Bill O’Reilly’s math

This 22 second statement has got to be seen to be believed. Anyone this math-challenged shouldn't be discussing the Canadian health care system and shouldn't be on the air at all. Via Media Matters. Interesting statistic that the average Canadian lives almost 2 years longer than the average American. BTW, did you know that O'Reilly's average viewer is 71 years old? Who is he going to replace those viewers with in coming years?

Continue ReadingBill O’Reilly’s math

Senator Al Franken charges SCOTUS with “judicial activism”

There's no doubt that Senator Al Franken has arrived. Consider his direct accusations aimed at the current version of the United States Supreme Court. In a thumbnail, Franken charges that the Court has worked hard to crank out pro-business rulings that curtail critically important and long-standing individual rights.

Continue ReadingSenator Al Franken charges SCOTUS with “judicial activism”

Yes, We Can (And We Must)!

President Obama has failed to keep his campaign promises regarding faith based programs and transparency--so far. Admittedly, Mr. Obama worked hard and accomplished much since January 21, 2009. His accomplishments include assembling his administration, getting appointments approved over irrational GOP opposition, trying to include insane Republicans into his cabinet, promoting and signing an $800 (flawed) billion stimulus package, dealing with the budget (and additional appropriations in violation of promises to keep war funding inside the pentagon budget), dealing with Swine Flu, taking international trips, repairing international relations and making an important nomination to the Supreme Court. Yes, Virginia, it’s only been since January 21, 2009! It hasn't been even six months and the poor guy is getting crucified for what he HASN'T yet done. Cool off, chill out a little and consider these proposals (MY proposals): If Mr. Cheney actually speaks—which he no longer does because he prefers not to be questioned further about secret assassination squads he apparently set up and then ordered the CIA not to disclose such actions to the Congress as mandated by federal law. Mr. Cheney has now abandoned his defense to a surrogate, Liz Cheney, who performs her role of defender for the former Vice President based upon her dubious qualifications of being Mr. Cheney’s daughter and a Bush administration appointee in the State Department (which was ignored in the Bush era!). You see, the music died.

Continue ReadingYes, We Can (And We Must)!

What IS that new health care system that we are arguing about?

I've been wondering about this for months. What IS the new health care system that we are arguing about? How can I know if I'm for it or against it until I know what it is? That was one of the topics Bill Moyers discussed with his guests, Trudy Lieberman, director of the health and medical reporting program at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, and Marcia Angell, senior lecturer in social medicine at Harvard Medical School and former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine.

TRUDY LIEBERMAN: [Barack Obama] has essentially advocated is throwing more money into the current system. He's treating the symptom and he's not treating the underlying cause of our problem. Our problem is that we spend two and a half times as much per person on health care as other advanced countries, the average of other advanced countries. And we don't get our money's worth. So, now he says, okay, this is a terribly inefficient, wasteful system. Let's throw some money into it . . . Into the same system. That's his problem. The other problem, in the press conference, was that he was trying to mobilize public support for a bill, and we don't know what that bill is.
Here's a big problem with the current system:
MARCIA ANGELL: Well, that goes to the cause of the problem. We are the only advanced country in the world that has chosen to leave health care to the tender mercies of a panoply of for-profit businesses, whose purpose is to maximize income and not to provide health. And that's exactly what they do.
Angell then strongly states that the system that Obama is apparently pushing doesn't change this sad situation, even though 2/3 of Americans prefer the Canadian-style single payor system. Is Obama going to change health care for the better? Angell says she's not optimistic:
But what I would say this time around, and now I am going to be very pessimistic, Bill. This time around, I don't think it's going to happen because of the power the pharmaceutical and insurance lobbies. I don't think it's going to happen. But I would rather see Obama go down fighting for something coherent and practical that the public could mobilize behind, than go down fighting for this amorphous plan that tries to keep these private insurance industry in place . . . Well, he will have to fight . . . I think he'll go down. I don't think he's grasped the nettle. And I don't think that even the best of the proposals that he is considering are going to be effective. And I worry about even the public option, because the power of the insurance industry is so great that I believe that they would use their clout in Congress to hobble the public option in some way.
What's the only solution? Angell says it forcefully:
I think we have to go for a single payer system. You could institute that gradually. You could do it state by state. You could do it decade by decade. You could improve Medicare. That is, make it nonprofit. But extend it down to age 55 and age 45 and age 35. It would give the private insurance industry a chance to go into hurricanes, earthquakes or something. To get out of the health business. It could be done gradually. I think that has to be done. And it's the only thing that can be done.
As always, Bill Moyers and his guests give you details and arguments that you won't find in most news sources.

Continue ReadingWhat IS that new health care system that we are arguing about?

National traffic safety agency (NHTSA) causes thousands to die by hiding safety data

From a bureaucrat's perspective, it's just much easier to hide inconvenient information. That doesn't make it right to hide important information. Not at all. Heads should roll for the recently disclosed cover-up by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. People died on the highway because of this cover-up, and not just a few people. Back in 2003, federal government researchers estimated that 955 people died and 240,000 accidents occurred in 2002 due to cell phone use. Extrapolate those numbers out to 2009 and we can reasonably assume that 5,000 people needlessly died in highway wrecks because the government didn't release this shocking cell phone usage data and issue a stern warning that people shouldn't talk on cell phones while they drive, because it's as bad as driving while drunk. This cover-up by the U.S. government means that more people died because of the government's corrupt ways than the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks. Shouldn't we declare "war" on safety officials who cause people to die by intentionally withholding safety information? I would have a commission get to the bottom of this to find out who made this piss poor decision to withhold the date. All the people involved should (but won't) spend many years in prison for manslaughter. And let's connect the dots. Why would Congress get mad because of the release of this accurate data? Let's see . . . maybe it's because the telecoms, who contribute massive amounts of money to Congress, would see their profits cut if their customers could run up cell phone minutes while driving. Could that be it? Note: The telephone utilities pour more than $40M annually into lobbying Congress and many millions more into political contributions. These politicians and government employees apparently forget who they work for. Here's a hint: their top priority should not be the telecoms and other monied contributors. They work for us. If they would have asked themselves this simple question ("Who do I really work for?"), maybe they would have felt compelled to release important safety data, which could have saved thousands of lives. This recent disclosure is unbelievable and very very sad. The NYT reports:

The former head of the highway safety agency said he was urged to withhold the research to avoid antagonizing members of Congress who had warned the agency to stick to its mission of gathering safety data but not to lobby states. Critics say that rationale and the failure of the Transportation Department, which oversees the highway agency, to more vigorously pursue distracted driving has cost lives and allowed to blossom a culture of behind-the-wheel multitasking. “We’re looking at a problem that could be as bad as drunk driving, and the government has covered it up,” said Clarence Ditlow, director of the Center for Auto Safety.

Continue ReadingNational traffic safety agency (NHTSA) causes thousands to die by hiding safety data