill, who was fired by the University of Colorado last year for his remarks about the 9/11 attack - calling the victims "little Eichmanns" who’d been targeted as a "technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire." The implication was that if Churchill could be fired for exercising his right of free speech, no matter how offensive,Wichman could be given the same treatment.

I doubt that it will happen. The difference of course is that Churchill was expressing an opinion that was close to incitement to violence whereas Wichman simply rattled off a series of factual events to which he took offense. Churchill deserved to be fired. I wish Northwestern University would follow Colorado’s example and fire Holocaust denier Arthur Butts. But if a tenured professor can be fired - or even reprimanded - for calling attention to irrefutable historical events - we are in big trouble. Let’s hope that the University of Michigan stands firm and doesn’t decide that "political correctness" is the better part of valor - even though they’ve already told Wichman to be careful about what he says in the future so as not to create "a threat to the learning environment."

If there is any problem with what Wichman said, it is that he said it to a bunch of students who - while they might be confused about the meaning of "hate" or "hate speech" - shouldn’t be saddled with the crimes of their extremist fellow religionists - and that seems to be what he was doing when he addressed them as "you dissatisfied, aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave- trading Moslems."

As for the rest of his e-mail, it can’t be said often enough . The extremist activities that he describes should offend every civilized person, including those who practice the Muslim faith - and anyone who thinks someone who talks about it out loud or writes it in an e-mail is in need of "diversity training" needs to hurry up and get an education. Which does not appear to be happening to members of the University of Michigan’s Muslim Students Association.
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/20/2007 03:29:00 PM

 
LOOKING FOR EVIDENCE OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD….

And Finding None

As I anticipated, when I challenge the existence of God, I in turn get challenged and asked why I am so skeptical - actually so non-believing.

It astonishes me that people don’t stop to consider all that weighs against theism with the same enthusiasm with which they embrace it. The answer of course is that people are taught the beliefs of their parents from childhood - and few are willing to challenge those beliefs. Besides, it is far more comfortable to believe than not. It makes you a member of the majority. It makes sense out of chaos. It makes the knowledge of one’s mortality easier to accept. An "after life" instead of oblivion.

Well, let me throw out a few things that I have considered - and that have led me to my conclusions.

First - as I said the other day, the lack of evidence for the existence of a deity. Anecdotal reports of so called eye witnesses to miracles handed down over centuries is not evidence. There is nothing to substantiate what these anecdotal reports claim to have happened and to mean. Ancient writings claiming to describe miraculous events is not evidence. There is nothing evidential about the bible. Philosophical ramblings that conclude that there must be a God is not evidence. The wonder of the universe is not evidence of a God. The question of how "everything" got started is not evidence of a God. The only way that "evidence" can be presented is first to believe that there is a God - and then point to almost anything you want to as "evidence" of "his work."

There are multiple religions practiced on earth and some of these religions claim that only through their belief can a human ascend to heaven after death. Evangelical Christians insist that only by accepting Jesus Christ as one’s "personal savior" - as did Tom Tancredo after 30 years - can one find their way to everlasting life.. But that leaves out a lot of people who have never heard of "Jesus Christ." Does that make any sense? Of course not.

Let’s stick with the Christian faith for a moment. It’s approximately two thousand years old. Jesus allegedly lived approximately two thousand years ago. But mankind is a lot older than that. So what happened to all of the people who lived and died before Jesus Christ was born? Including the Jews who had their own religion for a couple of thousand years before Jesus was born into that faith? They didn’t have him as their "personal savior" before he came along so what happened to them when they died? And what happened to the people who lived before the Jewish faith first arose? And what happens to people today who live and die without ever having heard of Jesus? How could they choose him as their "personal savior" and be "saved?" Would such people be condemned to oblivion or worse instead of "eternal life?" And would that apply to millions of people who do believe in a God but not in the Christian faith and not in Jesus Christ as a personal savior? What kind of God would that be to believe in?

Both the Christian and Muslim faiths maintain that there is an "after life." We’ve heard a lot lately about the Muslim males who believe that by dying in the act of destroying infidels, they not only will immediately enter "paradise" but will be rewarded with the ministrations of 70 virgins. Presumably heavenly virgins whose only job is to wait around in paradise for suicide bombers to arrive. Does that sound logical to you? Likely not if you are a Christian. But as a Christian, you may believe that you will enter heaven after death and be greeted by family members who have gone before you - parents - grandparents. But what if you died as a baby - before you could talk or think? Would your after life persona suddenly become adult and allow you to recognize and communicate with family members who had died before you? And what if you were artificially inseminated - never knowing whose sperm conceived you? Would that knowledge be instantly granted upon death and would your biological male parent be there to greet you with warmth and love?

When you ask these kinds of questions, religion begins to look silly. Believers of course will brush all of this aside and tell you that we are not meant to know or understand all things and that God moves in mysterious ways and other gobbledygook - which is their way of avoiding the lack of evidence for the existence of a deity and all the inventions of religions. You know about them. Heaven. Hell. Limbo Purgatory. Reincarnation. Believers say that they do mot concern themselves with pro and con arguments about that which cannot be understood. They deal only in faith and if one has faith one has no need to deal with logic or deductive argument.

I have no big problem with that if it ended there. But of course it doesn’t. These beliefs fashion societies and create history - and on the whole, in my view, create far more harm than good. There are those who argue that if there was no belief in God - if mankind became convinced that God did not exist - chaos would ensue. Man’s evil inner nature would guide him and the world would be rife with evil acts. After all, with no judgment at the end of days - why not do what comes naturally? Aside from the fact that what I’ve just said pretty much describes the world as it is at the moment, it’s an argument that doesn’t hold water. Our animal brethren do not have a God to fear and worship, yet their world is not in chaos - other than the chaos we create for them. Without a God, we might continue to kill each other in wars and in other ways - but at least it wouldn’t be on behalf of or because of religion. The suicide bombers would disappear overnight.

In a way, I envy believers. I don’t know whether they’ve ever given the subject any serious thought and concluded that the evidence points in the direction of theism - or if they’ve never bothered to question the faith that they’ve been taught and grown up with. Either way, they’re not bugged by the concept of oblivion as I am, as I wrote back on September 29, 2006.

I continue to think about the subject from time to time and if I come to any different conclusions, this is where I’ll record them and where you can read them.
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/16/2007 10:40:00 AM

 
THE MADNESS OF RELIGION
Or Maybe God Exists But He’s Insane

It’s been a while since I wrote about religion - and it’s probably just as well. Anything I write on the subject from my atheistic point of view usually annoys or upsets a few people. But every once in a while I get so damned irritated by what people in the public eye say or do that I want to explode. Since explosion isn’t a good idea for a multitude of reasons, I’ll settle for expressing my thoughts on this page - and if it annoys some who visit here - so be it.

There have been a couple of people in the public eye recently who bugged me with their religious comments.

Over this past weekend, "60 Minutes" aired a re-run of a piece on Yusuf Islam - once known as Cat Stevens. An international music star, Stevens converted to Islam in 1977 and quit performing and recording until last year, when he released a new album. In between , he garnered a reputation as an Islamic extremist when, among other things, he appeared to support the idea of murdering Salmon Rushdie.

What made Stevens give up his life to become a religious Islamic firebrand? According to the story he told "60 Minutes," it all began when he was swimming off the California coast and found himself being pulled out to sea by the tide. He thought he was a goner so he began to pray. ‘Save me God" he said, "and I’ll work for you." At that moment, the way Stevens tells it, a wave came behind him and the tide turned and he was able to get back to shore. I’m no expert on tides but if he was being pulled out to sea, he was probably swimming at low tide and it’s unlikely that it will suddenly "turn" no mater how much you pray. But he got back and he believed that it was because his prayer had been answered and he kept his promise to "work for God" - settling on the Islamic faith.

My initial reaction to this story was one of disbelief at the stupidity of the man - to actually believe that if there is a God - he/she/it is tuned in to individual beings and their pleas which he/she/it will or won’t grant. But then you see the same sort of thing everywhere you look and hardly anyone comments on how ridiculous it all is - at least not publicly. . Boxers getting ready to pound each other into bloody pulps, first kneeling and crossing themselves in their respective corners. Does God bet on the fights or pop in at arenas around the world to decide winners and losers? How about a plane crash where a hundred and fifty people perish and a handful survive? Did God pop in at the last minute and decide that it wasn’t time for that handful to shuffle off this mortal coil? If you hear what some of them say, that’s exactly what happened.

I make these comments to illustrate - if ii isn’t already painfully obvious - that based on such nonsense as a man believing he has survived a brush with death because he uttered a plea that perhaps any of us - even the most avowed atheist might utter in a moment of desperation - the very history of the world and of its human inhabitants can be and has been changed - and not for the better. Not by Yusuf Islam perhaps - but by people like him - by those fanatics who believe as fervently as he believes and conduct their lives accordingly.

The madness of such people is illustrated by the words of Stevens found in the link above. Stevens doesn’t like Jews and doesn’t think Israel should exist. He calls it "Holy Land." But while he believes that God saved him from the Pacific Ocean and steered him to adopt the Islamic faith - other people who have different religious beliefs are not just wrong - but evil!! Again from the above link, Stevens once said

"The Jews would have us believe that God has this bias to this little small tribe in the Middle of the Sinai desert and all the rest of humanity is just rubbish. I mean that this is the basic doctrine of the Jewish religion and that's why it is a most racist religion."

Of course that isn’t the basis of the Jewish faith - but the comment gives you an idea of the madness that is religious faith.

A week before the "60 Minutes" piece, on August 5, the Republican presidential wannabes had one of their "debates" in Iowa moderated by ABC’s George Stephanopoulos and at one point he asked the participants "What is the defining mistake of your life and why?"

Now you know that at least one of the answers was going to refer to religion or to God in some fashion - and there was no disappointment. Romney came close when he said he was mistaken by once being pro choice - and of course now, conveniently, he is one thousand percent "pro life." But it was Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo who stepped up to the plate with the "God" answer, saying

"I have no doubt of what the greatest mistake in my life has been. And that is that it took me probably 30 years before I realized that Jesus Christ is my personal savior."

You would think after 30 years he would have come to a different conclusion. That the mythology that was created about a supposed itinerant Jewish preacher who lived some two thousand years ago - and that blossomed into the vast business that is the Christian church in all of its various components - was just that. Mythology. Not anything that would categorize some long dead individual as one’s "personal savior." Any more that Mohammed is Cat Steven’s "personal savior." But after 30 years, a congressman who would like to be a president, realized that while he might not have a fairy godmother, he did indeed have a "personal savior."

It was a comment that went by without any reaction from Stephanopoulos - and probably one that wasn’t given a second thought by those in the audience or most people watching at home. It is so routine. It is so acceptable. It boggles the mind.

Let’s be rational for a moment. Let’s suppose there is a God. Forget about Mohammed or Jesus Christ. There are people who live and die without ever hearing of either one of them - but if there is a God, that shouldn’t make any difference. Wouldn’t you think that God would want us to be aware of his existence - particularly - as leaders of all religions say -that mankind should live by his "rules" and obey his "laws." But the only time that God allegedly communicated with any of us and told us about his rules and laws was at a time when there was no way to observe, record or verify those communications.

No matter. A few thousand years have passed. We have modern technology. Instant, world wide communication. And the world is in a horrible mess. Particularly when it comes to people having different religious beliefs but all believing that their’s is the true belief - and some willing to kill others just because they believe that way. Wouldn’t you think that God would take over world wide television, radio, and cyberspace and speak to the world’s population simultaneously, in multiple languages, and confirm to us that he/she/it not only exists - but indeed has rules and laws that he/she/it wants us to obey and that there is no such thing as the TRUE belief? I don’t know how it is in other countries, but in the good old USA, the only communications that we hear about are from preachers who get in front of television cameras to tell us that God spoke to them last night about this or that and to ask viewers to send them money so that they could continue to do "God’s work." At least Cat Stevens doesn’t try to con people that way.

It boggles the mind that the vast majority of mankind continues to accept the existence of a "God" without one scintilla of verifiable evidence. And that it doesn’t bother believers that the idea of that "God" and all of the religions that exist to worship and obey him is no more than five of six thousand years old - a fraction of evolutionary history of millions of years - and homo sapien’s history of a hundred thousand odd years.

But even if man didn’t invent "God" and all that devolved from that original invention, wouldn’t you think that since the advent of instant world wide communications - he/she/it would have acted as I suggest above? At least in a rational universe.

Or maybe there’s another answer - that there is a God and he/she/it is not rational. Certifiably insane in fact.

Now that would make sense.
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/14/2007 08:43:00 PM

 
A WEEK OF POLITICAL AND MARKET NUTTINESS

I’m trying very hard not to comment on the series of ongoing presidential wannabes debates - but I just have to say one thing about the August 7 Democratic gathering in Soldier Field in Chicago. The sponsors were the AFL-CIO. The labor movement for Pete’s sake. And the audience was made up of working folk - union members and former union members. And because of who they were and the kind of night it was, they were dressed appropriately - for a hot and humid August night. Earlier in the day, the "heat index" had hit 100. It was one steaming sultry day. By the time the gabfest got underway, the temperature might have dipped under 90 - but you could still cut the humidity with a knife. So how were the candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination dressed? I won’t comment on Hillary. I have no expertise in women’s fashions, but I assume she was wearing what she thought was suitable for an evening outdoor affair. But the men - every last one of them - unlike anyone else that I could spot in the stadium - were dressed like mindless mannequins - suits, button down shirts and ties. Not one shirt sleeved participant. Not even a loosened tie. They looked a bunch of hopefuls waiting in line to apply for an office job. In other words, considering the weather - they looked absolutely ridiculous.

Forget about what any of them said during the "debate." They’ll say it over and over until only one of them is left standing. But the question that comes to my mind about this group is - would I want to vote for someone for president who doesn’t have the brains not to stare at the sun during an eclipse? O.K. it wasn’t quite that bad. But the weather was killing - and these guys were all dressed like they were in an air conditioned restaurants - with rules. Gentlemen must wear jackets and ties.

But as nutty as these "debates" are getting to be, the rush to see which state can pick a front runner is getting even nuttier. A bunch of states are sick of Iowa and New Hampshire influencing the selection of a candidate - way out of proportion to the numbers and diversity of their populations - and so they are now playing early bird poker with each other. "I’ll bet February 19." "Oh yeah? Well I’ll see your February 19 and raise you January 29." " Oh - so you wanna play hardball. O.K. I’ll just see that January 29 raise and raise you a January 14." And so on ad nauseum.

A few weeks ago, on June 6, 2007, I expressed the thought that we needed a new way to pick our presidential candidates. I was talking them about the fact that the best people for the job aren’t the ones who are now running - and that the televised "debates" which of course are not debates at all, are not the vehicles that can reveal which of the candidates is best suited to lead this nation. But now none of this seems to matter as the various states vie with each other to see which can be the first to have a vote count and maybe put a "lock" on a candidate. He/She wins State A and B and becomes unstoppable. Never mind if States A and B are in any way representative of the country as a whole. They provide the 2008 "Big Mo" and that’s all that counts.

I swear - if a single primary backs into 2007, I'm going to resign from society anf flee to the mountains. No phones. No radio. No television. No newspapers. No computer. And wait quietly for doomsday.

It’s crazy. I’m telling you folks - if it ain’t The Year of the Jackpot it’s pretty damned close.

Speaking of which , the explanations for the turbulence in the stock market are reaching new heights with all of the talk of sub prime mortgages and credit crunches etc. Of course, as you might recall, the other day when the market soared, one business reporter/experts was saying it was because investors wanted back in and had confidence in the market despite mortgage worries.

I don’t doubt that people - including investment movers and shakers - are motivated to make certain moves on the basis of all of these things that are being talked about as the reason for volatility - but when the market movements are being reported - the reports are of the Dow - specifically the Dow 30. And I always wonder - when I hear the stories of why there is concern over this or that - at the moment, the problems of the sub prime mortgage market and the diminishing availability of credit - why the stocks of companies like 3M or AT&T or Pfizer or Coca Cola rise or fall as they have been doing now for days.

Yeah, sure. People are defaulting on mortgages they never should have been given. That’s got to make Coke worth less than it was last week.

It's a good thing I don't drink carbonated beverages or I never would have survived the week that was!!
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/10/2007 03:28:00 PM

 
POLITICAL "DEBATES" AND STOCK MARKET MOVEMENTS

I’m coming back to blogging slowly but the frequency of my comments probably will be diminished in the weeks and months ahead - and of course might be interrupted for a long stretch if I re-schedule and am able to go through with my twice postponed back surgery. As the great philosopher once said - oh my aching back - though it’s my legs that hurt the most.

I spent three or four minutes watching each of the "debates" over the weekend. I really have no interest in watching these affairs. I already know who I will vote for in the Illinois primary - and I have my second and third choice lined up should my choice drop out for any reason. I suppose there may be people who are undecided and could be influenced by the one liners the candidates reel off during these gatherings - but if that’s the way they make their decisions on such issues - they shouldn’t be allowed to vote at all. At least not in a rational society.

This whole business of a "blogger convention" puzzles me. I suppose any group of people with mutual interests can get together and organize a convention - but once again I can’t imagine that anything that a "liberal blogger" says on his or her blog is going to influence anyone’s voting decision in the primaries - and for sure not in the general election. But apparently when a recognizable choir assembles itself, the Democratic candidates are more than willing to preach. I guess the most interesting moment of the Democratic gathering was Hillary Clinton’s defense of Lobby money. Lobbyists represent real people she told the audience. Nurses. Social workers. Maybe corporations too - but certainly real people. But the question was about taking money from lobbyists, not listening to them. So why not hear their views and read their position papers and politely decline the proffered check?

This was billed as a "Yearly Kos Convention" - and frankly, I don’t "get" the apparent influence of the "Daily Kos." I’ve looked at the site. It’s busy. Way busy - and difficult to read. One would have to be the most devoted of liberal political blogging junkies to want to go to and read what appears at this site. I read one hard copy newspaper daily and, if I have the time, check one or two newspapers on line. And from time to time I will skim through the "Israpundit" blog because of my interest in Israel. And I check about once a week to see if "Riverbend" has found a home somewhere after leaving Baghdad and has resumed blogging. I’m retired - but I simply don’t have time to read blogs. I barely have time to sit down and contribute to my own!! That’s why I don’t have a long list of links to other blogs on this site. They’d just be for decorative purposes - not for any utilitarian use.

The Republican "debate" - the little that I saw of it - was pretty much like the Democratic effort - sticking to the topics that apparently are of interest to and energize its "base." I know that the country is divided politically - but when you watch these get togethers, the division comes into razor sharp focus. Can you imagine the Democrats arguing about which of them is the most "pro life?" I hung in with the Republicans just long enough to hear their opening salvoes - which were all about who was the most consistent "pro life" candidate. It is absolutely astonishing to me that these people are asking you to support their bid to become the Republican candidate for the presidency based on their alleged personal feelings about such an issue. Are we electing someone to lead us into a better future and to better manage our relations with the rest of the world - or just someone who thinks like we do on some single, narrow minded issue? It boggles the mind.

Something I found much more interesting over the weekend was a newspaper piece on the precipitous drop in the Dow on Friday. What was interesting was that nowhere in the report was any of the usual mantras that I swear are concocted daily by someone working in a tiny room deep in the bowels of the New York Stock Exchange and repeated verbatim by business "reporters" on radio and television - and in newspapers. You know the drill. "Investors were worried/encouraged by earnings reports, mortgage rates, the housing market, interest rates and the price of cheese." Sometimes they are so "worried" or maybe even "angered" by the performance of a particular publicly traded company that they "punish" it by selling their stock in that company at a lesser price than it traded the day before. Of course "punish" might be the right word for such an activity - but not as it’s applied by the business pundits. It’s always seemed more like acts of masochism to me. By the investors.

So why did the market drop like a bomb late in the day on Friday - just as it rose like a rocket today?? The newspaper piece had part of the answer that the business "reports" never mention. Hedge funds. Big time wheeler and dealers who make huge bets on the direction of the market and sometimes are forced to make huge trades when they guess wrong. And programmed trading. Huge buys and sells precipitated by certain market numbers being reached. Up or down. And of course the actions of NYSE Specialists that the late Richard Ney wrote and railed about for years. None of it precipitated by individual "investors" worried or encouraged about anything.

But today, the guy with the dark glasses and the green visor in the NYSE underground room must have been putting out multiple choice "reasons" for the huge upward surge. Driving home a little after five, an "expert" on CBS radio was telling us that in the closing hour of trading, investors "wanted to get back in the market" because they "still had confidence despite mortgage woes." But an hour or so later, Charles Gibson delivered the ABC Television network explanation. "Falling oil and gas prices." That was it. Five words - and on to something completely different. (Sorry John)

I’m no expert on the stock market, but I have as much confidence in the accuracy of the daily explanations for market movement as I have in the art "experts" who purport to be able to tall you which canvas full of streaks and smears is a genuine "Pollock" and which is not . As in which one was done by a monkey or a dog running in circles.
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/06/2007 11:33:00 PM

 
THE ULTIMATE OUTSOURCING

As anyone who pops in here on a regular on semi-regular basis knows, there hasn’t been much commenting on "the passing parade" of late - and I will admit it is because my psyche and my soma have been more concerned with the state of each other than the news of the day. But there were a couple of "news" items that sufficiently piqued my interest to persuade me to return to at least some limited blogging - and perhaps it is because they were at least tangentially concerned - as I fully am - with matters of the psyche and the soma.

The first wasn’t really a news item but a re-run of a "60 Minutes" piece on how the Medicare prescription benefit - "Medicare Part D" became law in 2003. In essence it was an exposé of who or what runs this country - and it isn’t the President or the Congress. It’s money - and those who have it to throw around in sufficient amounts to influence "lawmakers." What was clear in the "60 Minutes" piece - and many representatives were more than willing to affirm - is that the bill was written not by them but by the pharmaceutical lobby.

It didn’t go through without the application of extreme muscle. Even with the power of the pharmaceutical lobby being applied in continuous full court press - there was great resistance. The time for voting was extended again and again - far into the night - until finally - with even the most devoted of C-Span junkies having collapsed in exhaustion - and when alarm clocks were going off for early morning risers around the country - the bill carried by the slimmest of margins.

It was of course far more costly than publicized estimates - a matter fully known by those publicizing the phony estimates - and of course it included a provision disallowing any bargaining with pharmaceutical companies. The Veteran’s Administration can bargain for drug costs. Every other civilized nation on the planet can make the best deals with pharmaceutical companies for their citizens. But the cost to Medicare is what the pharmaceutical companies say it is. And it’s a national disgrace.

But if something like this is the tip of a rotten iceberg - a story out of Pondicherry, India provides a clear picture of the despicable portion below the surface and out of sight. Most of us, even if we’ve never been to or studied that country and its peoples and customs - have a "connection" with India. It’s a "connection" that springs into action when we get on the phone to make a credit card inquiry or to get tech advice - or to ask questions about a variety of topics from a variety of companies that we deal with It’s a connection caused by the American companies that we deal with "outsourcing" the business of providing "customer service" to banks of telephonic advisers sitting at their desks in Mumbai or Bangalore or Delhi. It might have seemed a little strange to American consumers at first, but we’re an adaptable lot and most of us are used to it by now.

Bur whether or not we’ll ever get "used to" a new kind of India outsourcing is another question. Like many countries around the world, the cost of medical care in India is far less than in the United States - and that includes doctors, hospitals, nursing homes, nurses, physical therapists and prescription medications. And Chicago Tribune reporter Laurie Goering, filed a report from Pondicherry, India, of an elderly couple with major medical problems whose son arranged to have them "outsourced" to a nursing home in that city, where all their needs are met and all their medications available at a cost of less than $2,000 a month - leaving them a thousand or so from their combined monthly social security - to do with what they will.

The equivalent care in the United States would have bankrupted them and their son in the blink of an eye. Their combined social security wouldn’t have paid half a month’s basic rent at the cheapest nursing home than could be found here. And that’s just rent!! After their money ran out, the government would have picked up their costs - but they’d be stuck in that cheap nursing home with all of the drawbacks and lack of services that can be expected from such a facility and that we’ve read about so many times.

It’s absolutely amazing to me that things like this can happen and continue to happen while members of congress stifle any and all attempts to have this nation catch up to the rest of the world - and members of the extreme right keep trotting out their mantra about "the left" wanting to "take money" from decent, patriotic, hard working Americans - including the much maligned "rich" to pay for "free medical care" for the rest of us that don’t fall into those noble categories. It’s surreal. The profits generated by the health industries have become so huge that their influence transcends all efforts to deal with issues of the nation’s health care on a rational basis.

We pride ourselves on being an advanced and civilized nation, having the best medical care in the world and the pharmaceutical companies that create the miracle drugs that are used by all of the world’s citizens. Part of that is true, yet almost anyone living in Canada or England or any European country has more access to medical care of all kinds, including nursing homes and those miracle drugs that we create - than any American other than those who can afford the enormous cost of our medical care, either through costly insurance or personal wealth. And it’s simply because medicine is not big business with enormous political influence in those countries - but a benefit of citizenship.

I don’t know whether "outsourcing" our ailing senior citizens to nursing homes in India or similar counties - where all their costs can be covered from their social security payments and have money left over - will become as routine as having people in India answer our calls to what we believe to be the American companies that we deal with every day - or if Laurie Goering’s story is that of an isolated incident. But just the other day, my wife and I were talking about selling our house when she retires - and moving to Canada where our US dollars would buy more and where we would never have to worry about being able to afford needed health care - including - if it came to it - nursing home care. It was a casual, off the cuff exchange - not entirely serious - but the fact that it was mentioned at all speaks volumes of the choices facing so many of us as we grow older and more vulnerable to the ravages of age and to the cost of medical care.

Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised to see our health care system pick up on this phenomenon - hospitals, nursing homes, insurance companies - all those who profit from our ailments - and find ways to make even greater profits by taking over the outsourcing of our aging to India and beyond.

What would you call that? American ingenuity or the words I used to describe how the pharmaceutical lobby buys and controls our so called lawmakers - a national disgrace?
________________________________________

From time to time, as regular readers know, I have been critical of the selection of letters to the editor published in my local paper - the Chicago Tribune. But yesterday, the Tribune published a gem which I am proud to reproduce below - and not just because it was authored by a fellow Smith - but because it provides the perfect answer to the nitwits who keep insisting that the news media are somehow biased because they always emphasize "bad" news. I doubt that any nitwits come to this blog deliberately - but in the event that you are one who arrived here accidentally - read on. If you are able. Sorry - no pictures.

GOOD BAD NEWS

This is in response to the recent letter to the editor "Positive news" (Voice of the people, July 24), by reader Ivy McKee, whose letter ended with the following:

"The media are very influential and inspirational. How come they can't leverage that power to put an end to the violence by focusing on the positive things in life?"

My father told me many years ago (more than 60), "Always be thankful that bad news is news. When good news becomes news, that is bad news."

Georgia Smith
Oak Park

Amen Georgia!!
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/02/2007 01:39:00 PM