Dr. Donald Henderson was the person most responsible for the world eradication of Small Pox. Over the last 3,000 years smallpox is estimated to have killed 500,000,000 people, three times as many that have died in all the wars combined. It is an example of how government is not the problem, how compulsory government intervention in health care can be more efficient than voluntary private efforts and how mandated government efforts in healthcare can cost pennies in prevention and save billions in treatment. Also when the government puts "a bureacrat between you and your doctor" (sic) that bureacrat is often a doctor.
Today the US spends a few million providing security for stock piles of small pox in Atlanta (which Dr. Henderson advocated be destroyed) and nothing on the treatment of this disease.
Henderson led WHO's effort to rid the world of smallpox
One day in 1947, two cases of smallpox turned up in New York City. An investigation identified more cases. The outbreak's source turned out to be a visitor from Mexico who stayed in a hotel with 3,000 guests from 28 states. Health workers raced to vaccinate each one. And they didn't stop there. Over the next four weeks, to make sure smallpox didn't take hold in the USA, health workers vaccinated 6 million New Yorkers, all to contain a 12-person outbreak with just two deaths.
News of the outbreak made a big impression on a Cleveland 19-year-old named Donald Ainslie "D.A." Henderson. Thirty-three years later, he would lead the team that would craft a different kind of obituary — one for smallpox itself.
"We knew the disease could be eradicated," says Ciro de Quadros of the Sabin Vaccine Institute, who worked on eradication in Brazil and Africa. "There was no poliical will, no resources, no ledership.
Most people at the time were intensely skeptical that smallpox could be eradicated. "Anyone can understand that, if you've been to Africa and Asia and you know how vast the areas are and how limited the public health services were," says Henderson, author of Smallpox --The Death of a Disease: The Inside Story of Eradicating a Worldwide Killer, published this month by Prometheus.
. . .
In 1965, at the urging of the USA and Soviet Union, the World Health Assembly decided to build on the West African program and attempt eradication worldwide. World Health Organization Director General Marcelino Candau handpicked Henderson to lead the effort, partly so the United States would take the blame if the effort failed, Henderson writes. Henderson, his wife and three children moved to Geneva and went to work.
Last Tuesday night Republicans got off of the commercial planes that had government licensed pilots that landed on 'single payer' airports that were controlled by government air traffic controllers so that they could go to a 'single payer' convention center that was serviced by a city run non profit so that they could complain saying;
"Don't let the Government take over private business. Don't let them take over health care. Don't let them tell you what Doctor you can or cannot go to."
Afterwards some of them took their invited guests to single payer stadiums that are rented out at subsidy prices and financed with municipal bonds. At the same time many Republican fat cats are taking their families down to the single payer port to use municipal passenger facilities in order to take their families on cruises by profit making companies.
There are thousands of examples of single payer services provided in our country.
We do it when it makes sense.
We currently have very limited 'single payer health care'. We have single payer public health services, by the Center for Disease Control at the national level and the local public health clinics at the county level, while Fire Departments have basically 'crowded out' and eliminated almost all private ambulance service in the US. Quality goes up and prices go down. We no longer spend any money mumps, measles, chicken pox or small pox. Nobody is calling for the elimination of the CDC or the county health clinics because of some arcane ideological principle.
I don't have a problem with any of the single payer airports, convention centers, ports, baseball stadiums, ambulances, or the CDC, that significantly add to the quality of life to the 'haves' in this country as long as they are transparent and are supported by the local population.
It isn't socialism, its called an intelligent solution.
Massive rallies have been tying up Tehran all through the night.
Ahmadinejad in a last minute desperate attack has labelled all of his attackers as "Zionist Agents". NPR went into the rural areas and found that even in traditional poor rural areas that will support Ahmadinejad his support is slipping.
If he doesn't win 51% he will face a single opponent and the final election will become a referendum on Ahmadinejad. Shi-ite culture is based on collective leadership and when any one leader becomes too 'big for their britches' they are taken down. Even if Ahmadinejad should somehow survive, it will not be accepted, he is seriously compromised. Already crowds in Iran are calling "Death to the Government" in a strange reminder to the crowds calling for "Death to the US".
The unintended results of the demise of Ahmadinejad will be to Neo Cons. Neo Cons in Iran and the United States, Israel and Palestine.
Candidate Obama's loan stand among all candidates for talks without precondition set the stage for President Obama's speech in Cairo. The leaders may be restrained but the people in the street and even the urban elites have had enough of the neo con line 'that it is all our way or you are a traitor'. The key trigger for Neo Con-ism is that we are under attack. It works. It works in the US, Iran, Israel and Palestine. But, to paraphrase Lincoln, "You can make some of the people afraid all of the time, and you can make all of the people afraid some of the time, but you can't keep the world in a permanent state of fear.
Following the President's speech in Cairo, the anit Hamas (calling it 'pro-western' is incredibly chauvinistic) coalition in Lebanon took the first step.
Courageous young people in Iran are taking the second step. Obama spoke and the Iranian people listened.
And what everyone will see is that you can defeat extremism without a war, engage a country without bombs.
Once that truth is exposed the Neo Con movment in the US, and the mirror images elsewhere will start to wither and die.
Latest pictures:
Presidential Candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi
Students chant 'death to dictator' in loud protest against Iran president Ahmadinejad
Here is youtube of last night's demonstrations in Iran:
Iran demonstrators aim to see off Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's 'empire of lies'
(see Sky News video here)
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl... It was open insurrection, a rebellion of a sort seldom seen in the 30-year history of the Islamic Republic, an eruption of pent-up rage against the repressive Government of President Ahmadinejad.
“Death to the Government,” chanted the several thousand Iranians packed into a football stadium in Tehran. “Death to dictators,” roared the young men and women, draped in green shirts, ribbons, bandanas and headscarves to signal their support for Mir Hossein Mousavi. “Bye-bye Ahmadi,” they sang as they waved a sea of banners for the man who hopes to topple Mr Ahmadinejad in the presidential election on Friday. “Don’t rig the election,” they added for good measure.
Women have suffered particularly badly under Mr Ahmadinejad, and twentysomethings sporting sunglasses, make-up and dyed hair beneath their mandatory headscarves shouted themselves hoarse as speaker after speaker promised an end to repression, despair and the “empire of lies”.
“I feel danger every second I’m on the street because of the morality police,” an arts student called Nina said. As she was speaking another young woman way back in the mêlée scribbled a note and passed it forward. “We need freedom. We want big change. We don’t want liar government,” it declared.
Demonstrators Hit the Streets Ahead of Iranian Election
Tensions flared in Tehran Wednesday night as thousands of protesters marched to the state television center, enraged by the discovery that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was being given more airtime than his opponents.
The demonstration came as a leading conservative accused reformists of fomenting a "velvet revolution." Yadollah Javani, a leader of the hardline Revolutionary Guards, said that reformists were going to claim vote-rigging if their candidate, Mir Hossein Mousavi, loses in Friday's presidential elections. He vowed to crush any post-election violence. As the accusations flew, Hojatoleslam Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a former president and powerful cleric, wrote an open letter to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, complaining about allegations of corruption that Ahmadinejad had levelled against his family in a televised debate last week. He warned that Khamenei’s failure to act against those "lies" could spark social unrest.
Iranian elections: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad could lose as Mousavi emerges as leading challenger
For the first time, there is a real chance of a sitting president suffering defeat at the ballot box, an outcome that would be a political earthquake with no precedent anywhere in the Middle East. Until a few weeks ago, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the clear favourite to win another four years in power. His three predecessors had all achieved re-election and served two terms.
Moreover, Mr Ahmadinejad seemed to have every political advantage, including the crucial support of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and all the benefits of incumbency, ranging from the official media's lavish praise to control of the government machine.
His most popular opponent, Mohammed Khatami, the former president, had given him an unexpected bonus by abandoning the race for the presidency.
Yet the campaign's final weeks have changed everything. Mir-Hossein Mousavi, a former prime minister, has emerged as the president's leading challenger. Mr Mousavi has managed to tap a well of discontent over the hardships inflicted by Iran's stagnant economy and crushing levels of unemployment. Televised debates have allowed him to attack Mr Ahmadinejad directly and appeal to the country's youthful electorate.
Behind the scenes, Mr Mousavi appears to have powerful supporters. Mr Khatami, who served as president between 1997 and 2005 and still commands a large following, has backed him from the outset. Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, another former president, denounced Mr Ahmadinejad in unsparing terms on Wednesday.
The most enduring and endearing quality that President Obama has displayed during the first few months of his administration is unwillingness to procrastinate or delay standing up to important issues, no matter how sensitive they are. He is the President who refuses to 'kick the can' down the road for others to solve.
He is also demonstrated that he is guided by a clear set of principles.
It means that in confronting these issues that he is continually the one who is reshaping square blocks into round holes. That process means that sometimes the enactment of actual policies in a real world with real conflicting interests means that theoretical solutions have to be tempered with competing political interests.
This is clearly seen in closing the detention facility at Gitmo. Stated the principle, advancing the policy, confronting the details. Some of those details confront awkward realities that are the result of policy of the Bush administration and do not fit a simplistic or magical solution. The contrast to Congress is astonishing.
While a large swath of Democratic congresspeople, even those from safe districts, remained quiet and voted with Republican fear mongering sentiments, the President remains firm, standing alone taking the heat.
The Cairo speech is another example.
Evenhanded, based in history and historical in reach.
Stating what everyone knows but no one confronts directly against their own interests. On issues where around the world leaders on all sides are continually 'preaching to their own choir' for their own domestic political advantage. Against Islamic extremism and its terrorist strategy, against Israeli settlements and Palestinian tolerance of violence, for Iran's rights as a nation but against nuclear proliferation, support of Islamic people expanding their path to Democracy, religious tolerance, equality of women and a shared vision of economic prosperity, not a single can kicked.
We will see in the next few weeks an organized campaign campaign to paint him as the destroyer of Israeli security, and some will nit pick the speech for not going far enough.
But our President will remain firm, take the heat and let it just fall off his back as he moves to the next 'can' he refuses to kick. The Republicans will simply be diminished, looking smaller and smaller. But if Congressional Democrats don't start taking up the slack on sensitive issues they too will be diminished, and this isn't good for the country or our Party. Simply because we are in the choir doesn't mean that we agree we every iota of what you say, but frankly those of us in the choir know that in making tough decisions that belie simplistic formulas that sometime you are taking positions that are not your own first preference.
So from the choir, an appreciative and informed choir, thank you Mr. President.
President Obama's "prolonged detention" is to Bush's "detention of noncombatants" in the same way that "apples" are comparable to "pineapples". Here's why:
I. Origination
Bush's intention was to vacuum the battlefield and scoop up as many fish as he could into the detention 'net'.
Obama's intention is to first not bring any new detainees to Gitmo, and secondly put all detainees through normal legal channels, if possible.
II. End Game
Bush's prolonged detention was his beginning and middle game, literally his best case scenario, there was no end game. Bush successfully prosecuted only 3 detainees, who largely plead guilty to get out of Gitmo.
Obama's prolonged detention is only a theoretical worst case scenario, and if it exists, is the result of legal contamination of the Bush administration:
We're going to exhaust every avenue that we have to prosecute those at Guantanamo who pose a danger to our country. But even when this process is complete, there may be a number of people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, in some cases because evidence may be tainted, but who nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States.
III. Imperial Presidency
Bush concealed his actions, memos, rational and tried to take his actions beyond the reach of the American people or any other branch of the Government.
Obama is going to limit the power of the President to make such decisions and establish an appropriate level of oversight and check of Executive power.
I know that creating such a system poses unique challenges. And other countries have grappled with this question; now, so must we. But I want to be very clear that our goal is to construct a legitimate legal framework for the remaining Guantanamo detainees that cannot be transferred. Our goal is not to avoid a legitimate legal framework. In our constitutional system, prolonged detention should not be the decision of any one man. If and when we determine that the United States must hold individuals to keep them from carrying out an act of war, we will do so within a system that involves judicial and congressional oversight. And so, going forward, my administration will work with Congress to develop an appropriate legal regime so that our efforts are consistent with our values and our Constitution.
IV.Honesty in Communicating with the American People
Bush/Cheney used every cheap jingoistic trick to try and deceive the people and incite fear. From the Plame affair to allusions to a 'mushroom' cloud, their was not intellectual honesty.
Obama is using direct straight talk without evasion or deception;
Now, finally, there remains the question of detainees at Guantanamo who cannot be prosecuted yet who pose a clear danger to the American people. And I have to be honest here -- this is the toughest single issue that we will face. . .
. . .But even when this process is complete, there may be a number of people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, in some cases because evidence may be tainted, but who nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States. Examples of that threat include people who've received extensive explosives training at al Qaeda training camps, or commanded Taliban troops in battle, or expressed their allegiance to Osama bin Laden, or otherwise made it clear that they want to kill Americans. These are people who, in effect, remain at war with the United States. .
. .Let me repeat: I am not going to release individuals who endanger the American people. Al Qaeda terrorists and their affiliates are at war with the United States, and those that we capture -- like other prisoners of war -- must be prevented from attacking us again.
V. Inciting Fear for Partisan Purposes
Bush's political operatives used the capture of high value targets to increase the level of fear.
Obama is trying to take the use of fear as a political wedge issue out of the public square, and he has been left to do this by himself.
. . Now, as our efforts to close Guantanamo move forward, I know that the politics in Congress will be difficult. These are issues that are fodder for 30-second commercials. You can almost picture the direct mail pieces that emerge from any vote on this issue -- designed to frighten the population. I get it. But if we continue to make decisions within a climate of fear, we will make more mistakes. And if we refuse to deal with these issues today, then I guarantee you that they will be an albatross around our efforts to combat terrorism in the future.
Concern for Human Rights
Bush had no concern for how these policies would be seen by experts on Human Rights and the constituencies that support Human Rights.
Obama sought them out before he finalizes his policy and discusses it directly with them, seeking their input.
In an interview with the Huffington Post, Massimino (CEO of Human Rights First) detailed what she described as a "lively and detailed and serious" discussion on some of the days most vexing national security issues. Over the course of roughly an hour and fifteen minutes, Obama, along with Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, Attorney General Eric Holder, advisers Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod, foreign policy hand Dennis McDonough, and counter-terrorism chief John Brennan, held court with a group of academics, as well as officials with the ACLU, Human Rights Watch, and the Center for Constitutional Rights.
Asked to attend the meeting on Tuesday afternoon, the group came prepared with what Massimino described as "some pointed pushback and questions" on a variety of topics. The president, she added, spoke for roughly fifteen minutes before opening up the forum for questions.
"It was really a back and forth discussion," said Massimino. "It was not, one side makes a presentation and the other side listens and takes notes. It was really probing."
There was much to probe. According to Massimino, Obama had "two baskets of issues he wanted to talk about: one was Guantanamo and all of the things pertaining to closing it. And the other was transparency.
Conclusion
President Obama now stands virtually alone as the only politician that wants to unconditionally bring Gitmo detainees to US soil. While Republican Senators launch a ridiculous fear campaign and Democratic Senators largely run and hide, President Obama proceeds with trademark persist ency.
He clearly intends to use existing civilian court system for some detainees, significantly transform military tribunals so that standards of due process can be used for others, release detainees that are innocent and repatriate others who are no longer a threat.
For any others that continue to engage in a state of war against the US, and who may not fit the existing system the President intends to find an answer that is consistent with our values. The US has always detained Prisoners of War who continue to demonstrate a real threat to the country. Our constitution is not an invitation to suicide. He will subject that system to oversight of congress and the judiciary.
The biggest difference between the two approaches is that Bush had everyone in the same basket while President Obama is doing everything to put no one in that same basket.
Given the extraordinary steps he has taken to close Gitmo and bring all of the detainees into regular judicial process that can be, I think it would be prudent to withhold criticism of his approach until the system he intends to use is actually defined.
Edited to add
These are the camps that were used during WWII to hold hostile combatants still in a state of war against the United States
In the United States, at the end of World War II there were 175 Branch Camps serving 511 Area Camps containing over 425,000 prisoners of war. The camps were located all over the US but were mostly in the South because of the expense of heating the barracks. Eventually, every state with the exception of Nevada, North Dakota, and Vermont had POW camps. This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it. Camp Location Camp Allegan Michigan Bradley Field Connecticut Camp Adair Oregon Camp Albuquerque New Mexico Camp Algoma Idaho Camp Algona Iowa Camp Aliceville Alabama Camp Allen Norfolk, Virginia Camp Alva Oklahoma Camp Andrews Boston Harbor Camp Angel Island California Camp Ashby Virginia Camp Ashford West Virginia Camp Atlanta Nebraska Camp Atterbury (3,500 Italians. Later 10,000 Germans)(www.IndianaMilitary.org ) Indiana Camp AuTrain Michigan, AuTrain Camp Barkeley Texas Camp Bastrop
* Kurt Richard Westphal escaped in August 1945, and was recaptured in Hamburg, Germany in 1954.
Texas Camp Beale California Camp Blanding Florida Camp Bowie Texas<1> Camp Brady Texas Camp Breckinridge Kentucky Camp Briner North Carolina Camp Bullis San Antonio, Texas Camp Butner
* Kurt Rossmeisl escaped on 4 August 1945, and surrendered in 1959.
North Carolina Camp Campbell Kentucky Camp Carson Colorado Camp Chaffee Sebastian County, Arkansas Camp Chickasha Grady County, Oklahoma Camp Claiborne Louisiana Camp Clarinda Iowa Camp Clark Missouri Camp Clinton Mississippi Camp Como Mississippi Camp Concordia Kansas Camp Cooke California Camp Croft South Carolina Camp Crossville Tennessee Camp Crowder Missouri Camp David Maryland Camp Deming
* Georg Gärtner escaped on 21 September 1945, and finally surrendered in 1985. He was the last, and had remained at large for 40 years.
New Mexico Camp Dermott Arkansas Camp Douglas Wyoming Camp Edwards Massachusetts Camp Ellis Illinois Camp Evelyn Alger County, Michigan Camp Fannin
* Located on the campus of the now University of Texas Health Center at Tyler.
Tyler, Texas Camp Florence
* Largest all-new prisoner of war compound ever constructed on American soil <1>it is now used as United States Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
Florence, Arizona Camp Forrest
* First attempted escape by two German POWs on 5 November 1942.
Tullahoma, Tennessee Camp Gene Autry Ardmore Army Air Field, Oklahoma Camp Germfask Germfask, Michigan Camp Grant Rockford, IL Camp Greeley <2> Greeley, Colorado Camp Gruber near Muskogee, Oklahoma Camp Hearne Hearne, Texas Camp Hereford Deaf Smith County, Texas (only for Italians)<2> Camp Hobart Oklahoma Camp Hoffman (close to Fort Lincoln and Held over 5,000 confederate soldiers) Maryland Camp Hood Texas Camp Horseshoe Ranch Hickory, Oklahoma Camp Houlton Maine Camp Howze Texas<3> Camp Hulen Palacios,Texas Camp Huntsdale Pennsylvania Camp Huntsville Texas Camp Indianola Nebraska Camp Jerome Arkansas Camp Las Cruces
* Werner Paul Lueck escaped in November 1945, and was recaptured in Mexico City in 1954.
Las Cruces, New Mexico Camp Lee Virginia Camp Livingston Louisiana Camp Lockett California Camp Lordsburg
* 1942-1945: held Japanese American internees, and then German/Italian POWs.
Lordsburg, New Mexico Camp Mackall Hoffman, North Carolina Camp McAlester Oklahoma Camp McCain Mississippi Camp McCoy Wisconsin Camp McLean Texas Camp Mackan North Carolina Camp Maxey Texas<4> Camp Mexia Texas Camp Myles Standish Massachusetts Camp Monticello Arkansas Camp New Cumbrland Pennsylvania Camp Ogden Utah Camp Oklahoma City On site of Will Rogers World Airport. Camp Opelika Alabama Camp Owosso Michigan, Shiawassee County Camp Papago Park
* Germany's 'Great Escape' was from a 200 foot tunnel by 25 prisoners on 24 December 1944.
Arizona Camp Pauls Valley Oklahoma Camp Peary Virginia Camp Perry Ohio Camp Philips Kansas Camp Pickett Virginia Camp Pima Arizona Camp Pine Grove Furnace / Camp Michaux Gettysburg, PA Camp Polk Louisiana Camp Pomona California Camp Popolopen New York Camp Pori Michigan, Upper Peninsula Camp Pryor Oklahoma Camp Raco Michigan, near Sault Ste. Marie Camp Reynolds Pennsyslvania Camp Jos. T. Robinson Arkansas Camp Roswell
* 1942-1946: German POWs.
Roswell, New Mexico (14 miles SE of town) Camp Rucker Alabama Camp Rupert Idaho Camp Ruston Louisiana Camp Santa Fe New Mexico Camp Scottsbluff Nebraska Camp Shanks New York: Point of embarkation Camp Sharpe Gettysburg, PA Camp Shelby Mississippi Camp Sibert Alabama Camp Sidnaw Sidnaw, Michigan Camp Somerset Maryland Camp Stark New Hampshire Camp Stewart Georgia Camp Stockton California Stringtown POW Camp Atoka, Oklahoma Camp Sutton North Carolina Camp Swift Bastrop, Texas Camp Thornton Illinois Camp Tipton Oklahoma Camp Tishomingo Oklahoma Camp Tonkawa
* Site of murder of Johannes Kunze by five fellow German POWs, who were subsequently tried, found guilty and hanged.
* A 150-foot electrically-lighted tunnel was discovered by authorities.
Colorado Camp Van Dorn Mississippi Camp Wallace Galveston County,Texas Camp Warner Utah Camp Washington
* Reinhold Pabel escaped on 9 September 1945, and was recaptured in Chicago in March 1953
Washington (near Peoria), Illinois Camp Waynoka Oklahoma Camp Wharton Wharton, Texas Camp Wheeler Georgia Camp White Oregon Camp White Rock Dallas, Texas Camp Wolters Texas Corpus Christi Naval Air Station Corpus Christi, Texas Edgewood Arsenal Maryland Eglin Army Air Field Florida Fort Benjamin Harrison Indiana Fort Benning Georgia Fort Bliss Texas Fort Bragg North Carolina Fort Campbell Kentucky Fort Crockett Galveston, Texas Fort Curtis Virginia Fort Custer Michigan Fort Devens Massachusetts Fort Dix
* Harry Girth escaped in June 1946, and surrendered to authorities in New York City in 1953.
New Jersey Fort Drum New York Fort DuPont Delaware Fort Eustis Virginia Fort Gordon Georgia Fort Jackson South Carolina Fort Kearny Rhode Island Fort Knox Kentucky Fort Lawton (Seattle) Washington
* A riot by Negro soldiers took place over preferential treatment given to Italian & German
POW's. One Italian POW was lynched, and Leon Jaworski was the military prosecutor. The Italian and one German POW who committed suicide rather than be repatriated are buried just outside the post cemetery boundaries. Fort Leavenworth Kansas Fort Leonard Wood Missouri Fort Lewis Between Olympia and Tacoma, WA Fort McClellan Alabama Fort Meade Maryland Fort Niagara New York Fort Oglethorpe Georgia Fort Omaha Omaha, Nebraska Fort Ord
* A 120-foot nearly completed tunnel was discovered by authorities.
California Fort Patrick Henry Virginia Fort Reno Oklahoma Fort Riley Kansas Fort Robinson Nebraska Fort D. A. Russell Texas Fort Sam Houston Texas Fort Sheridan Illinois Fort Sill Lawton, Oklahoma Fort Sumner New Mexico Fort F.E. Warren Wyoming Glennan General Hospital Oklahoma Halloran General Hospital New York Hampton Roads Port of Embarkation Virginia Indiantown Gap Military Reservation Pennsyslvania Holabird Signal Depot Maryland McCloskey General Hospital Texas Memphis General Depot Tennessee New Orleans Port of Embarkation Louisiana Olmstead Field Pennsyslvania Pine Bluff Arsenal Arkansas Richmond ASF Depot Virginia Tobyhanna Military Reservation Pennsyslvania Westover Field Massachusetts Rose Hill Rocky mountain arsenal, Colorado
The third category of detainees includes those who we have been ordered released by the courts. Let me repeat what I said earlier: this has absolutely nothing to do with my decision to close Guantanamo. It has to do with the rule of law. The courts have found that there is no legitimate reason to hold twenty-one of the people currently held at Guantanamo. Twenty of these findings took place before I came into office. The United States is a nation of laws, and we must abide by these rulings.
President Obama National Archive Speech
"--there is one institution that makes a pauper the equal of a Rockefeller, the stupid man the equal of an Einstein, and the ignorant man the equal of any college president. That institution, gentlemen, is a court."
One has to wonder what happened to the courage that brought this country into being.
In the failure of leadership that followed the attack of 9/11 and the hysteria that institutionalized torture and Gitmo I often think back to John Adams and the hysteria that followed the Boston Massacre. A snowball led to an argument leading to a crowd leading to shots fired. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Massac...
Anti British propagandists inflamed the incident so that the colonies were incensed and a show trial was held.
John Adams stepped forth and defended the soldiers at considerable risk to the political career he was already planning:
In the trial of the soldiers, which opened November 27, 1770, Adams argued that if the soldiers were endangered by the mob they had the legal right to fight back, and so were innocent. If they were provoked but not endangered, he argued, they were at most guilty of manslaughter. The jury agreed with Adams and acquitted six of the soldiers. Two of the soldiers were found guilty of murder because there was overwhelming evidence that they fired directly into the crowd. However, John Adams used a loophole in British common law: by proving to the judge that they could read by having them read aloud from the Bible, he had their crimes reduced to manslaughter (see Benefit of clergy). The two privates were thus found guilty of manslaughter and punished by branding on their thumbs. The jury's decisions suggest that they believed the soldiers had felt threatened by the crowd. Patrick Carr, the fifth victim, corroborated this with a deathbed testimony delivered to his doctor.
Now we face the clean up of Gitmo. Fundamentally we have three groups of prisoners: One set that is known to be innocent, another set that is known to be guilty and continues to admit its guilt and a third group whose guilt, or the degree of guilt is either uncertain or may be difficult to establish because of contamination of evidence as a result of illegal interrogation, some of which was clearly torture.
And now in a spectacular instance of cowardice the United States Congress has elevated NIMBY to a new set of hypocrisy and cowardice by not funding the shut down of Gitmo as a shadow play of getting tough and not letting any Gitmo prisoner to the soil of the United States.
There is no longer any question about their innocence and the courts have ordered their immediate release
Today, Tuesday 7 October 2008, Washington, DC District Judge Ricardo Urbina ordered the release of the seventeen remaining Uyghur detainees at the American prison facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to be released to US soil. The detained men, cleared of all charges, were meant to have been released in 2004. Concern for security, both that of the United States and that of the prisoners, has prevented their release from Guantanamo or their acceptance by other states, which fear retribution from China.
The actions of Congress is an attempt to undo the legal judgment of the court. Just like McCarthy they are destroying innocent lives for propaganda purposes and those that know better - presumably all of them - are throwing these lives away for political expedience.
The hard core prisoners who continue to embrace their roles and actions will be found guilty of numerous crimes and they should be incarcerated into federal prisons, where they will suffer a sterile existence as high profile prisoners and be robbed of the martyrdom they aspire to. The US Federal system has no problem with high profile prisoners and the Republican hysteria machine that is getting people upset about having 'terrorists on American soil' are shameful idiots.
They will be prisoners and offer no danger to anyone. We should not give them capital punishment, which is what they want but give them a long quiet lifelong imprisonment to make them contemplate their failure and crimes.
III. The Others
Deal with on a case by case basis. Some will be traded, some freed. Some may be tried and serve additional time in Federal Prisons and then returned to their homes, or other countries that will take them.
The Current Absurdity
If the title "Un American Cowardice" is offensive then let me explain to you that is exactly how it will be perceived outside of the United States. If the US is unwilling to accept a single Gitmo detainee, even those known to be innocent, then other countries are not going to accept them either, and Gitmo will remain open.
What most Americans do not realize is that our allies continue to suffer massive civilian losses because of the war with Al Que-da.
People know that civilians continue to die in Iraq and Afghanistan, but there are losses elsewhere.
In Pakistan the numbers killed in 2007 exceeded those of the 9/11 attack and continue to increase:
The report says attacks in Pakistan more than doubled last year as militancy and extremism spread. More than one thousand three hundred people were killed -- an increase of almost three hundred percent.
In Thailand there has been a prolonged campaign against civilians by an Al Que-da ally
in 2005 it is reported
The Thai authorities continue to face difficulties in their efforts to bring the activities of the jihadi terrorist elements under control in Southern Thailand. The current wave of jihadi terrorist violence in the three Muslim majority southern provinces, which started in January last year (2004), has already cost over 800 lives of Government servants, innocent civilians and suspected Muslim militants.
The largest number of attacks were against low level civil servants like teachers. It continues to this day.
A Cowardly Congress
When compared to John Adams heroic defense of British soldiers todays vote on the Senate amendment to HR 2346 is a shameful act of cowardice.
The Uyghur detainees, who have been found innocent and no longer are classified as combatants, and have been ordered by the court to be released should be resettled in the US (ironically the Legislators are punishing these strident anti-Communists).
Those who have substantive charges against them, including the easy to prove 'Conspiracy Charges' and who want to plead guilty should be charged, tried and presumably sentenced to life sentences in Federal Prisons.
Those that remain should be handled on a case by case basis.
The hysteria that the Republicans are creating should be exposed and confronted by Democratic legislators.
During the boat people crises that started in earnest in 1978 there were thousands of odd stories. Some,like the fellow who pretended to be a customs officer in Saigon and hid on a freight boat and walked off in Singapore, were amazing stories of pluck and humor. Many were of tragedy. There are too many to relate here.
There is one story that provides an interesting point.
All of the countries in the area offered some sort of asylum, except Singapore. Except for the plucky fellow mentioned above no refugees arrived directly from Vietnam to Singapore. Singapore felt that being a small city state, predominately Chinese in a neighborhood of Muslims that it would become a magnet for all of the Chinese refugees streaming out of Vietnam if they made any exceptions. (Vietnam was at war with China at the time and was organizing the expulsion of Chinese - for profit - en masse.)
Refugees that were picked up by commercial shipping at sea could be off loaded in Singapore on one condition, that they had a letter of guarantee from the country that the ship was sailing under. There were a lot for Denmark, Sweden and the United States because these countries dominated the shipping lines in the area.
Refugees would be checked for family reunification and if found to not have a suitable anchor would have to be sent to the country that carried the flag for the ship that rescued them.
The routine was broken one time when the US Embassy Refugee Office received word that an American Naval ship had picked up a small boat of about 18 refugees. It was obvious that something was very wrong because all of the boats out of Vietnam were packed with almost no room to sit, and in this boat there was space, a lot of space.
The naval officers separated the refugees and heard one of the most horrific stories of the whole era. Thugs had taken over the boat. They had raped the teenage girls. The boat had been lost for weeks. They had ran low on food and when somebody got sick the thugs threw them overboard. When food got scarce they threw some more over. When food ran out they killed and cannibalized the victim.
The refugee office identified the thugs before they arrived. They were part of a ruthless band that operated as a cell to the VC but had no ideology, they used the conflict steal, extort and create mayhem. The refugee officer documented all of the alleged crimes of this group of thugs in Vietnam and the terrible crimes they committed at sea.
The refugee officer then transmitted the information to every embassy in the world, explaining exactly how terrible these guys were. Then the Naval ship arrived and the refugees were unloaded unto Singapore under a letter of guarantee.
A few days later it became obvious that the refugee officer had just created a great Gordian knot. No one was going to take the murdering/raping/cannibal Viet Cong. And yet the US Government had guaranteed they would take them.
The refugee officer was moved and 'the clean up guy' came in. He had to twist arms. He made deals with countries that couldn't take a lot of refugees to swap 500 guaranteed refugees if they would take one 'cannibal'. It took 6 months, he did what he had to do to get rid of the 8 thugs.
Obama wouldn't have started the Iraq war.
He wouldn't have opened Guantanamo Bay to hold combatants in a legal mumbo jumbo.
He wouldn't have authorized the torture.
Without the torture there wouldn't be any pictures that wouldn't have to be withheld.
Without the torture there wouldn't be any need for military tribunals. The criminals would have been caught and their statements from legal interrogations would have been used.
I understand why people are upset about the photos, the tribunals and all of the other mess. Its an easy shot to take.
But right now Obama has to either prosecute or relocate 200 people that would be as popular as a murdering/rapist/canibal Viet Cong thug. He didn't get them there and he didn't screw up their prosecutions.
Now President Obama has undertaken to make a major speech in Egypt on June 4th to try and undo the damage to American-Muslim relations that Bush/Cheney have done over the last 8 years.
Having had to do a couple of 'clean up jobs' one thing is always clear; When the time for clean up has arrived all of the good options are long gone.
I would have preferred that the pictures be released. I would have preferred the tribunals not needed.
While these preferences were not met my over ridding preference has been, that Obama takes care of the clean up.
He isn't the guy who started the war, authorized the torture or mangled the judicial options.
In the world of political opinion the Republican Party stands alone in not supporting either universal national health care or universal health care insurance
While the Republican Party gives lip service to the idea of competing in the 'marketplace of ideas', history has made its choice. Looking across the span of political parties in modern development Democratic countries there is broad unanimous agreement among political leaders and parties that health care should be universally accessable.
The overwhelming numbers support a nationalized health care system.
A smaller minority support a natinonalized insurance, or nationally controlled health insurance system that requires insurance companies to issue guarantee acceptance at regulated rates.
Only one party, The Republican Party, supports the proposition that individuals are better suited to work it out on its own.
In glancing at the partial list below, the most striking point is that very Conservative parties in Canada, the UK, and Australia all support positions that are to the left of even the Democratic Party in the US.
In all cases these countries spend about 30% less than the US (as a percentage of GDP - 16% versus 10%) and deliver more effective care to more people.
This is because national health care does three things;
1) Eliminates an unnecessary profit center (The health insurance industry).
2) Eliminates the unnecessary cost of administrating an expensive mechanism to approve care and achieves other efficiences of scale.
3) Focuses care on earlier stages of health problems allowing for more effective and less expensive preventative steps to be more universally accessed.
Universal health not only works but it saves money. Because of the eradication of Small Pox by governments across the globe this year we will spend no money and suffer no human loss due to small pox.
Australia
Government programs underpin the key aspects of healthcare. Medicare, which is funded out of general tax revenue, pays for hospital and medical services. Medicare covers all Australians, pays the entire cost of treatment in a public hospital, and reimburses for visits to doctors.
Liberal Party of Australia (center right 36%) The government should "(make) health services available, while encouraging preventative measures and private insurance http://www.liberal.org.au/info/docs/federa...
Social Democratic Party (socialist 57 seats) (website is in German but the SDS is considered one of the most socialist parties in Europe http://www.spoe.at /
People's Party (center right 51 seats) Access to medical care must be guaranteed for every human being, regardless of his/her financial situation, social status and place of residence. http://www.oevp.at/download/general/036201...
Alliance for the future of Austria (eclectic some far right some far left 21) The AFA has a 21 point platform - none of which advocate any change to Austria's socailized health care. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_for_...
Green Party (center left 20) build a society respectful of fundamental human rights and environmental justice: the rights to self‑determination, to shelter, to good health, to education, to culture, and to a high quality of life; http://www.greens-efa.org/cms/default/rubr...
Belgium
Belgium's health care system is one of the best in Europe and none of the parties want to make major changes to it;
Devoting only half as much of its GDP to health as the United States does, Belgium has created a flexible, public-private partnership to pay for and deliver health care that preserves many of the attributes that Americans desire: universal coverage; comprehensive coverage of physician services, hospital care, and prescription drugs; free choice of primary physicians and specialists; and acceptable waiting periods for non-emergency services. (Belgium parties each have a seperate Flemish/Walloon-French speaknig Parties which are listed together) http://www.brookings.edu/events/2007/0205h...
\ Christian Democratic and Flemish/ Humanist Democratic Centre (Christian Democratic 25%) Reformist Movement/Flemish Liberals/ (Liberalism 12%)
Flemish Interest (Right wing popularism/facist/anti immigrant 12%) Even this party, one of Europe's most far right wing parties, does not include any change in the health system in its extensive 18 point platform. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlaams_Belang Open VLD (Liberalism 12%)
Socialist/Socialist Different (socialist 21%)
Ecolo/Green (green 10%)
Canada
Since 1962, Canada has had a government-funded, national healthcare system founded on the five basic principles of the Canada Health Act. The principles are to provide a healthcare system that is: universally available to permanent residents; comprehensive in the services it covers; accessible without income barriers; portable within and outside the country; and publicly administered. http://www.medhunters.com/articles/healthc...
Universal Health Care is considered "sacrosanct" Conservative (center right 36%) A belief that all Canadians should have reasonable access to quality health care regardless of their ability to pay; http://www.conservative.ca/EN/4679 /
Liberal (center left 30%) Medicare—single tier, universal access, publicly-funded health care is still regarded as sacrosanct, and people are very concerned that we’re losing it. More and more people understand that within that system, some publicly-funded services can be privately delivered—the far larger concern is wanting to avoid a two-tier system. This creates an opportunity to have a more open discussion— even if we don’t have the answers, we should be looking for them. http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/platformrep...
Quebec Party (french national 11%)
New Democratic Party (Center left 17%) NDP wants to expand public health care including expanded dental and prescription drug coverage, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Democrati...
Czech Republic
Civic Democratic Party (Center right 81 seats) Ideologically similar to British Conservative Party
Christian Democratic Union (Center left 29 seats) "the creating of a universal health care system and the guarantee of its functionality" http://www.kdu.cz/EN_Videa/Media_11_2006_5...
Communist Party (Communist 26 seats)
Christian and Democatic Union (Center right 13 seats)
Denmark
Every resident in Denmark has free access to the ealth care system with free examinations and treatment. Residents receive a health insurance card from their municipality, which also arranges for the patients choice of doctor. http://www.ouh.dk/wm237197
Venstre (Center right 26%) Recently ran on increasing investment into Denmark's national health care system to reduce waiting lines http://www.venstre.dk/index.php?id=4620
Social Democrats (25% Socialism) Equality means applying decency and engendering a socially fair distribution of society’s goods. It means equal opportunities and equal access to education, health care and other services regardless of gender, social or ethnic background. http://socialdemokraterne.dk/A-English+ver...
Danish People's Party (Right Wing Populism 13.9%) The party is mostly an anti immigration policy and does not advocate major changes in the Danish Health System. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_People...
Socialist People's Party (Socialist/Green 13%) Supports universal free health care.
France
Although the French system faces many challenges, the World Health Organization rated it the best in the world in 2001 because of its universal coverage, responsive healthcare providers, patient and provider freedoms, and the health and longevity of the country's population. The United States ranked 37
Union for a Popular Movement (Center Right 317 seats) refund at fair value both dental work expenses and spectacles, to put an end to inequalities in health care. http://www.support-sarkozy-france.com/nico...
Coalition of the Left (Center Left/Socialists 204 seats) Several different Leftist Parties all supporting universal health care.
Germany
Germany has the world's oldest universal care system and is arguably the most successful. Like Americans, most Germans get their health coverage through their employers. But Germany's rich pay higher premiums to subsidize insurance for the poor — a principle the Germans call "solidarity" http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...
The principle of "Solidarity" has been endorsed by all of Germany's political parties".
Social Democratic Party (Center Left 34%) Free or low cost nursing, doctor medical and hospital care for those who are sick, injured or unable to care for themselves. This may also include free antenatal and postnatal care. Services may be provided in the community or a medical facility. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_th...
Christian Democratic Union (Center Right 28%)
Free Democratic Party (Center 10%)
The Left (Socialism 9%)
Green (Center left 8%)
Christian Social Union (Center Right 7%)
Greece
Many Greeks have been clamouring for reform in their country’s health care system. Still, it was ranked by the World Health Organization as one of the best health care system in the world. Health care cost is the lowest among the European Union member countries. . . Public health system in Greece provides free or low cost health care service to residents contributing to the social security system including their families. Other benefits include free laboratory services, maternity care, medical-related appliances or gadgets, and transportation. Other European Union nationals can also avail of the free health care benefits provided they have with them their E111 forms.
Unrestricted healthcare, guaranteed by the State. Healthcare is the principal social benefit. For current and future generations, a person's quality of life will depend on healthcare. We struggle for a healthcare system, free of restrictions; lifetime healthcare, covering all health needs, for all citizens. http://en.nd.gr /
Panhellenic Socialist Movement (Center Left 38%) Ensuring good education, health care, child care, et cetera for all citizens through government fundings.
Ireland
All persons resident in Ireland are entitled to receive health care through the public health care system, which is managed by the Health Service Executive and funded by general taxation. A person may be required to pay a subsidised fee for certain health care received; this depends on income, age, illness or disability. All child health and maternity services are provided free of charge as is emergency care. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_i...
A survey, commissioned by the HSE in 2007, found that patient satisfaction with the health service was quite high, with 90% of inpatients and 85% of outpatients saying they were satisfied with their treatment. In addition to this, 97% said they were satisfied with the care provided by their GP.
Fianna Fáil (Center Right 41%)
Fine Gael (Center Left 27%
Labour Party (Socialist 10%)
Japan
In the Japanese health care system, healthcare services, including free screening examinations for particular diseases, prenatal care, and infectious disease control, are provided by national and local governments. Payment for personal medical services is offered through a universal health care insurance system that provides relative equality of access, with fees set by a government committee. People without insurance through employers can participate in a national health insurance program administered by local governments. Since 1973, all elderly persons have been covered by government-sponsored insurance. Patients are free to select physicians or facilities of their choice.
Generally speaking, the healthcare in Japan is not only provided free for every Japanese citizen, but also for expatriates and foreigners. http://www.allianzworldwidecare.com/health...
All Parties in Japan support universal health Care
The National Health System of Italy, called the Servizio Sanitario Nazioanale, offers inexpensive healthcare to all European citizens. In-patient treatments which are covered include tests, medications, surgeries during hospitalization, family doctor visits, and medical assistance provided by paediatricians and other specialists. The health system is also responsible for drugs and medicines, out-patient treatments, and dental treatments.
Of all of the developed Democracies (besides the US) the Netherlands relies most on private insurance to combine with government subsidies and is therefore the closest to the US system:
The Netherlands has introduced a new system of health care insurance based on risk equalization through a risk equalization pool. In this way, a compulsory insurance package is available to all citizens at affordable cost without the need for the insured to be assessed for risk by the insurance company. Indeed health insurers are now willing to take on high risk individuals because they receive compensation for the higher risks <3>.
A 2008 article in the journal Health Affairs suggested that the Dutch health system, which combines mandatory universal coverage with competing private health plans, could serve as a model for reform in the US.
Nevertheless the Dutch system is both substantially lower and provides higher care;
"In 2003, the Netherlands spent 9.8 percent of its gross domestic product on health care, below the spending levels in Germany, France, and Canada and more than one-third less than the United States. Even under the constraints of this budget, the Netherlands has implemented a number of health sector reforms that have led to important quality improvement. . ."
While it is not a nationalized system it does provide for Universal Health Care Insurance
Since 1 January 2006, there has been a single healthcare insurance system in the Netherlands, Everyone living in the Netherlands, or paying income tax here is required to take out compulsory healthcare insurance, Although the basic package is fixed by law, people are free to choose their insurer.
Insurers have a duty to accpet everyone for the basic package and older or chronically ill people may not be charged higher premiums for the basic coverage. The new system should lead to more efficient and client-centered healthcare services.
All parties in the Netherlands support Universal Insurance (or completely nationalizing the medical service).
CDA (Center Right 41 Seats)
Labor Party (Socialist 33 Seats)
Socialist Party (Socialist 25 Seats)
VVD (Center Right 21
United Kingdom
The National Health Service (NHS) is based on the principle to provide a universal service for all based on clinical need, not ability to pay. It is supported by all major parties in the UK.
Labour Party (Center Left 350 Seats) Labour considers NHS "their greatest achievement'.
Conservative Party (Center Right 193 Seats) Now supports the NHS without reservation. In 2006, for example, David Cameron unveiled changes to his party's stance on healthcare which effectively undid Thatcher's efforts to try and subsidize patients going to private medical insurance. In his first speech becoming leader he said that he wanted the NHS to be free for all.
Liberal Party (Centrist 63 Seats) Supports NHS and would like to decentralize it and expand its drug coverage.
CDC confirms outbreak of "Elephant Flu" in 26 States.
AP Atlanta, GA
By Dewey Cheetham
In an unusual Sunday press conference Acting CDC Director Dr. Richard Bresser confirmed that the dreaded "Elephant Flu" virus has been identified in 26 states, "This is the same strain that first identified in Wheeling, West Virginia on Feb 9, 1950, when Senator McCarthy babbled the following, 'The State Department is infested with communists. I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department' most rational people new that a serious mental disease had entered in the public square, it continues to this day".
CDC epidemological experts believe that the number of people that are at risk for the flu has declined considerably because they have been getting such large doses of it over the last 8 years.
The CDC has issued the following bulletin listing the 5 stages of development of the Elephant Flu
Elephant Flu - 5 Stage Matrix
The stages of Elephant Flu are classified as hyperaccumulative, in that as the disease progresses the additional stages are added to the previous stages and do not supersede them. It is common for patients to exhibit all 5 stages of the disease. The symptoms generally follow a standard progression and are obvious in their stasis but in some cases the later stages are so pronounced that it is thought that they skipped earlier stages. The symptoms exhibit both chronic and remitting behavior and almost never relapsing although it generally gets more pronounced in 2 year cycles. It almost always is accompanied by serious failure of the histauthentic lobe of the cortex resulting in constant confusion of historical facts.
Stage One - Extreme Political Ego/Narcissistic Transmodulation
Identifying Characteristics The affected person begins to transpose individual experience with metaphysical truth. For example if a person has a bad experience at a post office they might express it with the following comment "The Government is the Problem we should dismantle Department of Education." There is also a transposing of personal interests with both the individual's own larger group interest and historical fact. One of the most common manifestations with this is "The Founding Fathers were both good evangelical Christians and Capitalists". (note 1)
Notable Occurrencess The first recordedoccurrencee was McCarthy'sinsistencee, without any independent evidence, that the US Army had tortured and denied the German soldiers who had murdered 90 American serviceman at Malmedy a fair trial.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy_massa... ) Later this mumbo jumbo would be completely inverted and used by commentator Bill O'Reilly to assert that the Americans had executed German POWs (none of the Germans convicted of these crimes and sentenced to death actuallyreceivedd the death penalty.
Stage Two - Logic Impairment
Identifying Characteristics When they are speaking normal people get severe headaches. They frequently take statements that have an element of truth expand the parameters until what seems like a statement that has a logical foundation becomes absurdity. For example, stating that tax reduction has a stimulative effect is logical when the variable tax rate can reach 60% but becomes increasingly illogical when the rate goes down. If it were true at all rates then a tax reduction of 9% on a 10% rate would be stimulative, which of course it is not. Notable Occurrences
When Republicans move their lips.
Stage Three Apocalyptic Collapse Syndrome
Identifying Characteristics: The affected person becomes hysterical and links everyday events to end of the world with a perpetualeschatologyl interpretation that ascribes final “end of the world” epochal signs to normal everyday occurrences. Notable Occurences: They can be seen daily on The Glenn Beck Show, even other affected people like O’Reilly consider him beyond treatment http://pushingrope.blogspot.com/2009/02/gl... . The affected person becomes delusional (here comparing Hitler and Jesus http://crooksandliars.com/2007/09/24/glenn... ) and also show signs of megalomania (here arguing for a NAZI style Final Solution on all ‘Islamic Extremists’ http://crooksandliars.com/2007/11/06/glenn... ) Stage Four Group Purification Syndrome
Identifying Characteristics: The infected sub group goes through a kind of obsessive nit picking and name calling among its own infected group in a relentless effort to achieve sanctity through purification not dissimilar to an OCD patient repeatedly washing their hands. Notable Occurrences:
See Goldwater vs. Rockefeller, Reagan vs. Ford, and the current Steele vs. everyone vs. Gingrich vs. Palin. Stage Five - Batshit Crazy
Identifying Characteristics: You will know it when you see it: Notable Occurrences:
Too extensive to detail but since the original symptoms shown by Joe McCarthy there have been thousands of examples. Here are some recent examples showing geographic spread of the syndrome;
"I’m a foreign correspondent on enemy lines and I try to let everyone back here in Minnesota know exactly the nefarious activities that are taking place in Washington." Michelle Bachman
George Lambus, candidate (R) for Mayor of Jackson, MS "Crime can only be alleviated by a noose and a stout tree limb. I will provide the noose."
Fox's Megyn Kelly asks ACORN spokesman: "You're going to send child rapists out to conduct the census?
Preventative measures; No prophylactic regime is known to have an effective barrier for the disease. The best preventative step is to stay away from small groups of close minded uneducated fearful people. Try and stay engaged with open minded well educated people with an altruistic mindset interested in history who are capable of transcending their own personal experiences and deal with complex abstract thoughts.
Note (1) The anachronistic claim about Founding Fathers reflecting modern concepts is the most classical and widespread evidence of the Elephant Flu, and the most easily dispatched. Capitalism was only orgainized as a replacement to mercantilism in the mid 19th Century (the New York Stock Exchange was, for example founded in 1817, and Dispensationalism -the precursor to the Evangelical Movement- was first proclaimed by Darby in 1832.
EPA expected to extend endangered specie protection to Young Republicans
Last known spotting of young republicans in the state of Vermont was 2003
By Dewey Cheetham
Recent new findings by pollster Kristen Stolis establishes what wild life watchers at colleges and universities across the country have been reporting anecdotally for the last few years: The homo sapien sub species, Young Republicans (spoilto bratadocious), is going through a radical decline of numbers nation wide.
In her article, The Vanishing Young Republicans (http://www.pollster.com/blogs/the_vanishin... for an actual article on the subject) Stolis documents a seismic shift in the electorate away from the Republican Party, but that the shift is more dramatic the younger the voter. After 9/11 the parties were virtually tied in this age group, four years later the Democrats had established a 12 point advantage:
Two years later, when the Presidential campaign really engaged the younger voter, the Republicans would have loved to achieve that number, the gap was now almost 20 points;
Given that it has long been established that the first three votes are highly determinative in establishing lifelong party identification Stolis points out that the current trend portends a long difficult road ahead for the Republican Party:
Another bit of conventional wisdom I hear from my fellow Republicans about the youth vote is that they need to vote Democratic twice before they are "locked in for life", supporting the notion that there is still time to turn the tide among this generation. Unfortunately, given that the shift began in 2006 and not 2008, for many voters the GOP may simply be too late. For the rest, if the Republican Party does not take immediate action to repair its brand, this generation may exhibit similarly low levels of Republican identification for years to come.
Alarmed analysts at the American Conservative Institute have taken these projections and appealed to the Environmental Protection Agency to protect "Young Republicans" as a threatened specie. Dr. Arnold Gasbagger ACI numerologist laments recent demographic trends, "The numbers keep going down, if they don't go up they will keep going down. If they keep going down then eventually there will be none left. We can't find a single Young Republican north of Virginia".
Senior ACI lobbyist Horace Rottenbury has been pressing the EPA to move the classification of "Young Republicans" from "Conservation Reliant" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_... to "Extinct in the Wild" a move that would raise it up 4 steps in the EPA rating ladder. "Let's face it, Young Republicans no longer exist in the wild. They only exist in those areas where we are able to protect them and give them a stipend or a trust fund allowance."
Changing the status would protect those who continue to carry the moniker "Young Republican" from ridicule and harrassment. For example snarking of photos like this from my own home county of Cheetham County Tennessee would no longer be legally permitted.
It would allow the Republican Party to hire actors and actresses to play Young Republicans in publicity spots and faux events until actual Young Republican numbers can be increased. "We just need an umbrella of time while we are able to find out what might possibly motivate a young person to become a Republican. We have exhausted all known possibilities in terms of economic policies, social policies, civil rights policies. They don't seem to agree with us on anything, drugs, abortion, war, nothing. We were kind of betting on same sex marriage controversy keeping "Young Republicans" numbers up but that actually has proven counter productive" Gasbagger remarked.
Rottenbury is also asking the EPA to issue an injunction against Michael Steele from "stating, attempting to state, comminicate in hand language or attempt to communicate in any visual fashion the concept of 'cool, kool, hip, rad, or any other contemporary expression' to appeal to young people in a way that the Republican Party is 'hip'". "It turns out that the only thing that is worse than the Republican Party not trying to be 'hip' is when Republicans' actually try to emulate young people with contemporary expression. When Steele started talking about Republicans being open to 'hip hop', the numbers of Young Republicans was reducted by 69%."
Recently Michael Steele urged the Republican Party go through a "hip hop" makeover
"We need messengers to really capture that region - young, Hispanic, black, a cross section ... We want to convey that the modern-day GOP looks like the conservative party that stands on principles. But we want to apply them to urban-surburban hip-hop settings."
Shortly thereafter 128 Young Republican Clubs shuttered their doors. If the EPA agrees to the injunction then the Republican Party would be authorized to have an actual Young Republican shadow Steele with a taser and give him a maximum dose every time he tried to make a direct appeal to anyone under the age of 27.
Ranking Republicans Efforts During Obama's first 100 Days
By Dewey Cheetahm
While the media is engulfed in a frenzy of examining every minute of Obama's first hundred days serious efforts to rank the Republican role as the loyal opposition have gone largely unnoticed. Today in advance of Wednesday's media gnashing of teeth the American Conservative Institute released their report and the head of the institute, Dr. Brian Goosestepper sat down with me for an interview on their ranking.
DC: Dr Goosestepper, for those unfamiliar with the "Washington Think Tank" Scene could you tell us a little bit about the American Conservative Institute.
BG: Our motto says it all Dewey, We think so you don't have to. We have, at great expense, assembled some of the brightest minds in the conservative movement to assist in following all that is happening so that people can link on our web site find out what they are thinking and make a donation every morning after their morning vespers. We have assembled some of the best minds from bible institutes and local conservative talk shows to make sure that no rock goes unturned.
DC: What was the point of your report ranking the Republican's first 100 days?
BG: We wanted to make sure that people knew exactly who was cooperating with Obama and who was really fighting him tooth and nail.
DC: Well what about the long held cherished role of "loyal opposition" where those defeated join to maximize cooperation with the new president for the sake of the nation.
BG: You show me a birth certificate and I will show you 'loyal opposition'.
DC: Uh, well I think that President Obama's birth certificate has been released and well documented.
BG: No I mean your birth certificate. We aren't out to be loyal we are out to be pure.
DC: Getting back to the report what was the criteria you used to evaluate individual Republican leaders on President Obama's first hundred days.
BG: We simply looked to see if they had done one single thing to help Obama. We gave a 48 hour grace period after the inauguration and then kept track of everything every Republican Senator, Congressman or Governor has done over the last 97 days.
DC: Everything every Republican politician has done for the last 97 days? That must have been exhausting.
BG: Not really except for a few malcontents not a single one of them has done a single thing, frankly we let Alice our intern keep the log but we had to give her extra duty because she was so bored.
DC: So how did the ratings turn out?
BG: 96% of them got As 2% got Cs and 2% got Fs.
DC: Lets go over some of the big names in your report, Mitch McConnell?
BG: Mitch McConnell got an A as a Senator but an F as Senate Majority leader. As a Senator he did nothing but as Senate Minority Leader he wasn't supposed to do nothing, he was supposed to make sure no Republican Senator did anything as well.
DC: John Boehner?
BG: Boehner got As all around. First as Congressman he did nothing, Second as House Minority Leader he made sure that no Republican Congressman did anything and he did it with real style, he looks like he just woke up from his nap and couldn't do anything the rest of the day.
DC: Michael Steele?
BG: Steele got one of the few Cs in our report. He got into a fight with Rush Limbaugh and criticized some Republicans for being negative but in actual fact Michael Steele has done nothing these last 100 days so we couldn't give him an F.
DC: But you did give a number of Fs out/?
BG: Of course, the Republican Party still needs purification. Snowe, Collins, and Spector all got easy Fs. Arnold gets an automatic F because he married a Kennedy and we gave an F to Crist because he was polite to Obama when he was down there and agreed to the stimulus package.
DC: How did McCain and Palin fair in your report?
BG: McCain got a C. He hasn't done anything but he can't control his own daughter. Palin has already achieved a 'lifetime' A so we don't even bother ranking her, and we don't care if she can't control her daughter, she brings in too much money.
DC: I notice that you gave a 'Special Achievement Award' to Norm Coleman.
BG: Absolutely. He not only did nothing, he did nothing while not being a Senator and prevented the State of Minnesota from doing anything and he raised money for all of us at the same time.
DC: What about the issues that confront the country? What do you feel about torture?
BG: Torture, I will show you torture. It is a crime that President Obama has agreed to doing Stem Cell research by using living zygotes for scientific experiments. These are human beings and if those zygotes are used in another human being those zygotes will be tortured the rest of their lives, trapped in a pancreas or a spinal column. That, my friend, is torture.
DC: Well those zygotes haven't even experienced basic cell division.
BG: That's not true. They can intuitively think, we have proof that these little children can do division in their cells from day one.
DC: Well moving on what would you say is your main goal over the next 4 years?
BG: We don't care how small the Republican Party gets, we want it to get pure. If that means that the Party is going to lose the 35 Congressional Seats held by Republican Congressman in districts that President Obama carried, so be it. Our hope is that things continue to get worse and that voters will eventually just choose to make a change, any change for the sake of change. We will provide the "do absolutely nothing" change. We don't have a lot of time to achieve this because it is essential for us get back into power so that we can protect the 14,448 government sub contractors who are our new financial base. Without them our think tank is in danger.
DC: Well what about the broad grass roots, your politically conservative/religious faithful? Don't they still support you?
BG: Are you kidding? They are losing their savings, their jobs and their disposable income to health care and college education. Jobs are being outsourced. America no longer holds an exclusive trading position in the world. Our grass roots don't have money any more. Don't you ever watch the news? Don't you know how bad it is out their for ordinary hard working Americans?
It is very ironic that today's biggest news story is about the possible outbreak of a pandemic swine flu.
The basic difference in the philosophy of the current leadership of the Democratic and Republican Parties illustrate how political philosophy can have a dramatic effect on infectious disease. You only have to look at the eradication of small pox and the change in strategy of combating Malaria to see how this plays out in the long term.
"Government Doesn't Work, Government is the problem not the solution".
Whenever I hear these infantile remarks I simply respond "Government eradicated small pox"
The greatest achievement of mankind, IMHO, was not reaching the moon but eradicating small pox. It required not simply scientific and technical achievement but it also required social organization. While significant reductions could be made in small pox in some countries, without a multilateral effort in the community of nations it would continue to remain in the human community and a threat to all humanity even though it continued to effect small numbers. As long as it remained active in the human transmission pool there was always a chance that it could mutate and come back in a resistant form.
Small pox was one of the largest killers in the 20th century. It is estimated that it killed as many as 500 million people. In the 1950s it was estimated that it killed 50 million in the 1950s. It is estimated that in 1967 15 million people contracted the disease. Twelve years later it was gone. Government and the dreaded United Nations eliminated it in 12 short years.
It is a story of courage and cooperation. It is a story of American leadership embracing a world wide challenge and getting every single country to sign on. It could only work if it was all or nothing. We needed the cooperation of the Soviet Union and Communist China.
Ironically the sphere of small pox was reduced until it was isolated in a small area in the Horn of Africa, Somalia. International cooperation led to cooperation and its elimination there, and the end of the disease.
The Story that isn't taught
It is a great story, a Shindler's list type of story. There should have been movies and books about it and it should have been in every history text book in every school in this country.
It isn't.
Small Pox remains the only human infectious disease that has been completely eradicated. You can read about it here:
One of the reasons that no one hears about it now is that it is no longer in our economy. This year the governments in the world will spend exactly nothing on small pox (except for the United States and Russia who keep armed guards around the two remaining vials kept in secured labs). It is a story of how cooperative 'socialized' efforts will mean an initial expenditure but that the long term savings are huge. Today we have no loss of life, or expensive treatments for the millions of people who should be suffering from this disease.
Small pox was the most prevalent scourge of mankind for 12,000 years. Today it is gone because of government and international agency action. Scientists, political leaders and health providers working together.
Confronting the Reagan/Bush Legacy
Once the political leadership of the United States lowers the bar on human achievement, it is difficult to sustain the type of world focus and cooperation needed to achieve anything great.
Twenty years of 'Government is the problem' and 'No we can't' has an impact, even on scientists and public health institutions.
One of the remaining most insidious infectious diseases afflicting humankind is Malaria. It is estimated that 300 million people are afflicted with Malaria every year and 3 million die while the vast majority face recurrence through out their life.
In that context we note the following article from CNN that was printed on World Malaria Day, April 24th.
(CNN) -- For the past few decades when talking about malaria, public health officials and malaria experts have avoided the word "eradication."
This reluctance is based in part on relatively recent history. In 1955, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched a valiant effort to eradicate malaria throughout the world. Although the disease was virtually eliminated in many temperate regions and reduced in some tropical areas, the goal of worldwide eradication fell short, and the effort ultimately was abandoned.
Today, malaria has resurged with a vengeance. Half the world's population is at risk of malaria infection. Approximately 250 million people get sick with malaria each year and nearly a million individuals die -- mostly young children and pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa. So when Bill and Melinda Gates dared to resurrect the "E" word in 2007, many in the public health community were skeptical and said in private conversation, "It can't be done."
. . .
Finally, perhaps our greatest challenge is sustaining our research efforts until the ultimate eradication of malaria. We may run the risk of becoming victims of our own success. Once we find ways to reduce the disease burden and deaths due to malaria, the world may no longer perceive malaria as a major threat and may lose interest. Celebrities, politicians and even health officials may focus their attention on other maladies that pose a more immediate threat. We cannot allow this to happen. Unless we want to face the persistence and even resurgence of malaria in the next century and beyond, we must maintain our resolve to fully eradicate this deadly scourge across the globe. It can be done.
Editor's note: Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., is director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health. Fauci has overseen research into preventing, diagnosing and treating disease and has made numerous discoveries related to HIV/AIDS. He has received the National Medal of Science, the Mary Woodard Lasker Award for Public Service and the Presidential Medal of Freedom. April 25, 2009, is World Malaria Day.
Dr. Anthony Fauci says we should aim to eradicate the killer disease of malaria.
What the Bill and Malinda Gates foundation is attempting to achieve is almost biblical in nature. Malaria has been the largest single factor in 'selective pressure' on human gene pool as Malaria has had its way for 50,000 years.
Even with the foundation's assistance it can only be achieved with an active strong American leadership that uses our best scientists and bests diplomats working together.
This cannot be achieved in a divided world. No one would seriously suggest that it could ever be achieved under the Reagan/Bush/Cheney era. What would they do with a government that wouldn't help - bomb them?
You can't bomb Malaria away.
So after these decades of pessimism now scientists believe that in 5 years the world could eradicate Malaria.
Last year on April 25, the World Malaria Day initiative was launched to raise awareness of the disease and efforts to control malaria around the world, as part of the Roll Back Malaria partnership -- a global group of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and governments.
The groups behind the initiative set ambitious goals to ensure universal access to malaria medication and treated mosquito nets in Africa by the end of 2010.
They also announced plans to attain near zero malaria-related deaths by 2015.
Beyond the headline stories of the War, Economy, Torture and so on are other stories that require political leadership that also have an impact on tens of millions. This story can only be achieved with an American administration that is actively engaged, supporting science and diplomacy, and embracing multilateralism. In 5 years from now the Bush administration will be receding, a distant memory, and hopefully it will be taking Malaria and the negative pessimism about what great things our government can achieve with it. Ironically it will also save us money.
This comes after he gets fed up with an earlier on air discussion where the idiot from the American Spectator is trying to talk about whether or not it is effective or not.
Shep, who doesn't walk in lockstep with the others at Fox, finally has had it and starts yelling at his colleague.
The guy still doesn't get it and tries to weasle around it.
On March 19, 1973 James McCord sent the letter below to Judge Sirica.
The lies of the Nixon administration began to unravel and without their ability to abstruct justice it was just a matter of time before everything was exposed, 508 days later Nixon resigned.
Today felt like the day that Judge Sirica made the letter public.
Blood is in the water. Matthews, Meadows and Olbermann are on the scent.
Cheney and Rove are whistling past the graveyard. They are scared and it is showing.
And now the timeline for policy is suspect, all their justifications for torture are being laid bare. Suskind is showing that torture was not used to stop a plot but to provide a "ex post facto" excuse for the war in Iraq. All of those who aspire for Pultizer are finding their targets. Editors who felt that they were absent 8 years ago now have a chance to address history.
All of those who disagreed with the policy from within the administration are now available to settle scores.
Ironically the Bush administration was afraid that they would lose power because they didn't have a good reason to invade Iraq, after the intelligence on the WMD was found to be fabrications of a petty thief and became desperate to coerce information that wasn't there. Wasn't there on the 20th waterboarding, wasn't there on the 183rd time.
After McCord sent the letter the Nixon administration's power to control and stonewall was compromised and soon it was every one was out to save their own skin. White House Counsel John Dean led the way.
Now the lies of the Bush administration are being exposed and unlike Libby they have no power to protect their underlings.
Expensive litigation, public shame and incarceration. Expect to see them fold, and they didn't even face waterboarding.
Cheney and Rove can see it coming and they are scared. There is blood in the water and the sharks are catching the scent, just like they did when McCord's letter was made public.
The following is the full text of the letter that McCord wrote to Judge Sirica during the Watergate trial:
James W. McCord, Jr. 7 Winder Court Rockville , Maryland 20850
TO: JUDGE SIRICA March 19, 1973
Certain questions have been posed to me from your honor through the probation officer, dealing with details of the case, motivations, intent and mitigating circumstances.
In endeavoring to respond to these questions, I am whipsawed in a variety of legalities. First, I may be called before a Senate Committee investigating this matter. Secondly, I may be involved in a civil suit, and thirdly there may be a new trial at some future date. Fourthly, the probation officer may be called before the Senate Committee to present testimony regarding what may otherwise be a privileged communication between defendant and Judge, as I understand it; if I answered certain questions to the probation officer, it is possible such answers could become a matter of record in the Senate and there-fore available for use in the other proceedings just described. My answers would, it would seem to me, to violate my fifth amendment rights, and possibly my 6 th amendment right to counsel and possibly other rights.
On the other hand, to fail to answer your questions may appear to be non-cooperation, and I can therefore expect a much more severe sentence.
There are further considerations which are not to be lightly taken. Several members of my family have expressed fear for my life if I disclose knowledge of the facts in this matter, either publicly or to any government representative. Whereas I do not share their concerns to the same degree, nevertheless, I do believe that retaliatory measures will be taken against me, my family, and my friends should I disclose such facts. Such retaliation could destroy careers, income, and reputations of persons who are innocent of any guilt whatever.
Be that as it may, in the interests of justice, and in the interests of restoring faith in the criminal justice system, which faith has been severely damaged in this case, I will state the following to you at this time which I hope may be of help to you in meting out justice in this case:
1. There was political pressure applied to the defendants to plead guilty and remain silent.
2. Perjury occurred during the trial in matters highly material to the very structure, orientation, and impact of the government's case, and to the motivation and intent of the defendants.
3. Others involved in the Watergate operation were not identified during the trial, when they could have been by those testifying.
4. The Watergate operation was not a CIA operation. The Cubans may have been misled by others into believing that it was a CIA operation. I know for a fact that it was not.
5. Some statements were unfortunately made by a witness which left the Court with the impression that he was stating untruths, or withholding facts of his knowledge, when in fact only honest errors of memory were involved.
6. My motivations were different than those of the others involved, but were not limited to, or simply those offered in my defense during the trial. This is no fault of my attorneys, but of the circumstances under which we had to prepare my defense.
Following sentence, I would appreciate the opportunity to talk with you privately in chambers. Since I cannot feel confident in talking with an FBI agent, in testifying before a Grand Jury whose U.S. Attorneys work for the Department of Justice, or in talking with other government representatives, such a discussion with you would be of assistance to me.
I have not discussed the above with my attorneys as a matter of protection for them.
I give this statement freely and voluntarily, fully realizing that I may be prosecuted for giving a false statement to a Judicial Official, if the statements herein are knowingly untrue. The statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
