I. Heart of Darkness in the 21st Century

Before I proceed with this indictment of the International Criminal Court, here is some necessary background. If you did not read my DU Journal Dear Mr. President: Only YOU Can Stop the World’s Longest, Bloodiest War...And It's NOT Iraq here is your chance.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Important point to take away---the conflict in the Congo is a proxy war being waged by various industrialized nations including the U.S. and France. The spoils are the abundant natural resources of the Congo. Western nations greedy for gold, diamonds, cobalt, copper and the rest could invest in the infrastructure of these African countries in exchange for access to their mineral riches. But hey, it is so much more sporting to 1)demand that African countries cut wages and jobs, 2) ship in lots of arms for the unemployed and underemployed, 3)stir up regional hostilities and then 4) sit back and reap the rewards as the armed citizens attack their neighbors in a never ending war for survival funded by “blood diamonds” and other natural treasures.

When the conflict gets too ugly, the same western powers that control the war look for a convenient scapegoat. They use the power of the UN and the International Criminal Court to indict the war lords they helped create. There is a method to this madness. By pointing their fingers at a handful of (Black) war criminals, they tell the world The Congo is so chaotic. We must intervene for the sake of the children creating a justification for their continued colonial exploitation of the region.

II. How to Spot a War Criminal

Since its inception in 2002, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has indicted some war criminal and given others a free pass. How do they decide whom to indict?

Indicted!

Joseph Kony indicted for “21 counts of war crimes which include murder, cruel treatment of civilians, intentionally directing an attack against a civilian population.” (Wiki).



Not Indicted…

Mikheil Saak'ashvili president of Georgia, whose government started the 2008 war by attacking its own civilians.





http://euobserver.com/9/27008

The difference? Maybe the ICC can’t prosecute the elected leader of a country for crimes committed by his troops. But wait! What about...?

Indicted!

Omar al-Bashir president of the Sudan.






http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_al-Bashi...

Not Indicted….

Ehud Olmert prime minister of Israel during the war against Gaza.





http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...

Hmm. Maybe the difference is a matter of degree.

Darfur…



Gaza…



Yes indeed! The difference is clear.

Who else has been prosecuted by the ICC?

Indicted!

Germain Katanga





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germain_Katan...

It is only right to hold military leaders responsible for the crimes committed by those under their command. Armies exist to protect the civilians of their own country, not to kill them. But how does the ICC explain this?

Not indicted…

Burma’s Military Dictators





http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art_i...

Here is a photo essay about Burma’s war against its own civilians:

http://www.dictatorwatch.org/phshows/schoo...

Some other folks who have not been indicted:

George W. Bush…



….for the 2004 attack on Fallujah which was scheduled after Grand Theft Election 2004 in order to distract the new media from the many election irregularities committed in Ohio. Unlawful weapons including white phosphorus abd depleted uranium were reportedly used against a civilian population. Here is a photo essay:

http://www.thewe.cc/weplanet/news/americas...

More here:



http://www.internationalist.org/fallujarap...



III. Heroes and Villains

Don't get me wrong. The crimes which those whom the ICC has indicted are accused of are horrific. But so are the war crimes which have been committed by many people outside Africa. Why is it a crime when an African does it and "self defense" if an Israeli, Burmese, Georgian or American does it?

Could it be that the ICC does not exist to deter war crimes, but rather is a tool being used in the ongoing effort to stigmatize Africans as violent, criminal, savage in order to justify continued colonial exploitation of the continent? Are the people who wield the weapons really more guilty than the ones who put the weapons in their hands and tell them "Go kill for us"? According to the ICC, those who plan the war crimes are just as guilty as those who commit them. Some will argue that businessmen and corporations which fan the flames of war for their own profit are not as culpable as those who wage war for ideological reasons. However, there is a precedent for criminal trials against businessmen who profit from war crimes.



Indicted!

The Directors of IG Farben



Imagine! Once upon a time plundering was seen as something bad, something criminal. But not anymore. Now, plundering another country is downright patriotic!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IG_Farben_Tri...



http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Africa/B...

Joseph Kabila, whom the west adored, had committed his own share of war crimes.



However, he is one of the "good guys" in the conflict, because...



http://www.afrol.com/html/Countries/DRC/ba...

That made him a real hero in the eyes of the west.

IV. Before We Go Patting Ourselves on the Back...

For taking a stand for the slaughtered innocents in Africa, maybe we should ask ourselves where the guns are coming from and how much profit our country makes from all that spilled blood.

http://gawker.com/5127128/rahm-emanuel-alr...

You know it is coming, right? The last administration this ready to throw fellow Democrats under the bus was that of Georgia peanut farmer and nuclear engineer turned president Jimmy Carter--who felt that he owed no one in his own party anything. Carter paid for his indifference to his party by almost losing his own Party nomination (to Ted Kennedy) and then going on to lose his re-election.



http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/0...

Now, officially speaking, Rahm is 100% against Democrats criticizing other Democrats. When the Democrats being criticized are Obama and his corporate Dem buddies.



http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-c... /

On the other hand, if Democrats dare to thwart any of Obama/Emanuel's ambitions--like a sharp move to the political right aka escalating the war in Afghanistan to appease the Military Industrial Complex---they are immediately tossed under the bus. Here is what happened to liberal Congressional Dems who did not want to fund Obama's War.



http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_gr...

What's that sound? Screech! "Gah!" Squish! Why, that is the sound of another Democrat being thrown under the bus by Rahm Emanuel.

He has done it to Howard Dean, the true heart and soul of the Democratic left (Obama only played at being a leftist in order to win the nomination from Hillary in a campaign remarkably similar to that of Carter in 1976).



http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/12/18/r... /

OMG! Did the White House just throw KO under the bus, too? The man who sold his soul ( or at least compromised his integrity) by declaring the Hillary was bad for not denouncing Geraldine Ferraro (even though she did denounce Ferraro) but who praised Obama for first refusing to denounce his pastor and then later praised him again for changing his mind? The man who aired Obama campaign talking points as if they were real news and not political pr? They are throwing their own media shill under the bus? Pretty short sighted, if you ask me.

And that is my real concern. I don't care if Democrats love each other or not. But they have to work together. Jimmy Carter learned the hard way that if you screw your fellow Democrats, they will screw you in return, where it hurts the most--at re-election, time.

Here are the facts. Massachusetts has the same sorry excuse for universal health care that Obama and the corporate Democrats are trying to shove down our throats. Democrats in that state are not amused by talk of how they must preserve the Dem's 60 vote majority in the Senate so that health insurers nationwide can do to folks in Minnesota and Alabama what they are doing right now in Boston. They were probably hoping that the new Democratic controlled Washington would fix their healthcare mess, not export it to the other 49 states. We all know misery loves company, but misery would rather have affordable health care.

The problem with Coakley is not that she did not try hard enough. Her troubles began when business as usual Democrats in Washington decided to toss the American people under the bus (it is getting pretty crowded under there) by whipping up a nasty concoction that will require us to purchase insurance at rates that health insurers will be allowed to set (and fix among themselves) with no regulation at any level, state or federal. These crafty politicians stuck a cherry on this mess and labeled it "Health Care Reform"--fooling no one.

Massachusetts should be a warning to the White House. In the midterms, Democrats everywhere are going to do what they appear to be doing in that state---staying home. Of course, that might not bother the Democrats that we have in executive branch right now. They seem to care more for the regard of Republicans than members of their own party...like President Jimmy Carter.



http://www.newsweek.com/id/211854

And we all know where throwing fellow Democrats under the bus got Jimmy Carter.

So, do not be surprised if, sometime tomorrow, Emanuel or some other corporate Democratic clone does not blame the dead Senator Ted Kennedy for this election loss---and for the health care reform fuck up in general.

Why did he let himself get brain cancer and die right when we needed him? What a sorry excuse for a Democratic leader!

Oh, by the way, ever wonder what happened to Don Siegelman?



http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-Anothe...

He is under the bus, too. Pretty soon, it will be a fashionable place to be, like Nixon's enemies list.

http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2006/11/...

I. Which Comes First?



http://www.masspsy.com/leading/0506_ne_cov...

We all know that illness and poverty are linked in the United States, but which comes first? Some tell us that poverty is a lifestyle choice (adopted by the “shiftless” and “lazy”). In their world view, poor folks who suffer serious illness are eating the fruits of their (lack of) labor. Since many of the nation’s poor work long, hard hours at low wage jobs, maybe that should read “the fruits of their lack of high paid labor”. In this world view, every citizen, Tyrone and Manuel as well as Clifton and Brad, can become a bank CEO---- if only he chooses to do so.

On the other side of the debate are those who say that illness—especially mental illness---is the cause of poverty. This explanation is also problematic, for it can be used to re-enforce the Puritan belief that we get what we deserve based upon where we stand in God’s favor. Since the all powerful creator decides who will be cursed with schizophrenia and who will enjoy a lifetime of perfect health, the nation’s unhealthy poor are God’s rejects, creatures flawed at their conception and destined for a lifetime of hunger and deprivation.

If your tastes are a little bit more Catholic, you may view the presence of the poor as an opportunity---for you to polish up your halo by casting down table scraps to the starving masses that God has put upon the earth to teach folks charity. You can see this tendency among some self described liberals. I feel for the poor---but I don’t want them living next door to me “The Poor” become a separate race of human being, almost another species. They exist in the same way that Mom, Baseball and Apple Pie exist, as a rarified ideal rather than as people. Charity towards the Poor becomes a luxury---which is often the first thing chopped from state and federal budgets when executives find their profit margins slipping.



http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...


One thing you will notice during this debate----we seldom hear from the folks who have to choose between paying their heating bill and buying food and for whom a mammogram is an impossible dream. For the most part, they are ignored by the press. Many do not have access to the Internet. Their story is told for them. We read books written by people who have helped the Poor. We hear speeches in which the nation’s ills are blamed on Welfare Queens. If poor folks manage to make their voices heard as musicians, artists, writers, they are soon elevated through the socioeconomic ranks---

We have reality TV about prisons, about corporations, about models, but where is our reality show that records the lives of folks who struggle day after day to survive?

II. Walk a Mile in My Shoes

I can think of only one time in the entire history of the United States when people living in poverty have been treated like real Americans.



http://www.wwcd.org/policy/US/newdeal.html...

We all recognize this photo:



It is as much a part of our national identity as this one:



We look at the skinny, prematurely aged woman, and we see ourselves in the frown lines on her brow. We see our own families in the children who cling to her like a tree in a storm. We do not make excuses----she must have had unprotected sex and had those children when she was too young and that is why the whole family lives in poverty---the way we would if confronted by this image:



Once upon a time---for a very brief time---we accepted that ours was a society and economy that produced as many tragic life stories as happy ones. We blamed the system, not the people caught up in that system, and we promised to do something about it---

Until poverty was reduced to an “acceptable” level. And then, we forgot most of those vows we had made. Instead. we started talking about Welfare Queens and about how low levels of unemployment were “bad” for the economy. Because face it, this nation’s corporate fascists gets rich off the suffering of the poor. The presence of poverty as a universal fixture in our country is used to drive down the wages of all workers who are told “Shut your mouth, punch the time clock and do are you are told. Or you will end up like one of them ” . Since no one wanted to become one of them, we started telling ourselves that they were different. They had nothing in common with us, the so called “hard working Americans”. Poverty had a different skin color, it practiced a different religion, it spoke a different langue----

It was Other.

III. Try to Imagine….

That you can see a doctor, because you are poor enough to qualify for care at the county clinic. But, you do not have the ten dollar copay which the clinic’s pharmacy charges per prescription. Therefore, you can not fill the antibiotic prescription which the doctor wrote for you until you get your paycheck next week. By that point, your bladder infection has turned into a kidney infection, so you show up at the local hospital emergency room and are admitted for a life threatening illness. You miss a week of work, putting you and your family further in debt. You are branded a “non compliant” patient, because you did not follow your first doctor’s advice. In other words, it is all your fault.

That your teenaged son is hearing voices that are not really there. They tell him to do things which are dangerous for himself and others. You know that there are medications out there which will turn this stranger back into your dear child----but you do not have two hundred dollars for the initial psychiatric consultation and fifteen dollars a pill for the medication (Abilify) that the doctor will prescribe. The waiting time to see a doctor at the local MHMR, which charges on a sliding scale, is three months, but your son does not have three months. Reluctantly, you follow the advice of your coworkers and turn him over the police for being truant, hoping that the criminal justice system can fill the gaps in our health care system. Congratulations. Your son is now on his way to become a career criminal.

That your birth control pills fail and you get pregnant. Your job does not offer insurance---or maternity leave. If your boss finds out that you are pregnant, you are likely to get fired, which will make it very difficult to support the two kids you are raising as a single mom since your husband moved to another state and has refused to pay child support. You want an abortion, but the closest provider is three hours away. Even though you work for minimum wage, the government will not pay for your procedure---though it will pay for your obstetric care and delivery, no questions asked. Unable to come up with five hundred dollars for the procedure, another hundred dollars for food, hotel and transportation minus the two days wages that you will lose, you miss the deadline for getting the pregnancy terminated. Your boss finds out and you are, indeed, laid off. In your third trimester, you start seeing an obstetrician. Medicaid covers your medical expenses, because the government just loves your unborn child. But the federal assistance you get for your living children will not even pay the rent and grocery bills.

That you are a self employed farmer who can not get health insurance because of a pre-existing condition, high blood pressure. You wake up one morning with your left leg painful and swollen. Your mother died of a blood clot and you know that this is serious. However, you live in the piney woods of East Texas, and the designated indigent hospital for your area is in Galveston, six hour away. You get in a car and drive six hours to get medical care for your deep venous thrombosis. On the way, you see three hospitals, each of which is equipped to give you heparin and Coumadin, but you pass them by. You were taught to pay your own way, and you know that a bill from one of those private hospitals would cost you your family farm. By the time you reach Galveston, that clot has grown bigger. You step out of your car, and the clot breaks loose and heads straight to your lungs. You suffer a cardiopulmonary arrest just outside the emergency room.

That you are the neighbor of the farmer who died of a blood clot after driving six hours for treatment. When your own leg swells up, you decide to go straight to the nearest ER, even though you do not have insurance (pre-existing condition: asthma). You are expecting a bill of a few thousand dollars. Turns out that your emergency room care alone is over ten thousand dollars. The bill for your hospital stay is so high that you have to take out a mortgage on your house and farm, which you own outright. Because of complications from your blood thinners, you are in and out of the hospital for several months, during which time you can not make the money to pay the mortgage. There goes the family farm.

That your father suffered from diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol, which were never diagnosed because he worked in a job that did not supply health insurance. He developed premature coronary artery disease and died at the age of 30 from “indigestion”. Your mom went back to work, at a minimum wage pink collar job. You and your siblings ate a lot of bread and grease, because they were filling and not too expensive. You lived in a really bad neighborhood, because the rents were cheap, so you could not go outside to play and your school cut its physical education program in order to devote more time to training students how to pass standardized tests. College was out of the question. You had to go to work to help support your family. By the time you are in your mid twenties, you are over weight, with high blood pressure, cholesterol and diabetes, but you do not know it, because your job does not supply health insurance. On your thirtieth birthday, you suffer a severe attack of “indigestion”---and, remembering what happened to your dad, you call 911. By the time you reach the hospital, you have already infarcted a huge piece of your left ventricle and you develop congestive heart failure that forces you to quit work. After a couple of years, you qualify for disability and Medicare. By this time, you can barely walk across the room. You will now be able to see doctors and get treatment, which will keep you alive in this invalid condition for many more years.

That your mother died from a stroke when she was in her thirties. No one has ever told you why. Your aunt, with whom you live, has lupus and can not keep a job. Your grandmother died of colon cancer related to her undiagnosed ulcerative colitis. Recently, your neck began to swell up and you have noticed that your heart beats too quickly and you are losing weight. You sign up at the local indigent health clinic and are told that your problems are not emergencies and therefore you will have to wait three months for an appointment. While waiting, you go into thyroid storm and suffer a stroke from your extremely high blood pressure. The emergency room is able to save your life, but you suffer permanent paralysis on your left side and will have to be in a nursing home.

That you retired from your job, which provided insurance, when you were sixty. Since your husband worked for the government and had great insurance that covered the two of you, you were not worried---until he died suddenly of a heart attack. Now, for the first time in your life, you have no health insurance. You cross your fingers and hope that nothing will happen before you turn 65 and can qualify for Medicare. When you notice a breast lump, you decide that it is probably a cyst---you had a benign cyst removed many years ago, when you were still insured. The lump keeps getting larger. Then, your armpit begins to hurt. There are lumps there, too. Still, you wait and hope—until one day, you can not get your breath. And your chest hurts. Thinking this is a heart attack, you rush to the closest emergency room, where you are told that your breast cancer has metastasized to the pericardium, the lining around the heart. You get emergency surgery to free your heart from the constrictive band and your breathing improves. The hospital is able to facilitate your Medicaid application (they do not now want to get stuck with your bill), and now you can see an oncologist for your late stage cancer

That you are always tired. You get eight or nine hours of sleep a night, but you still wake up feeling exhausted. Your blood pressure is through the roof even though you take four different medications---which you are lucky to get for $10 each rather than $100, since you qualify for treatment in a community health center. You wish that you could find a better paying job, one with insurance, but your head hurts all the time and you are too exhausted at the end of the work day to take after hours classes. Your partner tells you that you snore, and someone mentions that could have sleep apnea. You ask your doctor during your next visit and you are told that your clinic does not cover the costs of sleep apnea diagnosis or treatment “because there is not enough money in the budget”. You are given the option of paying for the test yourself----but you would need to put up $800 in order to be tested for something you might not even have. So you put it off---and eventually your high blood pressure causes your kidney’s to fail. Congratulations. You qualify for Medicare, to pay for your dialysis. And you can finally get that sleep study. Too bad you had to lose your kidney’s first.

That your parents were always fighting when you were young. Mostly, they argued about money. Sometimes your dad would beat your mom, after he had been drinking. Your mother drank, too, but in private, after everyone else was asleep. There was never enough money to pay the bills. At least a couple of times each year the lights or phones or water would be turned off. You could never afford the clothes and toys that other kids had. Your teeth are crooked but you can not get braces. You can not play outdoors, because that would cause your asthma to flare up---and there is no money for treatments. One night, your mother calls the cops after a particularly bad beating, and the next day at school you get teased because the neighbors saw the police haul your father away. You hate your mother for being so weak. You hate your dad for being so cruel. You vow that you will not grow up like them. When a boy tells you that he loves you, you sleep with him, though you are only fifteen, because you are so desperate to hear someone those words to you. You get pregnant. You are happy, because now you will have someone---a child---who will love you forever. You have now become a statistic---unmarried women and their children are the face of poverty in this country.


IV. The Invisible Poor

The above vignettes are all based upon true events (though some of the details have been changed to disguise identities). I selected these stories out of many others that I have witnessed in order to make a point. Sometimes illness leads to disability which causes poverty. Sometimes illness leads to huge medical bills that cause poverty. Some hereditary illnesses can cause multi-generational poverty---and poverty, in turn, worsens the multi-generational illness. Mental illness can cause poverty. Poverty can contribute to a host of conditions from depression to drug abuse to delayed diagnosis and treatment of curable diseases. People who live in poverty may not care enough about themselves or their own future to use even available health resources. Poor folks may care about themselves, but find that it is impossible to get the kinds of treatment that other Americans, those lucky enough to work for the government or large employers, enjoy. When you are poor, the safety net often does not kick in until you are permanently disabled---which means permanently poor, too.

So, how will the latest Health Care Reform help the people I describe above? The woman with the kidney infection still will not have enough money for copayments. Since the bill sets no limits on deductibles and other barriers to care, many people will find themselves forced to buy insurance they can not afford to use.

The woman with the schizophrenic son may find that her insurance has a ridiculously low annual limit for psychiatric care. The bill allows the federal government to decide what limits are acceptable, and it does nothing to keep the insurance industry from conspiring to set prices and benefits the same which eliminates consumer choice. Remember, the insurance industry currently is exempted from anti-trust rules.

The woman with the unplanned pregnancy still will not be able to get an abortion. The first man with the blood clot will now have insurance, but it may only cover treatment at a hospital a couple of hours away, so there is a chance he will still code in the parking lot. His neighbor, who will also have insurance, may find that the closest emergency room in not on his plan, and so he may find himself stuck with a big bill, even though he is insured.

The next two people are the success stories of HCR. The woman with Grave’s Disease will be diagnosed promptly and start treatment. Let’s just hope that living in working class poverty does not make it impossible for her to pay her deductible and copayments. The retired widow with breast cancer will probably get life saving treatment---but she may have to drive quite a distance in order get to participating provider hospitals and doctors.

The man with sleep apnea may or may not get timely treatment. His new insurance plan is likely to throw up a bunch of obstacles to keep him from getting that sleep study---like a five to ten thousand dollar deductible---- and there is no guarantee that they will cover CPAP or other treatments even if he is diagnosed. Being tired and sleepy all the time, he may not have the energy to fight his insurer for the care he needs.

The unwed mother still faces a lifetime of poverty, since making birth control easier to afford will not change the underlying problems that lead her to become pregnant.

Though the Democrats may have started out with good intentions, I am afraid that they will end up just like Schwarzenegger in California, making decisions which are politically expedient in the short run while ignoring the real opportunities which we have to improve the lives of all Americans. They will do this, because they believe---and have persuaded a bunch of Americans to believe---that folks living in poverty do not count. They are not heard. They are not seen. They are invisible.

V. Just the Facts

Sadly, we may have seen the best that our elected leaders can offer us in the way of health care reform. In our current political climate, where it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to get elected president, only money talks. If we want to have a seat at the bargaining table, we need to make sure that the one with the most popular support, not the one with the biggest coffer, gets elected.

We all remember “legislation by administrative decree”, right? That is what the Bush-Cheney used to do when they wanted to roll back environmental protections or make torture legal. They did not leave it up to Congress to write the law and the federal courts to interpret the law. They did it all themselves.

The Obama administration recently revealed that it also believes in the power of the executive branch to create the law. I refer to the case in which a federal judge ordered spousal benefits for lesbians. Rather than appealing the ruling the Obama DOJ made its own ruling. It said that the judge was wrong. Period.

Since Obama believes in the expanded powers of the executive branch which Bush-Cheney promoted, I think it is time for him to put those powers to good use.

He can start by enacting health care reform by administrative decree.

I. Expand Medicare to Cover All the Nation’s Chronically Ill

Some of those folks out there with brittle diabetes and unstable angina can not wait until 2014 for health care. Turns out, they do not have to.

There is a bill in Congress that would phase out the two year waiting period that applies to everyone with a medical disability (except end stage renal disease on dialysis and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis aka Lou Gherig’s disease). The bill is H.R. 1708. There is a companion bill in the Senate. The health insurers should love this one, since they will be able to punt all the sick people straight to Medicare. However, there is a loophole in the law which Obama could use to actually provide care to needy people (and not just increase the profit margins of health insurers.)



http://www.nosscr.org/medicarewait.html

Get that? If Kathleen Sebelius says that your diseased coronary arteries are a “life-threatening condition” because you could die from a heart attack tomorrow without medical treatment, then CAD joins ALS and ESD as a Medicare waiting period free condition. COPD, asthma, autoimmune diseases like lupus and all forms of cancer are fatal without proper treatment. Even gallstones could qualify, since the gallbladder could become gangrenous or cause a fatal case of pancreatitis.

So, let’s see the administration lobby for this bill and then use it to provide affordable, comprehensive care to everyone in desperate need of care. Think of all the lives that can be saved before 2014 even gets here.

II. Increase the Number of Federally Funded Community Health Centers

Right now there are 1200 Federally Funded Community Health Centers which treated approximately 7 million uninsured Americans in 2008. Now, this might seem like a drop in the bucket compared to the 40 plus million Americans without insurance, but every little bit helps.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-0...

For those Americans who do not have a “life-threatening” disease, centers like this can make preventive care affordable. That is because these clinics charge a sliding scale fee for their services.

These clinics are authorized by the Public Health Service Act, linked here:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/254b...



The list of services provided is impressive. Be sure to read the above link. Cancer screening, immunizations, family planning services are all included.

Note that grants are available for new clinics at the discretion of the federal government (i.e. Sebelius). I suggest that the federal government increase the capacity of these clinics (and start up some new ones) in order to provide preventive and necessary medical services to folks without insurance who are too broke to pay cash.

III. Spend More of the Stimulus Money on Health Care

As I pointed out in my journal “Books, Not Bombs: How Military Spending Hurts the Economy and Education Spending Helps”

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/...

Education spending gives the best return on your investment if you want to create jobs. Tax breaks and military spending are the worst. Health care and infrastructure are also pretty good at jump starting an economy plagued by unemployment---

And if you use your funds to provide necessary health care services in a time of high uninsured rates (which go hand in hand with high unemployment) you are getting double rewards for your money.

HHS has already jumped on this one with grants such as this:



http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2009pres/09/...

We need more spending like this. Maybe the administration can move around some Pentagon funding “by executive decree.”

IV. Make It Easier (and Safer)For Americans to Order their Drugs From Canada

I was just amazed when I compared the prices of drugs in Canada to the prices in the U.S. Some are four times more expensive here. Some do not have a generic available in this country, but they do in other countries, which saves even more money.

I was also surprised to read that it is absolutely legal for people here to order drugs from Canada, as long they only get 90 days supply at a time and as long as they have a prescription. You can read more about the federal legislation at wiki’s “On Line Pharmacy” page here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_pharma...

Note that Customs still has the right to intercept your medication (though they rarely do so). This may discourage some people from making use of this opportunity to save money. I suggest that the Obama administration stop all seizures of medications from Canada—at all levels, federal, state and local. Just declare it protected, legal international commerce.

V. Start Prosecuting Insurance Companies for Price Fixing and Other Anti-Trust Violations ASAP

There is a problem with this one. Right now, the insurance industry is exempt from anti-trust laws. So, they are able to merge into single behemoths that completely control a wide geographic area. A bill in Congress, introduced by Leahy, would strip the industry of this protection. It is languishing (of course) because insurers hate the legislation. However, if the federal government can force us to buy private insurance, it must have a way to keep the insurers from price gouging---especially since the new “National Insurance Plans” will be exempt from state and local regulation which have been used to check the industry’s greed up until now.

We need to call upon Congress to pass the bill---and Obama to become active in his support of the bill. The insurance industry will not be able to claim (as they so often do) that this law will raise rates. This law can only lower rates and keep them at a reasonable level. It will cut down the amount the feds pay out for premium support, too, which will lower taxes. Without an economic justification to quash the bill, the insurance industry will have to kill it in stealth. Do not let them.

Here is info about HR 3596, The Health Insurance Industry Antitrust Enforcement Act of 2009
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3596...

Passing the bill will be only half (of) the (uphill) battle. Obama’s DOJ will have to enforce the law. They will be reluctant to do so---just look at how aggressively they have prosecuted the banksters. However, since voters will feel the effects almost immediately through reductions in their health care premiums, it will be worth it, politically speaking. Would not it be great to have a choice of insurance carriers again? Would not you feel safer if you knew that you were buying security for your family from a company that did not take your business for granted?

If anyone knows of any other ways that the administration can get a head start on health care reform, please post them. Obama is not powerless. Congress does not control everything. Plenty of stuff gets done in this country through executive agencies. Obama and Sebelius should move heaven and earth to serve the voters---that is the best way to ensure that Obama is not a one term president. When the system has let you down, you want a president who is willing to buck the system.

Here is the one I wish we would see (but probably won't):

VI. Obama Declares War on Preventable Disease. Demands that Congress act fast to authorize special wartime powers for the executive branch

We had a war on poverty once. Why not a war on needless death and suffering?

Those who have followed my political blogs knows that I am often right in my predictions. That is because I pay attention. I know how the folks on the other side operate. If something works once, they try it again. And again. They are conservatives, after all. They prefer the tried and true.

Here is what David Rockefeller and his breed are already planning. I call it “Operation Carter Hands Over Control of the Country to Republicans for 12 Years, Part II”.

First, promise Obama their undying support in the next election---if he dumps the Democratic base. Since any candidate for public office fears the destructive power of the corporate media, President Obama will want to believe them. He will alienate the people whose support he should be shoring up in case 2012 is a tough one. Labor, women, gays, immigrants, the elderly.

Now, what will make 2012 tough? Recession. Unemployment. Tight credit. Who has the most control over the economy? Since Congress and the President will not pass any meaningful jobs legislation, the corporations have pretty much full power. The banksters can afford to sit tight and let the economy flounder. They have hundreds of billions of our dollars in their vaults to tide them over. The oil companies can raise prices. They will blame OPEC, of course. A few key big employers will lay off American workers and send the jobs overseas. Their lackeys in the corporate media will begin to declare that high taxes and the big deficit are to blame. They will suggest that Obama, as a Senator, did not have enough executive experience. They will call for another governor, another Ronald Reagan to save the day. They will anoint…

Romney. He even looks like Reagan. And his state had health care before the rest of the country (by 2012 people will be salivating over the health care that they thought they were buying in 2008 but which still will not have been delivered). Romney will get on TV with his perfect hair and declare that he has the fiscal responsibility it takes to whip this country’s economy back in shape. He will call himself the new Reagan and the new Bill Clinton. Promises of tax cuts will help, too. It is much easier for a candidate to promise tax cuts than it is for a sitting president to deliver them.

The Republicans will further splinter the Democrats by funding another Nader. The corporate media will actually identify an appropriate candidate and tell Republicans that if they send him money, Obama could lose (the way they did back in 2000). They will alienate the independents by engineering a foreign relations debacle---say, for instance, a take over of the US embassy in Pakistan. Bush’s CIA colleagues will be glad to help, if Romney agrees to put Jeb (the “smart one”) on the ticket with him. Obama will not be able to rescue the hostages for fear that the Pakistanis might use their nukes. The Pakistani government will be bribed by David Rockefeller to stall…

Just throw in some e-vote fraud and all Romney will have to do is secure the votes of 47% of the people in a few key states. The rest of the votes will be created for him through the magic of computer tabulation and African-American voter suppression.

If this sounds implausible, recall that the GOP has stolen two elections already using these tactics (and I am not even counting Kissinger’s secret deal with the South Vietnamese in 1968 that helped Nixon beat Humphrey). If it was good enough for Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney, it will be good enough for Romney/Bush. The GOP does not strive to provide the nation with transformative change. They do not care if their playbook is tattered and torn. They will do whatever they saw work the last time. This was the key political weakness of Rove and understanding how the Grand Old Party thinks will be essential if we are to stop the next coup---

But first, Obama needs to start acting a lot more like FDR and a lot less like Jimmy Carter. Carter allowed the press to blame him for the economic disaster bequeathed to him by Ford/Nixon. FDR made sure that everyone knew who the real culprits were.

Obama needs to point his finger at the banksters and at insurance company executives and make sure that the public know exactly who is to blame for our current mess. Otherwise, the press will soon be telling Americans Obama did it! He needs to roll up his shirt sleeves and mingle with the common folk, the way he did back in 2008. He needs to act like he gives a damn. He needs to declare that 2014 is too long for sick Americans to wait for health care and use the power of the administrative branch to open Medicare up to anyone without insurance who has significant medical problems. He needs to slap big penalties on US companies that move jobs overseas—and make sure that the press covers him doing it.

In a time of economic crisis, a Democratic president can not be perceived to be a friend of the rich and powerful, because that makes him an enemy of the people whose votes he needs to get re-elected.



This man was re-elected three times ! He did a lot of things right. There is no reason that Democrats can not act like Republicans and learn from the lessons of history, too.

PS Oh, and watch out for Fitz in Chicago. There is a reason he went on TV to declare the Gov. Good Hair Blago was the worst villain in history since Jack the Ripper. He needed to keep his job in the new administration. Why? What kind of deals will he start cooking with people under indictment to get them to testify against Obama's associates---and maybe even the president himself? There is a reason that Bush Sr. left Linda Tripp behind in the White House. Fitz is Tripp, 2, the new improved model.

Since the beginning of his presidential campaign, Obama supporters have been touchy about comparisons of their man to former president Jimmy Carter. I am about to stir up the hornets’ nest. Again.

A couple of years ago, I wrote about the similarities between Obama 2008 and the Carter campaign of 1976.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Like Obama, over three decades later, Carter turned his relative lack of experience into a positive. He promised a presidential term that would be unlike any that came before. He promised honesty. He promised to represent the people. He promised health care reform and tax reform and human rights---

And when Carter failed to keep his promises, the liberal wing of his party chewed him up and spit him back out for Ronald Reagan to trounce in the 1980 election.

From Newsweek 1979, about the schism between Carter and the liberal Democrats (represented by Ted Kennedy)



The Whitehouse’s response?


http://www.newsweek.com/id/211854

Yeah. Right.

You can read more on the divide between President Jimmy Carter and the liberal Democrats in the article “Four Years Later It’s Jimmy Why?” by Michael Kramer:

http://books.google.com/books?id=V-UCAAAAM...



Kramer then goes on to describe how Carter alienated women (by failing to provide federal funding for abortion), labor (by cutting the minimum wage increase), mayors (for cutting funding to cities) and the poor (for cuts in social and jobs programs).

I bring this up, because those who are only familiar with Carter’s recent humanitarian work may assume that his was a liberal presidency---and that the nation rejected him in favor of Reagan because his politics were too left wing. This is not true. Carter alienated the traditional Democratic base so much that he had trouble securing his own party nomination in 1980. And if a Democratic Presidential candidate does not emerge from his own primary looking like a winner, he is in real trouble, since the corporate media can be counted on to cut him down another couple of notches before November.

Maybe Carter thought that he could take the liberal Democratic base for granted. Maybe he thought that they had no where else to go and so he courted the middle--- the so called independents. Maybe he thought that people would forget what he said in order to get elected.



The base does not forget. The base is organized. It keeps track of what it has done for the candidate and what the candidate delivers in return. If Obama continues to snub gays and women and if he does not keep his promise to labor re: the Employee Free Choice Act, he is going to face some stiff opposition in 2012---

And it will be no one’s fault but his if some Republican gains control of the White House. A Democratic president who can not even mobilize his own base to come out and support him is in big trouble. And, unfortunately, we will be the ones who suffer.

No, I am not talking about those of you who broke open your piggy banks in order to send presidential candidate Obama your nickels and dimes. For you every day is Bush engineered recession ( with depression level unemployment rates.)

The people who have benefited first and most from last year’s elections are those who paid for it. And presidential campaigns in this country do not come cheap. Due to the apathy of voters---who refuse to take an interest in the electoral process except on election day, when they throw a dart in the general direction of the most photogenic candidate---Big Business has turned the democratic process into something more akin to a private auction. The one willing to put up the most money wins. Bidding is fierce.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...

One billion dollars. Oo la la!

Pop quiz. How many kids could be enrolled in SCHIP for one year for that one billion dollars?

Answer. One million.

Everyone has heard the phrase “Dance with the one who brought you.” Obama, like all wise politicians, lives by that rule. He has a re-election campaign to think about.

Here is another bit of timeless wisdom:



I. Christmas Everyday for Exelon



Exelon is not just another energy company whose name begins with an “E”. Like Enron, Exelon has ties to a U.S. president.

Exelon and Obama go way back.

On July 4, 2007 , Jeffrey St. Clair & Joshua Frank wrote “Bartack Obama’s Nuclear Ambitions”



http://dissidentvoice.org/2007/07/barack-o... /

Exelon is the largest nuclear power company in the U.S. and the third largest in the world.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf41.ht...

Those who knew about Obama’s ties to the company understood that he meant it when he professed to being a big advocate of nuclear power. The one form of protest which he did not tolerate at his primary campaign stops was that of the No Nukes crowd. They had their own “free speech zone”. And the internet was astroturfed with groups claiming to be minority voters for nuclear power. Because every minority community wants to have a radioactive waste dump next door.



http://www.energyjustice.net/ej /

So, what kinds of goodies has Santa Obama been leaving in Exelon’s stocking this year?



Oo! Solar. However, as the article goes on to explain



http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/next/...

The FERC offered Exelon a sweet deal when it authorized the merger with NRG Energy, Inc.---which would have made Exelon the nation’s largest supplier of electricity. Can I get a round of “Too big to fail”?
http://business.cch.com/updates/energy/jun...

Too bad for Exelon that NRC Energy Inc was not so sweet on the deal.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/bu...

Cap and trade should provide Exelon with a windfall.



http://publiccitizenenergy.org/2009/12/15/... /

Now where have I heard about cap and trade recently? Oh yes.



http://motherjones.com/politics/2009/12/co...

Cap and trade is what Obama wants, too. If you do not believe me, watch him here in a special YouTube video created over a year ago, before he took office:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=IT&hl=it&v...



II. Christmas Everyday for the Banksters



The Democrats (with the approval of then presidential candidate Obama) did not wait for the elections to deliver on the investments of the nation’s banking industry. Why? The title of this March 2008 LA Times article “Democrats are Darlings of Wall Street” says it all.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/21/na...

For their investment, the banking industry got a bail out. A really big bail out. Which they have not spent freeing up credit. And they got to keep paying themselves bonuses. And Obama did not select his own Ferdinand Pecora to investigate the mess which lead to the mortgage meltdown, even though a number of people (including yours truly) suggested it and former New York Governor Spitzer has done everything short of wear a sign that reads Make ME Your Pecora.

Instead, we got Tim Geithner.

http://www.wegoted.com/news/detail.asp?new...

When will we see banksters doing the perp walk? When will the guys who stole our homes go to jail for robbery? Don’t be silly. Under Obama, they are still stealing our homes. Only now, they collect mortgage payments from us right up until the day they sell our houses out from under us.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/80867...

III. More Wish Lists

Source Watch has a list of lobbyists who bundled money for candidate Obama (you know, the guy who boasted that he did not accept money from federal lobbyists). I chose a few at random to see how their clients were faring under the new, all Democratic federal government.

Solomont Bailis Ventures: More Medical Spending

These guys specialize in elder care services.

http://www.ncbcapitalimpact.org/documents/...

There is a little something in the Senate Health Care Bill for them.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091204/ap_on_...

I am sure they do.

Oh, and Mr. Solomont gets an all expense paid vacation to Spain for the duration of the Obama administration. In other words, he bought himself an ambassadorship.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politi...

Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis : More Gas

If the last part of this firm’s name sounds familiar, that is because Abramoff used to work for them---before the merger.

Wow. Who do these guys not represent? I chose a topic at random—“health care” to see what they do and found a little of this a little of that---including hospitals and health insurers, two of the big winners in the Obama approved Senate HCB.

http://www.klgates.com/practices/ServiceDe...

And what’s this? Marcellus shale? Natural gas.

http://www.klgates.com/practices/ServiceDe...

Doesn’t our new energy secretary, Stephen Chu know a thing or two about natural gas?



http://www.xomba.com/marcellus_shale_and_o...

Anyone who wants to know some of the problems with fracture-drilling for gas in residential areas can check out my old journal about the problems in Texas.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Oh, well, we can conserve energy by reducing our need for night time lighting if we all glow in the dark.

Arnold & Porter: More Drugs



You will never in a million years guess who these guys represent. Never. Do not even try.

Phillip Morris.

I guess they think that Obama is a good spokes model for their product. But seriously, Arnold & Porter also represents pharmaceutical companies. You know, drugs that are supposed to be good for you.

http://www.arnoldporter.com/industries.cfm...

And we all know what the current Congress thinks about the high cost of drugs. They love it!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34438653/ns/po... /

There are more lobbyist-donors here at Source Watch.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title...

What's that I hear in the distance? Is it Christmas carolers. No, it's DU singing "They All Do!" that tired old tune that the GOP uses whenever their politicians get caught with their hands in the cookie jar (or up someone's skirt). They all do it. So, why shouldn't Obama and the Congressional Democrats get their share of the money?

Enjoy your Christmas. And be sure to say a prayer for all the folks who will not be in their own homes this holidays and all who do not have jobs (or credit) and all the sick people who can not afford health care---because few people in Washington are giving them much thought.

First off, it is not my job to make our elected leaders look good.

It is my job as a U.S. citizen to make them act well. When they get distracted by all the lovely lobbyists and their big sacks of cash, I am not supposed to exclaim Hot damn! Those are MY politicians getting rich now! I am not required to feel my bosom swell with pride, because the nation’s CEOs are bribing Democrats as much or more than Republicans. As a good American, I can not sit back and bask in the glow of Democrats who act marginally more civilized than their Republican counterparts.

To do so, would be to concede that we are no longer a representative democracy. And once we make that concession, we spit in the face of our nation’s Founders.

I. A Little Knowledge…. is Better Than No Knowledge At All

Somewhere along the way, Americans bought into the notion that we are a people who feel rather than think. I have some good news. It is possible to do both. But, in order to make rational decisions, we must keep ourselves (and our neighbors) informed.



Thomas Jefferson was a big believer in the natural human capacity to learn and grow. In his opinion, if you bothered to teach people about their government, they would step forward to correct problems as they arose. And he had plenty of reason for fearing the worst from our new country’s federal government. John Adams, with whom Jefferson served as Vice President, used the Constitution for toilet paper. He made free speech a crime. He made criticism of the federal government a crime. He shut down newspapers. He created a phantom menace in France, our Revolutionary War ally. If Jefferson was the advocate of an informed electorate, Adams was its nemesis.

Over two centuries have passed, and we still face the same conflict. Some of those in power would prefer that we cast our votes and form our opinions based upon emotion. They teach us that our chosen political party is always right, because it is always battling the forces of evil (i.e. the other major political party). We get so caught up in this political wrestling match that we fail to notice that the battle is, very often, a mock one. We are told that it is disloyal to criticize members of our own party----



II. My Party, Right or….Fix It

In the 18th century, it was wrong to acquiesce to tyranny out of a sense of national pride. In the 21st century, it is still wrong. So, what constitutes tyranny? Hell, we all know that one.



No, this is not an anti-tax screed. It is a statement against the imposition of government from above. We claim to live in a democracy. And yet, we are told that our opinions only matter once every two to four years, when we vote (in rigged elections that are financed by the nation’s wealth business elite). We are told that good things will come in time. Wealth will trickle down. People who criticize the government and especially their own party’s members in government are often characterized as trouble makers, traitors, stealth agents for “the other side”. If this were true, then Jefferson, Paine and the rest should be reviled in our history books---

But they are not. Far from it. They are revered as heroes who had the courage to fashion a government that reflected their interests, not those of VIPs across the Atlantic. A modern American patriot is one who fights to meet the essential needs of her family and community. She does not wish and hope and pray that things will get better. She takes responsibility. She points her finger at wrongs:



A true patriot does not wave a flag. He thinks of ways in which he and his neighbors can live better lives. He knows that things like nutrition, education, personal safety, health and work are all essential to human happiness---and the happiness of the individual is necessary if the community is going to prosper. Self sacrifice can be a good thing, if done out of compassion for another individual. But we need to know the difference between self sacrifice and slavery.



This is not a labor of a moment. We can not pull the lever and then sit back.



Folks who are tearing Congress and the President a new one over the atrocity which the Senate calls “Health Care Reform” are not trying to destroy political careers. They are trying to provide political guidance to their elected representatives so that our democracy will be a better one (since a country can only be as strong as its citizens). They publicize their criticism, because they know that if informed Americans actually bother to take an interest in politics, Washington will listen.

III. Moving Mountains



Imagine how different things would have been had the corporate media bothered to cover the criticism of Bush-Cheney’s march to war in Iraq? Plenty of people, including Democrats in Congress, tried to question the rhetoric of Rice, Powell and Bush. They were effectively censored. The result was a Vietnam style quagmire.

Eight years from now, will we look back and say “If only we had spoken out when we had a chance?”

“Yes, we can!” does not mean “Yes, Obama can!” or “Yes, 60 Democratic Senators can!” It means that we, the people of the United States can accomplish miracles, if only we set our minds to it.

It will not be easy to get the politicians in Washington to listen to us, after they have spent so long listening to the lobbyists. But if we surrender without even trying, for fear of being labeled “disloyal” then what does that make us?

In my book, it makes us traitors to democracy.



IV. A Work In Progress




If we had stopped trying back in the 18th century, slavery would still be legal. Children would still labor in sweat shops. Women still would not have the vote. We are constantly evolving. It is never "too soon" to improve someone's welfare.




.

There is something worse than having no health insurance in the United States---being forced to scrape up your nickels and dimes (and thousand dollar bills) to purchase health insurance that you will not be able to use.

Consider the plight of a family of three living on $28,000 a year (over the cut off for total health insurance premiums subsidies in the Senate version of HCR). That family will have to pay $1250 a year to a health care plan---or pay a $750 year fine. Note how close these two numbers are to each other. This is no accident. If forced to choose between giving the federal government one and a half week’s income or spending two weeks income to buy some kind of health care, most frugal Americans are going to buy some kind of health care. Even if it is shitty health care.

Myth But some health care insurance is better than no health care insurance.

Not if you can not afford to use it.

That same family, living very slightly above the poverty level, will almost certainly find itself saddled with huge deductibles. You know, the $2500 per person, $10000 per family kind. That is pretty standard right now for low end policies. And once they max out their credit cards paying the upfront money for Dad’s coronary bypass surgery, the family will find that their insurance does not cover 100% of the remaining costs. It won’t even cover the traditional 80%. They will be lucky if they are only stuck with 40% of the tab---which the hospital will demand up front, before the surgery is done. Some plans will only pitch in a few hundred dollars for each day you spend in the hospital--hardly enough to pay for hospital mark up Tylenol.

Since Dad will be unable to get the surgery that would keep him working, he will be forced out of work, at which point he will apply for Social Security Disability. A year or so later, he will get his Medicare card in the mail. At that point, if he still has any myocardium worth saving, the U.S. tax payers will foot the bill for his CABG.

When Mom gets a breast lump, she will put off the biopsy, because she does not know for certain that it is cancer---and spending a few thousand dollars to take out a benign lump would devastate the family’s fortune. By the time the cancer has declared itself, she will be in too much pain to work. She will go the disability route and may even find her quest for government insurance expedited in some states. At that point, she will start palliative chemotherapy and radiation therapy….at tax payers’ expense.

Junior’s asthma will go untreated, because the family can not afford doctor’s visits, a home nebulizer and pricey medication. (They have used all their disposable income paying for their crappy insurance.) He will receive his treatment at the local ER, where he will be hospitalized for an attack that could have been prevented if only he had health coverage his family could actually use. The hospital bill will be so high that his insurance will kick in and cover at least part of the bill (“Hurray!” says the hospital administrator). The family will be forced to pay off the rest of the debt by taking out a second mortgage on its home---assuming it owns a home. This cycle will be repeated. Junior will miss school and fall behind. He will have to take so many rounds of rescue steroids that he will turn into a little butter ball---increasing his risks for diabetes, high blood pressure and premature heart disease.

When Sis gets pregnant, she will discover that her insurance plan does not cover termination----because her family is poor enough to qualify for partial federal premium subsidies. (Note that most private insurers currently cover termination). She will have to deliver the child. If she is smart, she will get on Medicaid, which will cover obstetric care for her and her unborn child. That will transfer more of the health care expense burden to the taxpayers. Once the baby is born, she may drop out of school---ending her chances of ever getting a decent paying job with good benefits. The baby will remain on Medicaid, which will cover its expensive shots. Mom will be left without useful insurance, which in some communities (like rural ones or the ones that bomb Planned Parenthood clinics) will mean more unplanned pregnancies.

That same family would actually be better off with the $1250 dollars. If no one develops a serious illness, that money could be used to pay for birth control pills for Sis, pediatric follow up and medication for Junior, cholesterol lowering meds for Dad. Mom will be out of luck either way.

Myth The notion of unusable insurance only applies to the (shiftless) poor. My middle to upper middle income family will be well protected.

If you believe that, I have some swampland I would like to sell you.

The Senate is poised to allow insurance companies to offer something called “nationwide plans.” That means the company can write its policies in Mississippi and sell them in New York. State insurance rules will no longer count. If the nation’s health insurers decide that they no longer want to cover mammograms or mental health services or screens for diabetes, you will have to take it up with Joe Liebermann. Too bad you are not one of his constituents.

In this era of health insurance consolidation, in which one or two companies commonly dominate large geographic regions, you are likely to find that the only policy you can afford will be one of these “nationwide polices”. If your insurer decides that the surgery to remove the tumor that is robbing you of your vision is “elective”, then you will have a very hard time seeking relief from the courts, since you will have to sue in the federal court system which is notoriously back logged. Forget about switching plans. If there is another insurance provider in your area (doubtful) that company will have the exact same policies and rates as the company you just dropped. It will probably be easier to quit working and apply for disability. Medicare will raise no objections to your neurosurgery.

If you develop lymphoma, you will have to be prepared to stay overnight in a motel every time you go for chemotherapy, because your out of state plan will have no oncologist in your area. And whatever you do, don’t develop a complication that requires emergency hospitalization. If you do, the admitting physician, radiologist, pathologist and everyone else who lays hands on you will send you the bill. If your insurer decides that one orthopedist can cover all its clients in Alabama, take a number and get in line.

Note that any attempts to force insurers to make care available to clients will be shouted down with cries of It will raise health care premiums . Never mind that the nation’s insurance plans will all have raised premiums as one---something they are legally entitled to do, since they have anti-trust exemption. That means they can set their rates as high as they want, and you will have to pay what they are asking---or hand over $750 to the feds and forgo insurance coverage. And don't expect your premiums to be be anywhere near $1250 a year. You are likely to be paying ten times that amount.

Myth But older folks and people with pre-existing conditions will finally be able to get insurance.

Being older does not necessarily make you richer--and that is what you will have to be in order to afford private health insurance. The Senate allows plans to charge more to older people. Free market competition is supposed to keep costs low. But, as I point out above, there is no free market when it comes to health insurance. There are only state insurance boards. And these will soon be relics of the past.

Insurers will set rates as high as they possibly can. For young folks, who think of themselves as immortal, rates will be kept pretty low, to encourage them to buy in. Middle aged Americans, who actually have some chronic health problems or who are concerned about their future health, will be the ones most eager to participate in the new program. Therefore, they are the ones who will be gouged.

The Senate's "reasonable annual limits" will be especially useful to insurance companies when it comes to the chronically ill and middle aged, because they will encourage reverse cherry picking. I.e. people who have expensive medical problems will drop their private insurance and get on Medicare---something you can do, as long as you prove that your illness keeps you from working. So, for instance, if your child has schizophrenia and you discover that your private plan has a ridiculously low annual cap on mental health care, you will switch him to public insurance which will have no cap. If he is run over by a drunk motorist and suffers brain damage and needs lots of rehab (that your insurer will not cover) the feds will start picking up his medical tab. COPD, congestive heart failure and arthritis will join renal failure/dialysis as conditions that will automatically get people on Medicare. The government's share of the nation's health care will continue to rise, even as privates collect more in premiums.

Note that chronic illness is directly tied to socioeconomic status in this country. The sicker you are, the less likely you are to have thousands of dollars lying around to hand over to an insurance company.

Myth This is just a temporary measure. If private insurers get too greedy, Congress and the White House will rein them in.

Yeah. Right. The same way they checked the growth and greed of the Military Industrial Complex. The way that the nation's banks have been punished for the mortgage meltdown. The way that the telecommunications consolidations were stopped. The more money we pour into the coffers of private insurance companies, the more political clout they will have in Washington. The more they will be able to argue that the preservation of these companies---and their enormous CEO salaries---is necessary for our country's economic security. "Too big to fail" is not just a stupid saying, it is the law of the land in our nation's capitol.


Myth But if the Democrats serve the public a horse’s head on a platter and call it “Health Care Reform” the voters will be so happy they will elect Democrats into the White House for the next one hundred years.

You can fool some of the people all the time and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool anyone who gets a ten thousand dollar medical bill in the mail. Federally mandated health insurance that does not prevent bankruptcy in the event of illness is not insurance. It is extortion. Federally mandated health insurance that does not encourage people to get necessary preventive care is not “healthy”---except for insurance company profits.

I. They Want to Eat Your House




This week, I have been thinking a lot about the things which our President and Democratic majority Congress have not done. Today, McClathchy had an article about how folks who thought that they were going to be able to keep their homes through federally mandated mortgage rescue programs have been let down.


http://www.star-telegram.com/business/stor...

Turns out that the banks are allowed to decide that a home owner is not “qualified” to stay in his or her home---if they can find a buyer for that home. The implications here are obvious. Friends of bank officials can cherry pick the houses they want. Bankers get to keep collecting money on the houses and have a tenant to maintain the property until they sell it to a buddy. This was the plan all along under the George W. Bush administration. His dad’s Carlyle Group runs one of the big “vulture funds” (see my old journal “The Carlyle Group is Run By Zombies Who Want to Eat Your Brains”).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

Score one for the banksters and zero for us. The really insidious thing about this scheme---it is designed to lull Americans into a false sense of security. It declares “We are all in this together” and then picks us off one by one. In our false complacency, we become one of the zombie pack, docile and unquestioning.


II. They Want to Eat Your Sons and Daughters



Before September 2008, the war was the single defining issue of the last election. After September 2008, it should have continued to be a defining issue, since the federal bankruptcy under Bush was caused by runaway war spending (and tax cuts for the rich). The newly elected Democratic majority in DC should have committed to run, not walk, away from our business wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That did not happen. Instead, on the eve of his Peace Prize ceremony, President Obama announced that he was escalating the war in Afghanistan. Nixon (that zombie master extraordinaire) came into office declaring that four years was enough to end a war and then he escalated the Vietnam conflict, too. Obama was compared to a lot of ex-presidents before he was elected. Usually JFK, but sometimes FDR or Carter. Who would have thought that he would choose to emulate the second worst Republican President of this century, committing more of our troops to a conflict in a region notorious for its hostile terrain and never ending wars, so that a natural gas pipeline could be built?

The casualties in Operation Enduring Oil Company Profits have not stopped. The press has simply stopped reporting on them. Here is a list of U.S. military personnel who have died in Afghanistan. Note how many were killed in 2009.

http://icasualties.org/oef/ByTheatre.aspx

The Washington Post has their photos. Remember how we demanded the right to show the flag draped caskets of killed servicemen and women, so that America would remember the cost of war? That was then, when it gave the Democrats a political advantage. When was the last time that Keith Olbermann reminded us of the number of days that have passed since victory was declared in Iraq?

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/fallen /

III. They Want to Eat Your Conscience, Part I. Burma




Obama got a Peace Prize for not being W. America patted itself on the back for electing a president who was not W. This year, our whole foreign policy was supposed to change. Under the leadership of a new president and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, we were to become the friends of democracy again.

Yeah, right.



http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-...

That is code for ending sanctions. Against the country that thinks nothing of murdering/terrorizing/starving its own citizens to keep them good little zombies. Against a country which happens to be sitting upon a bunch of natural resources which the west craves.



http://www.mizzima.com/news/world/2816-cli...

Why the rush to start doing business with the junta? From the U.S. State Department:



http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35910.htm

IV. They Want to Eat You Conscience, Part 2, the Congo





http://www.laprogressive.com/2009/05/16/co... /

Note that the photos that accompany the above article are much, much worse than any of the zombie pics in this thread.

For a summary of the foreign powers (including the U.S.) who are funding the wars in the Congo, see my old journal on the subject.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...

As in Burma, the prize is the regions’ vast supply of natural resources. Rich, western countries arm the combatants in exchange for diamonds and other treasures. People are enslaved, children are conscripted, women are raped. Recent UN action has only intensified the violence. Here is a report about one American company that continues to do business with military combatants.


http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/diploma...

I really truly hoped that the new crop of Washington Democrats would do something to end the bloody war in the Congo. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has issued some nice sounding words on the subject:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8194836.stm

Clinton misses the point. As long as we continue to encourage the various sides in local political squabbles to take up (foreign made) arms rather than negotiate, there will be violence against civilians—that is how modern wars are fought. And violence against women inevitably involves rape. Maybe, instead of scolding fighters in the Congo, Clinton should seek to shut down U.S. companies, like the one above, which help fund the war.

But I forget. This is a business friendly administration.

V.They Want to Eat Your Conscience, Part 3 Gaza




http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas...

The last time I was this ashamed of my country was last winter, when the former President and the last Congress gave their seal of approval to the invasion of Gaza. At the very least, civilians were killed because of imprudent, indiscriminate use of heavy weapons in a crowded city. By most people’s definition, that counts as a “war crime”. But we can not even investigate? Why not? Winston Smith of 1984 would recognize this America. It has its very own Ministry of Truth, and it is called the U.S. Congress.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/0...

If only the U.S. determination to whitewash every Israeli action was motivated purely by a sense of justice----Hitler killed millions of Jewish people and therefore Israel is allowed to use any methods to ensure its safety. However, money is the real tie that binds our country to the handful of extremely wealthy families that control Israel. The safety of the Israeli people is not important. Like U.S. citizens, they are considered zombies, to be used and discarded at the whim of their masters.

VI. They Want to Eat Your Brains (and Livers and Kidneys and Hearts)



Healthcare was a hot issue in the last election. Most Americans agreed that their access to necessary care was limited—by lack of insurance, by high deductibles and co-payments, by insurance restrictions. They demanded that something be done.

And boy, has the Democratic Congress delivered something . What exactly that something is I am not sure. I suspect that there is very little “health” involved. And I am pretty sure that only a minority of them really “care.”

As things stand now, we will soon be forced to pay higher taxes and spend money that we do not have to buy over priced insurance policies that will have higher deductibles, higher copayments, more limited service...and no state regulation in case something goes wrong. The health insurance companies have bragged that the Senate Bill fulfills all their dreams. Folks on the left finally seem to have gotten the message, and now they are attempting to shoot down the bill, presumably because they know that the health insurance industry wants it so badly that they may be willing to have their paid Congressmen negotiate on a few issues…like the Medicare buy in?

A year ago , we were promised affordable, comprehensive health care for all. Now, we are reduced to begging the insurance companies to let us include older, sicker (uninsurable) Americans in our federally funded health insurance plan, Medicare. Does anyone else see the irony in this? Or, have we all eaten our own brains?

. VII. They Want to Eat Your Labor




http://socialistworker.org/2009/12/18/yes-...

I am still waiting for the Employee Free Choice Act . This was supposed to be a priority. It was introduced way back in March. Al Franken decided to cosponsor it. And yet, it just languishes in Congress.

How hard could it be for 60 Democratic Senators to pay back the unions which propelled them into political power in DC? Those same politicians have no trouble returning the favor for insurance companies, drug companies, bankers. Why do they consider their promises to one of the core Democratic constituencies to be optional? Do they think that the workers of America have been so devastated by the recession that they will be grateful for any crust that is tossed their way? In the movies, you have to kill a man before you can make him a zombie. In the United States you kill a man’s spirit before you reduce him to an undead existence.

VIII. They Want to Eat Your Freedoms



Since when did Americans have to give up their Roe v. Wade rights in order to get health care? This is like telling someone “We won’t kill your son----but you have to give us your daughter.” Mobsters make declarations like this. How did Congress become a freaking wing of the Mafia?

How long will our current government continue to make honest sexuality and military service mutually exclusive?

When will they fix the broken election system that allows a few VIPs to veto the wishes of the electorate?

How can a party which campaigned against Bush era civil rights abuses continue to deny political prisoners humanitarian rights? How can they continue to spy? And withhold information that should be made public, according to post Watergate Reforms?

W. was partially right when he said “They hate us for our freedoms.” We just did not know that he was talking about corporate America and their paid zombie minions in Washington.

IX. They Want to Eat Your Future

So, have your credit card rates come down since the change in political power in Washington? Have you been able to declare bankruptcy and start over after catastrophic medical debt wipes out your savings? Has your bankster been held liable for reducing the value of your pension? Do you feel more empowered? Do you think that the future will be rosier, brighter, because the face of corporate America's elected puppets is fresher, kinder?

Here is the face of Washington.



Enjoy your lobotomy.

Welcome to Healthcare Hell, the new $849 billion dollar theme park being designed by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, the single most powerful man in a city where members of another party, the Democrats control two of the three bodies of government. Why Joe and not some Democratic Senator? Why not? This is a theme park we are talking about. People don’t want the same old same old---like Western European style affordable health care for all that delivers quality results. The American people crave the new, the unexpected.

No one expects Healthcare Hell. That is part of its charm. Here is a preview of some of its attractions. In honor of its architect, all the rides are named with words beginning in the letter L.

I. Limbo




Healthcare Hell is not scheduled to open its doors until at least 2014. But you get to buy your ticket now. Pardon me. Did I just write get ? I meant you have to buy your ticket now. The federal government is going to start collecting more in taxes immediately, so that its coffers will not be quite so bare when it comes time to start delivering big bags of money to the Health Insurance Companies.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/HealthCare/howar...


While you wait in limbo, your undiagnosed diabetes, hypertension and hyperlipidemia will be clogging your coronary arteries, damaging your kidneys and stroking out your brain. If you are lucky, you will be ready for dialysis and a CABG right about the time you finally snag some insurance. If the health insurers are lucky, you will be dead before they have to cover you.

While you are doing your best to pretend that your exertional chest pain is indigestion, health insurance companies will be paying their executives enormous bonuses and making frivolous investments. Why? So they can argue to government regulators that they are close to bankruptcy and therefore they all need to raise premiums the exact same amount at the same time . Once you get out of Limbo in 2014, health insurance premiums will be much higher than they are now.

Impossible, you say? Because Sen. Leahy has introduced the Health Insurance Industry Antitrust Enforcement Act? Leahy’s name may begin with an L, but he is just a senior member of the party in power in Washington. His word carries no weight.

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200909/09170...



http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/...

As long as health insurers are exempt from anti-trust rules, they will continue to fix prices to their hearts content. And, with the federal government footing the bill, there will be no limit to what they can charge.

Speaking of limits, the next attraction in our theme park is

II. Limits



Because good Americans follow the motto "Moderation in all things"...including their catastrophic illness.

The Senators, under the guidance of Joltin’ Joe and his Hartford Connecticut friends, have created a fun new attraction they call Annual Limits . As long as the monetary limits are not “unreasonable”, they are ok. What is “unreasonable”? The Obama administration gets to decide. That is the same Obama administration which has rolled over like a puppy for the health insurance industry.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...

You or I might think it reasonable to expect our insurance to pay for a bone marrow transplant for our daughter’s leukemia (which also begins with an L). After all, bone marrow transplantation is a recognized, effective treatment for many forms of the disease. However, the insurance companies (and their lobbyists) are likely to have different definitions of “reasonable.” To them, big ticket items like transplants are just plain not fair. Why should they be penalized because some kid decided to get Reye’s Syndrome and is now the color of Big Bird? Let him save his pennies if he wants a new liver.

Limits are also likely to apply to intensive care unit stays. Such as your premature infant’s Neonatal ICU stay. Here, the insurance companies will luck out, since no NICU will kick out a preemie for lack of funds. Or will they? Remember all that talk about “death panels”? In Texas, hospitals can pull the plug over family members’ objections---if the insurance has run out. The moral here: be sure to divide your ICU stays up like vacations, no more than two weeks a year. Or, maybe you can buy a second insurance policy, one that takes over when your primary plan bows out.

III. Lawyers




Health insurers claim that they have gotten everything they wanted from the Senate. We all heard them crowing about it. That worries me, because one of the things that they wanted most from Health Care Reform was exemption from state insurance board rules and oversight.




http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/11/1... /

Do you live in one of the progressive blue states? Did you work hard to elect leaders who would write mental health care parity into the law? Big fucking deal. Now, you get the same shitty coverage that the downtrodden masses of the worst of the red states get. And that is not all.

There is another potential problem with these so called nationwide plans. It is called “where the hell do I go if I want to sue my insurer?” Right now, you can sue in local court. Once insurance becomes “nationwide”, you will have to go to federal court. And we all know how congested the federal court system is.

Picture this scenario. Your child’s pediatrician says she needs that new heart by next week. Your insurance company says “Blow me.” You get a lawyer. And you get put on a docket somewhere and your case is heard next year on the anniversary of your child’s death.

Right now, with many Americans getting their health insurance from their employers, insurance companies are protected by the ERISA loophole. A law designed to protect pensions was interpreted by the courts to mean that if pre-tax dollars where used to pay your premiums, then you had to sue your health plan in federal court. And the insurer could only be held liable for the cost of the denied procedure not the harm that resulted from the denial of the procedure. For instance, if CIGNA refused to pay for an $800 CT scan and your husband died of a ruptured aneurysm, the federal court would make CIGNA pay you…$800.

Insurance companies just love this crazy loophole. It allows them to disregard the health of their members without fear of financial loss. They have fought like a pack of wild hyenas to keep Congress from closing it, since they absolutely positively do not want to be held liable for the death and disability that results from their medical decision making.

Under Health Care Reform, more folks will be purchasing their own insurance. That is a problem for the insurance companies, because suddenly they will be writing a lot of policies that will put them at financial risk if they deny necessary care. One of the intended side effects of "nationwide" policies is to stop this from happening. Expect insurance company lawyers to file federal suits the day after the first nationwide policies are written, in hopes of getting some judge somewhere to restrict your right to sue. Expect them to pay Congressmen outrageous sums to write "tort reform" laws that will "keep premiums down." Bonus points if they can argue that ERISA covers plans partially paid for out of federal dollars.

IV. Lines



Hey. It wouldn’t be an amusement park without lines. With all insurance policies written in places like Guam, plans will be free to offer extra crappy coverage with a bare minimum number of local providers. That means that you will likely have to wait months to see a specialist, even if there are plenty of specialists in your area, because your insurance company will have an exclusive contract with just one of them to cover all of its members in your city/county/state.

This was a favorite strategy of the HMOs in the 1990s, which made up for their inability to cherry pick healthy members by making it impossible for their sick members to get care. Have one dermatologist for the entire Houston Metropolitan area, and no one gets acne treatment. If the closest pediatric neurologist is two hours away, your child’s seizures may have to wait until you can get some time off work. If the only general surgeon in your town on your plan in booked up months in advance, you will have to learn to live with those gallstones. And if the one orthopedist is kept busy treating fractures, you can kiss goodbye your hopes of getting that bum knee replaced.

The federal government plans like Medicare and Medicaid will continue to have more or less open provider directories, which means that everyone who uses a lot of health care will eventually figure out that they are better off on a federal plan, not a private one. That will save the insurance companies even more money.

V. Luxury



Hey, but at least we are all gonna get free health care (that we pay for from our own taxes) right?

Au contraire. Even the Senate does not claim that it is going to cover everyone. Low to middle income Americans, being poor and therefore unholy in the sight of God, do not deserve the same health care that richer (i.e whiter) folks get.



http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11...

Anyone who has ever tried to support a spouse and child in a major US city for less than $30k a year knows that thousand dollar bills do not grow on trees. With the fines set to max out at $750/year for no coverage, there will be a lot of lower income Americans who end up subsidizing the subsidies for their higher earning neighbors. Ironically, Congress plans to finance “universal health care” by collecting fines from folks too poor to purchase insurance.

VI. Lobbyists



With the White House regulating the massively profitable health insurance industry (instead of state boards), presidential candidates will have access to almost unlimited cash. Here is how it works. We, the tax payers, will hand over our hard earned money to the feds who will give it all to private insurance company CEOs who will avoid spending the money for health care. This will give insurers enormous reserves from which to bribe presidential candidates. If Congress wants some of the action, they can pretend to tinker with health care reform, too (the way that the current Congress is doing). This will be just like the bank bailout (in which money paid to the banks to loosen up credit is being horded for campaign contributions, instead) but it will happen over and over again.

VII. Losers

For an advance preview of this attraction, just look in a mirror.

Oh man! What was he thinking? If I were a member of the nut job right, I would wonder if he said



In order to encourage his left wing pinko commie followers to reflect upon the many democracies we have battled and the many human rights abusers we have coddled in the 200 plus years since the Founders wrote




I. Cherokee Nation

The Cherokee Nation convened a convention in 1827 and adopted a Constitution much like that of the United States. It called for elective representation. The government was made up of a legislative, executive and judicial branch.



http://www2.volstate.edu/cbucy/History%202...

Yes, this seems unfair by modern standards. But the United States did not protect the voting rights of anyone but landed white men back in the early 19th century. So, the Cherokee Nation was as much a democracy as the U.S.

That did not stop President Andrew Jackson from waging war on them.



“The Trail of Tears” is the phrase used to describe the forced exile of Cherokee landowners from the United States to the Oklahoma territories. Why did it happen? Gold had been discovered in North Georgia, and the white folks wanted it—even if it lay on Cherokee land.



http://ngeorgia.com/history/nghisttt.html

Why declare war on civilized, democratically governed people? I suspect that the early U.S. government felt threatened by the presence of another representative government in its midst. It is a lot easier to control people if they live in fear. Once they are part of something like a democracy, they will fight harder in order to preserve their rights, freedoms (and property).



That’s one.

II. Mexico

Like the United States, Mexico fought a war of independence against its colonial masters back in Spain---and won. This was in the early 19th century. Afterward, political power switched back and forth between liberals and conservatives, but the country had a constitution.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Me...

Before we get all righteous, recall who said that the Constitution “is just a god damned piece of paper”? Answer: It was not Santa Anna of Mexico.

We can debate all day about which self proclaimed democracies are most democratic. However, Mexico had a democratic form of government when United States settlers in Texas fought for control of Mexican land and later, when the U.S. fought in the Mexican-American War to consolidate its gains from that land grab. The war with Mexico to strip that country of its Texas territories was embraced by slave owning states which wanted to increase their political power by securing Texas as another slave state. It was widely opposed in the U.S.



The U.S. won that war---in the process taking control of huge portions of Mexico’s territories, which saw one democratic form of government replaced by another. Maybe Obama should have said “America has never fought a war with a democracy for the purposes of instituting a non democratic form of government.”

But that would have been wrong, too. Read about the (many) instances in which the United States sent troops into Central American countries which flirted with democracy:

http://www.zompist.com/latam.html

American greed knows no bounds. I am going to lump these all together and call them “Two”.

III. The Philippines



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine-Am...

When the U.S. was fighting Spain for control of its territories, it encouraged a rebellion by Filipinos. Once the Spanish American War was over, the U.S. had no more need (or desire) for a people’s revolution in any of its new territories. So, it declared



And picked up a big stick with which it proceeded to pound the idea of Filipino self rule into the mud.

Here is what Mark Twain wrote about the intervention:



That’s three. Wow. I guess I lied when I called this a “brief” history of United States wars against (other people’s) democracies.

IV. Haiti

The Western World, including such notable democracies as the U.S. and France seem to have decided that they can do whatever the hell they want in Haiti, because that country's slaves had the temerity to attempt to copy the French and American Revolution, and in the process a whole bunch of white slave owners were killed---two hundred years ago.

White folks have long memories when it comes to crimes against their own.



Haiti is the poorest country in the western hemisphere, despite the fact that the U.S. has insinuated itself in Haiti's government for decades.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States...

The United States occupied Haiti for almost twenty years. It controlled the government of that country, for the purpose of protecting U.S. financial interests in the region.

That’s four.

V. Cold War

After WW II (the so called “good war”), the United States attempted to give its colonial military adventures an aura of respectability by declaring that it was fighting to secure the free world from the threat of communism. Under pretense of keeping the leftists down, it was able to thwart the democratic aspirations of people all over the world, including:

Chile In 1970 newly elected President Allende



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_...

He then proceeded to nationalize so many industries, that the Nixon administration dubbed him an enemy of business as usual in South America, and Henry Kissinger went to work doing what he did best---making life hell for folks in other countries by installing Pinochet as the country's very own dictator.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/458990....

Good old fashioned American values.


Argentina A different South American country, the same old “U.S. backs brutal right wing regime which commits numerous crimes against humanity.”


http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/dec2003/...



http://www.yendor.com/vanished /

Moral: money good, people bad.

Cambodia



While not technically a democracy, Cambodia before the illegal U.S. incursion was a lot better than what we left behind:


http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Kissinge...

We all know how this story ended.



Which circle of Hell will get Henry Kissinger when he dies? Fourth (avarice)? Seventh (violence)? Eighth (fraud)? Ninth (treason)? Maybe they will have to build him his own personal Hell.

VI. More of Our Favorite Dictators or Can You Tell the Difference Between "Worthy" and "Unworthy" Victims?

Here is a "worthy" victim:



Here is an "unworthy" victim:



This one is "worthy" or "unworthy" depending upon which way the wind is blowing in Washington:



That was easy, wasn't it?

Often the U.S. chooses to let others do its dirty work. And when they do the worst (genocide, rape, torture) we look the other way or else declare that the victims had it coming. They were communists. Rebels. Enemies of democracy.

Here is an excellent summary of how the U.S. CIA overthrows democracies all over in the world in order to protect U.S. business interests.



http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/CIAtimeline....

Here is a line up of some of the most notorious dictators who have been embraced (and supported) by the United States government.

Shah of Iran



http://www.angelfire.com/home/iran/savak.h...

Sadam Hussein

Before we hated him, we set him up, as part of the U.S. strategy to prevent Middle Eastern countries from nationalizing their oil.



http://www.iraqfoundation.org/news/2003/em...

The Regime of the Colonels in Greece

That one was immortalized in the film Z , by Costa Gavras. Yes, it was one of ours. Don’t you just love it when we prop up a monarchy? It is so…democratic. Especially when we knock down the oldest democracy in the world.



Sauds
More of our favorite monarchs. Except for the guy who tried to nationalize Saudi Arabia’s oil back in the 1970s and who died (conveniently) these guys are more than happy to do the bidding of the U.S. in exchange for obscene amounts of wealth.


http://www.hvk.org/articles/1102/205.html

If this journal seems a little bit long for one that called itself “brief” remember that this is an abridged history of the United States war against democracy and human rights. Our country has committed way too many crimes for me to even begin to catalog them all in a forum such as this. I will close this section with

Suharto



http://www.fair.org/extra/9809/suharto.htm...


VII. The On Going Atrocity in the Congo

You hardly see this one on TV here in the U.S., probably because it is yet another of our proxy wars, being fought by men (and children) from other countries. And it is making some folks back at home in the U.S. very, very rich. I wrote about this one back in January, when I still hoped that Obama would actually do something to end the U.S. policy of killing folks in other countries for their natural resources. The journal was entitled “Mr. President, Only You Can Can Stop the World’s Longest, Bloodiest War…and Its Not Iraq.”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...



http://www.inteldaily.com/news/172/ARTICLE...

So, have things gotten better under Obama/Clinton? From October, 2009



http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/10/16...

From November, 2009



http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/11/02/east...



The U.S. judgment? Unworthy.

So, go on President Obama. Wave that American flag that you have sported on your lapel ever since the general election. It is good for American business. Just be sure to keep the blood stains hidden.

Intro.

I don’t pretend to know why President Obama is so determined to escalate the war in Afghanistan, the country that drove the Soviet Union into bankruptcy. Maybe he covets the executive privilege that goes with being a war time president. Maybe he is courting the center and center-right in anticipation of the 2012 election. Maybe he does not want to bring too many troops home all at once for fear of worsening the economic recession at home. Maybe he is scared of being called a waffler a flip flopper or some other unpleasant name if he goes back on his word. Maybe he is afraid that terrorists will attack the mainland U.S. again and he will be blamed for ending one of Bush’s foreign wars too soon. Maybe, maybe, maybe.

The only thing I know for certain is that the troops will not be back home until after 2014. That is when the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is scheduled to be operational.

I. A Brief History of Greed

The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline is the reason the Taliban rose to power. In the mid 1990s, Unocol began plans for an oil and a gas pipeline that would run from the Caspian Sea, through Afghanistan and Pakistan and finally to India. You know, the country where they are sending all our jobs. Unocol and the CIA helped to put the Taliban in power, thinking that the new regime would permit them to build the pipeline.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unocal

Once in power, the Taliban failed to keep its part of the bargain. Since fucking with a U.S. corporation is grounds for death, Unocol petitioned the U.S. Congress to force the Taliban out and replace it with a regime that would uphold the good old fashioned American value of making money.



http://www.ringnebula.com/Oil/Maresca_test...


“An internationally recognized Afghanistan government is in place” was a euphemism for “slap down those lying Taliban bitches and put the fear of Uncle Sam into Afghanistan.”

No significant action was taken on this request under Bill Clinton. However, the Bush-Cheney administration spent the entire summer of 2001 attempting to persuade the Taliban to change its mind---in a futile effort to avert Enron's bankruptcy.



http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=5...


We all know what happened next. The Taliban said “Fuck you.” Unfortunately for them, Enron , W.’s biggest campaign donor desperately needed to build the gas pipeline, since it would help fuel its floundering Dabhol Power Plant, the one in India, a country which was refusing to honor its agreement to pay Enron for doing nothing (imagine that). Enron was on the verge of bankruptcy and it could not wait any longer.

http://www.atimes.com/reports/CA13Ai01.htm...

In addition, Enron had invested in natural gas fields and had no way to move its product:



http://theragblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/she...


So, the Bush administration did not attempt to prevent the 9-11 attacks, of which it had been warned. Instead, it drew up the plans for the invasion of Afghanistan, which were ready to go on 9-12.

On Dec. 22, 2001



http://www.ringnebula.com/Oil/Timeline.htm

Almost immediately, talks resumed about the planned Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline.



http://hillshepherd.blogspot.com/2009/08/t...

So, in order to build that pipeline, the U.S. would need to subdue the Taliban. However, Bush and Cheney had turned their attention to the oil fields of Iraq, in an effort to realize the NeoCon dream of world domination through control of third world oil supplies (or, at least, oil company profits through control of third world oil supplies). They did not have the man power to fight two full scale wars on two fronts. And with Enron bankrupt, Dabhol and the Trans-Afghanistan pipeline had to take a backseat to the needs of Chevron (Condie’s old company).

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=79...

II. There’s a New Sheriff in Town

A change of administrations provides big business with lots of opportunities. If your company was snubbed by one party’s president, maybe the other party will be more obliging.

During his campaign, Barack Obama talked often of withdrawing troops from Iraq (the unpopular war) to shift them to Afghanistan (the “good” war). No doubt, many progressives thought that he was engaging in political posturing. This stance allowed him to be whatever the voters wanted him to be. For those who wanted peace, he was the man who would get us out of Iraq. For those who wanted their new president to be part John Wayne, he was the president who would furnish a more satisfying war somewhere else. A war about which America could “feel good”, since the Taliban was responsible for 9/11.

However, somewhere between the debates and election day, George W. Bush and the banksters of America wrecked the economy. Unemployment began to rise. Suddenly the center, which was losing its jobs, no longer cared to spend its money kicking third world ass. It wanted jobs and unemployment benefits and health care.

Surprisingly, the newly elected President Obama continued to insist that he wanted to escalate the fighting in Afghanistan, even though this was now an unpopular position with all but the most idiotic members of the right wing, people who would never vote for Obama in a million years. Why?

Whenever something does not make sense in the United States, I follow this simple rule. Look for the money. Keep in mind that it takes hundreds of millions of dollars to run for president in this country, and no one raises that kind of cash from the nickels and dimes people extract from their piggy banks.

III. Dollars and Sense

More on the proposed pipeline:



http://hillshepherd.blogspot.com/2009/08/t...

The United States is one of the main members of the Asian Development Bank.

Now, why should we give a rat’s ass if Caspian Sea natural gas can be transported to Pakistan and then to India? If we are employees of General Electric or if we are indebted to GE for months of favorable coverage on its news program MSNBC and in its magazine Newsweek we would care. Because GE is still up to its neck in Enron’s old Dabhol Power Plant—which needs natural gas to run.



http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/N...

$130 million. Almost enough to run for president of the United States. However, the plant has run into problems due to lack of natural gas. The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline should solve those problems once and for all.

Who will build this $6 billion (plus cost over runs) pipeline? I don’t know. Maybe Halliburton will bid. I can be pretty sure that the company that wins the contract is going to be very, very pleased to have U.S. troops in the country to help protect its investment.





One final word about GE. Recall how the company and its news networks and magazine turned on George W. Bush back in 2005. GE became very down on the war in Iraq, way before the other members of the corporate media. Is it possible that the company was not against war? Maybe they just wanted to war moved back up to Afghanistan, so that the stalled pipeline project could be resumed.

Tell me about it. I’ve been a U.S. citizen for 50 years. That is half a century of disillusionment with all our presidents, including the ones who belong(ed) to my party. Jack Kennedy started it back in 1963 by getting killed. It was the first---and last---time I ever saw my ex-Marine father cry.

A few years later, LBJ blew it all----the Civil Rights Act, the War on Poverty, Medicare---by getting the country stuck in a war that made lots of cents for his long time financial backer Brown & Root, but no sense for the United States of America. His announcement that he would not seek re-election was another one of those worst of times moments, followed by the double assassinations of Dr. King and Bobby Kennedy and culminating in the election of Richard Nixon on a campaign of “four years is enough” to end the War.

Four years and two illegal incursions into other southeast Asian countries later, Nixon was re-elected. Yes, I know Nixon represented the enemy party, but I can’t hate him. His CREEPy campaign tricks were the best thing he ever did for America, since they showed folks that Washington was a sewer and politicians ought not to be trusted. However, as Noam Chomsky predicted all the way back in 1974, the lesson of Watergate would not prevent future presidents from doing the same---or worse.



http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19730920....

You tell ‘em, Chomsky. Just don’t expect them to listen. I did not read this document when it was written. Instead, I stumbled upon it by accident thirty years later, when time had proven Chomsky to be a genius. I’ll bet he would prefer to have been proven wrong.

I did listen to Gore Vidal back in the mid 1970s. He was on TV a lot back then, delivering his “Property Party” talk, about how the United States has only one political party with two branches.



I did not doubt Vidal. My own observations had revealed that corporate Democrats got elected just like corporate Republicans, while ideological Democrats were lucky to win their home state----just like ideological Republicans (Well, to be honest, Goldwater carried the Deep South, too.)

However….

When you are one of the “poor, black or anti-imperialists” living under the thumb of a president who counts upon the goodwill of the members of the John Birch Society, “small adjustments” can mean the difference between starvation and three meals a day. Never mock incremental change, if the alternative is a reactionary spiral into corporate fascism.

In 1976, America was not in the mood for incremental change. The voters wanted great big flashy change. (Picture exploding fireworks and Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders decked out in American flag hot pants) So, they selected A Leader for a Change a Georgia peanut farmer who was so removed from Washington that everyone just knew he had to be clean.



Those were probably the four most relaxed years, politically speaking, in my life. Carter was not perfect, but he was a lot more OK than I expected. Until he blew his re-election and subjected the nation to 12 years of Reagan-Bush Federalist Fascism. Yes, I know that Poppy Bush made a deal with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the election, the same way that Nixon made a deal with Kissinger, LBJ’s guy in Vietnam, to prevent a cease fire until after the election. However, I still blamed Jimmy. Where was all that transformative change that was supposed to make Nixon dirty tricks impossible?

In 1992, Bill Clinton (with a little help from Ross Perot) delivered a miracle. He unseated that rat bastard, George Bush Sr. He brought cute, sassy “I don’t bake cookies” Hillary to the White House. Best of all, he promised to give us universal health care (Yes!).



We all know how that turned out. The Republicans exploited the failed effort to deliver health care reform in order to win control of Congress. They spent four years sniffing panties (for their corporate masters) in order to distract the country, so that it would not notice the next presidential disaster looming on the horizon. W. and his pal KKK Rove stole two elections with the help of our nation’s corporate media. Two excellent Democrats----Al Gore and John Kerry---were consigned to the loser’s circle, from which Democratic presidential contenders never emerge. Cheney fulfilled Chomsky’s prophecy. Our country was plunged into a ruinous war. The rich made out like bandits and the poor got much, much poorer. Any gains which Bill Clinton made were erased. (Didn’t I see this once in a play by Samuel Beckett?) And America told itself Any (Democrat) Must Be Better Than That Pair of Fuck Ups .

And America was correct. Barack Obama is much, much better than Bush/Cheney. My two pet rats, Butters and Artemis are much better than Bush/Cheney. I have had bouts of the flu which I enjoyed more than Bush/Cheney. But…

Is Obama the best we could do? Eighteen more months of war in Afghanistan (minimum), six percent of Americans left out of our “universal” health care (if we are lucky), credit card interest rates that would make loan sharks proud, bankers still paying themselves big bonuses and not a one headed to jail for their role in the mortgage meltdown. FDR had his Ferdinand Pecora. We have Tim Geithner. (Pardon me, while I pick myself off the floor, where I am laughing my ass off. This would be pretty damn funny if it was not so tragic.)

Actually, Obama probably is the best that we could do. I learned long ago that no one makes it to the White House without the blessings of the Rockefellers of this country. And as long as the voters keep trusting (“and wishin’ and hopin’ and thinkin’ and prayin’”) for Mr. Right to come along and make it all better, nothing is going to change. No matter how many times we repeat that word---

Oh well. At least my expectations hit rock bottom decades ago. I feel for the people who spent all of last year having orgies of political anticipation. Bob Dylan was right about one thing.



How does it feel?

You don't like it? Then do something about it.

The health insurance industry and the other members of the Medical Industrial Complex did not create the Leviathan that is health care in the United States all by themselves. They had a lot of help, here at home, from ordinary Americans who believe some pretty extraordinary things.

I. “Money Can Set You Free”



http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/21/americans...

American Calvinists----puritans, Presbyterians and others----taught that salvation was a gift bestowed by God. Nothing you did influenced the state of your soul. God either chose you to be among the elect----or he damned you to Hell for all eternity. The chosen would just naturally reap the benefits of God’s love in the form of material success in life. If your fields were fertile, you labor profitable and your slaves docile, then you were on the express train to paradise. If you lost your farm and were forced onto the streets to beg in order to feed your family, death would not end your suffering, because you were destined for the inferno.

Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism is a great resource if you want to learn more about the link between religion and western style capitalism. As far back as the early 20th century, he noted that Americans had an exaggerated regard for money. He characterized their eternal quest for profit as a “game”. But, in fact, people in the U.S. are very serious when it comes to money. We measure a man’s success by the number of digits in his salary---not by his good deeds. We measure the value of a company by the profit it posts---not the public service it does.

In a culture that calls profit the ultimate good, charity is a sucker’s game. Time spent worrying about the plight of those less fortunate than yourself is time wasted on the “shiftless”, the “lazy”, the “Welfare Queen”---you know, Satan’s chosen. No self respecting puritan would waste a cent improving the health or prolonging the lives of such people, since that would only give them more time to steal cars, rape women and snort cocaine.

Since profit is a sign of God’s grace, puritan Americans do not begrudge members of the medical industrial complex their inflated salaries. A cardiothoracic surgeon who makes a million a year obviously knows what he is doing. A health insurance company that posts a profit must be treating its customers right. The greater the return on its investment, the more sanctified the health care industry becomes. And who would not want God on his side when he is having a coronary?


II. “All You Need is Love”



http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn41... /

Oh yes, romantic love. It is used to sell everything from diet soft drinks to tooth paste. An alien from another planet watching a TV ad for Diet-Coke would think the advertisers were promoting a sex aid. In the U.S., the ultimate happy ending is boy kisses girl and then they walk into the sunset, hand in hand. Since real life does not have a “The End” after each happy moment, tomorrow the girl has to kiss someone else in order to recreate that thrill. So, she spends all her spare money on clothes, makeup, cosmetic medicine including surgery in order to attract potential lovers. She agonizes over a few extra pounds or the laugh lines beside her eyes. She can not find the time or money to get a Pap smear, but she can afford diet pills, growth hormone injections and a tummy tuck. She will not quit smoking, because the last time she tried it, she gained ten pounds!

The penalties for ignoring your appearance can be high, especially for women. Attractive females are perceived to be more intelligent. They are friendlier. They make better workers. Men value their opinions more. And so, they get promoted before their less flashy sisters. If you want proof, just look at Sarah Palin. Millions of Americans adore her---because she is a MILF.

Sex sells in America, and that goes for the health care industry, too. Time and money are spent finding ways to prolong erections, smooth out wrinkles. If those same resources were spent preventing diabetes and high blood pressure, our country might not lead the industrialized world in chronic diseases. However, the thought of no liposuction frightens some Americans more than the threat of heart disease. And so, the enemies of change can scare these voters with talk of “loss of choice”---which is code for “Your insurance will no longer pay for Viagra and Retin A.”

III. “Everyman for Himself”



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091117/ap_on_...

Rugged individualism is both the blessing and the curse of Americans. We are quick to stand up and complain if we do not like the way that things are going. We will even stage a revolution if that is what it takes to get things done.

On the other hand, we are descended from people who despised the countries of their birth so much that they crossed the ocean and then headed west, to find a new home in the wilderness, as far away from civilization as possible. Note that folks in California, our most western continental state, are the least likely to want to pay for stuff for other people. Schools, libraries, prisons---if they do not benefit from them directly, then they will not sacrifice a cent in order to maintain them.

This notion that every man is an island is a nail in the coffin of health care reform. The strongest argument for changing our current system is the lack of focus on prevention which gives us piss poor public health outcomes---at more than twice the cost per person than any other industrialized country spends. Cradle to grave insurance for every citizen of the United States would enable us to keep people healthy for pennies---which would save us billions in sick care, disability and premature death. However, the rugged individualist American is skeptical of any call to make a short term sacrifice for the greater good. He does not understand that we are all connected, economically as well as spiritually, and that his neighbor’s clean coronary arteries can actually influence his own standard of living. To him, the "public" (as in public health) is someone else, and he sees money spent on someone else as money wasted.

Note that these people are not the majority. Most Americans are in favor of increased emphasis on disease prevention (if you do not talk about how such a program will be funded.) The bad news is that 30% of us disapprove of keeping folks healthier.

http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/...

Who could reject disease prevention? Could these be the same 25-30% who kept supporting Bush and Cheney, no matter how many Muslims were killed and Americans were spied upon and laws were broken to line the pockets of VIPs? And why the hell are these people so loud? Do they get some kind of thrill from going on television and acting like dicks? Maybe they do. Narcissism is the ugly cousin of rugged individualism, and fourteen minutes of fame are better than nothing.

One more statistic, implied from the two polls above. If you consider that two thirds of us want disease prevention but only one third of us are willing to pay more in taxes to get a program of disease prevention started, that means that only one third of the people in the United States truly understand the issue. They know that a temporary sacrifice will net significant long term gains. They are willing to plan ahead---and pay for their neighbor’s good health---because in the end, we will all benefit. That is a woefully small number when you consider how much money has been spent trying to educate the public on this issue. Which leads me to another American Lie…

IV. “Knowledge is dangerous.”

What other country would cast votes against a presidential candidate, because the press proclaimed him “too smart”?