Life in the US reminds me more and more of the life in the Soviet Russia. See, the good thing about living with the propaganda instead of the news, and the lack of free speech was the abundance of jokes. That subculture of folk fun kept our spirit alive back then. For example, here is one of the political jokes of the Brezhnev's era (the guy with bushy eye brows and slurry speech who ruled the Soviet Union for nearly two decades and died in 1982). Here it goes:
Nixon and Brezhnev had a running race. Nixon beat Brezhnev. Here is how the news was reported in the "Pravda" newspaper, the official organ of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union: "Presidents Brezhnev and Nixon participated in a race. Mr. Brezhnev came second with an excellent result. President Nixon came next to last."
Would you call it factually accurate? Yes, if you work for FOX News.
Today, that "news" network published the results of the EU commission's finding that the last year's war in South Ossetia was started by Georgia. (I wrote an earlier post on that which you can see below.) Here is how they packaged the news: "EU Report Blames Russia and Georgia for War". Here is a passage from the publication: "The EU report went on to blame Russia for conducting a military campaign deep inside Georgia. "All this cannot be regarded as even remotely commensurate with the threat to Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia," the report said. Russia's retaliation went "far beyond the reasonable limits of defense," it said, criticizing the devastating Russian assault on a tiny neighbor that in recent years has moved closer into the West with hopes of joining NATO. In a first reaction, Georgia's EU Ambassador Salome Samadashvili said the question of who fired first on Aug. 7, 2008, was immaterial without considering two decades of friction. She said the "report gives the full context," referring to Russia's invasion of Georgia's separatist regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia."
And here is a link to the whole article if somebody wants to read it first hand: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,557702,00.html?test=latestnews
Compare it with the headlines published by the BBC News today: "Georgia 'started unjustified war' ." (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8281990.stm)
Both articles report on the same findings, but their emphasis is clearly different. Few people read beyond the headlines, and the US readership will remember that "EU Report blames Russia" whereas the rest of the civilized world will get the message that "Georgia started unjustified war." FOX News never fails to put a nice spin on a story, if you know what I mean.
I am still laughing. Did you hear? Their president came next to last. Ha-ha-ha!
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
What Would Jesus Do?
Next time you donate to a non-profit or a charity, you may want to check how much their CEO and other leadership is making. USA today publishes an interesting statistics about the earnings of the top employees in the biggest charities. Here is a passage from the article: "The biggest compensation gainer among top executives was Franklin Graham of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, whose compensation rose 534% to $633,722, much of the gain because of a $366,000 retirement payment. Graham, 57, son of Billy Graham, also earns $483,000 as CEO of charity Samaritan's Purse. " To read more, click here:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2009-09-27-nonprofit-executive-compensation_N.htm#uslPageReturn.
I know people need to be paid and paid well for good work. However, I do struggle to reconcile the thought that these organizations find it possible to pay millions of dollars to some top earners while enjoying the tax exempt status. Somehow this does not feel right.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2009-09-27-nonprofit-executive-compensation_N.htm#uslPageReturn.
I know people need to be paid and paid well for good work. However, I do struggle to reconcile the thought that these organizations find it possible to pay millions of dollars to some top earners while enjoying the tax exempt status. Somehow this does not feel right.
Friday, September 25, 2009
In the Footsteps of the Great
The other day I went to watch "Julie and Julia." I should say that the part about Julia Child was a sheer delight to watch due to the personality of the character and the superb acting of Meryl Streep; and the part about Julie was cute but totally unremarkable. I thought that the part about Julie did not add anything - whatsoever - valuable to the movie. I wish they would have spent all the time on Julia Child - original, passionate, creative, authentic. I still am struggling to understand what makes Julie's tour de force effort in cooking every single recipe from Julia Child's book so appealing. Would we be equally engaged in a journal of an amateur artist who decided to copy every single work by Gauguin in one year and documented his progress online? Someone who decided to learn every sonnet by Shakespeare? So why does cooking appeal to us so much? Because unlike fine art and poetry we can actually enjoy it? What does Julie's understanding of Julia through cooking add to our own perception of the same person had we been afforded more opportunity to observe her without diluting the picture with Julie's trite observations? I don't even think that Julie's personality is big enough to really offer a prism through which we watch Julia - she provides a mere bland sideline comment. So even though I was not mightily annoyed by her presence in the movie, I still find it unnecessary.
Anyway, this is not the point of this post. The point is that I remembered about this movie just now when my son told me that today at school he looked through the guide on "How to Tick People Off" which a friend of his was secretly reading in class. First of all, I did not know that teenagers need GUIDES for that! I thought that knowledge comes naturally. But I suppose, some extremely conscientious teens who take the art of annoying people seriously enough look for additional opportunities and suggestions on how to hone their skills of ticking off people. My son said that from what he had a chance to read, his favorite ideas were to sing along at an opera, and to ask people which gender they were. I am wondering if I should suggest to my son's friend to set a goal, like practice all the tricks in the book in - say - a month, and to track his progress in a blog. You never know, he may become famous just like Julie Powell. Only funnier, I would think.
Anyway, this is not the point of this post. The point is that I remembered about this movie just now when my son told me that today at school he looked through the guide on "How to Tick People Off" which a friend of his was secretly reading in class. First of all, I did not know that teenagers need GUIDES for that! I thought that knowledge comes naturally. But I suppose, some extremely conscientious teens who take the art of annoying people seriously enough look for additional opportunities and suggestions on how to hone their skills of ticking off people. My son said that from what he had a chance to read, his favorite ideas were to sing along at an opera, and to ask people which gender they were. I am wondering if I should suggest to my son's friend to set a goal, like practice all the tricks in the book in - say - a month, and to track his progress in a blog. You never know, he may become famous just like Julie Powell. Only funnier, I would think.
For the Record
Fox News prides itself on reporting facts with no spin. Yesterday, they showed an interview with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, and here is a link to this interview in print: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,555461,00.html. In it both the interviewer, and Mr. Saakashvili several times allude to how the Russian army tried to bomb and kill him during the war last year. Thankfully, the media actually chronicled the details of those insidious attacks as they were happening. And I invite you to watch for yourself - the attack (imaginary), and the reaction of the brave president to that attack.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWlQ_fzECl4&feature=related
Please notice that nobody else around hims acts alarmed until he declares there is danger and starts running away erratically. That is when his body guards desperately try to catch up with him, and finally fight him to the ground and cover him with something which looks like black card board, but must be a super effective defense against air bombs. No sound of the airplane or the bombs is discernible at all, and everybody else seems to be continuing business as usual - the traffic is heavy, and you can see groups of people standing and talking. The 2nd video link offers and additional footage of the entire episode from a different vantage point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7DpBZa9x5Q&feature=related
This reminded me of a Russian joke which goes like this:
A famous Russian poet of the 19th century, Mikhail Lermontov wrote in one of his poems: "The battle was short/The timid Georgians ran away." Georgians became outraged with what they perceived as an insult and tarnishing of their reputation, and they asked the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union to change those poetic lines. The highest authority in the country satisfied their request and ruled that from now on the line should read: "The brave Georgians ran away."
Unlike Fox News I do not pretend that the story above is true - it is a mere joke.
Keep spinning, guys! I am watching, and I will set your record straight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWlQ_fzECl4&feature=related
Please notice that nobody else around hims acts alarmed until he declares there is danger and starts running away erratically. That is when his body guards desperately try to catch up with him, and finally fight him to the ground and cover him with something which looks like black card board, but must be a super effective defense against air bombs. No sound of the airplane or the bombs is discernible at all, and everybody else seems to be continuing business as usual - the traffic is heavy, and you can see groups of people standing and talking. The 2nd video link offers and additional footage of the entire episode from a different vantage point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7DpBZa9x5Q&feature=related
This reminded me of a Russian joke which goes like this:
A famous Russian poet of the 19th century, Mikhail Lermontov wrote in one of his poems: "The battle was short/The timid Georgians ran away." Georgians became outraged with what they perceived as an insult and tarnishing of their reputation, and they asked the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union to change those poetic lines. The highest authority in the country satisfied their request and ruled that from now on the line should read: "The brave Georgians ran away."
Unlike Fox News I do not pretend that the story above is true - it is a mere joke.
Keep spinning, guys! I am watching, and I will set your record straight.
A License to Act Surprised
Did you hear the news in the past two days? The Associated Press reports, "Home resales dipped unexpectedly last month. [...] Sales [...] had been expected to rise to [...], according to economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters." Another news comes today, "Orders for durable goods like aircraft and electronics fell unexpectedly in August." In both quotes italics are mine. We all remember how surprised Alan Greenspan was with the meltdown of the financial system which collapsed under the weight of the bad loans and creative financial schemes allowed under his watch. Until two years ago, I thought that a meteorologist was the best job in the world - putting your smartest face on, you can predict whatever (like more hurricanes this year), then act surprised when your forecast does not come true, then go an still collect your salary. I mean, a psychic is another one of those, but it usually does not come with a clout of knowledge and education - you are sort of expected to be a crook, like a politician, really. I now realize that an economist is one more specialty where you can draw a salary and be mistaken with impunity. Come to think about it, a stock broker in yet another one...
Wow! This should be a major counseling advice to give to our youth choosing their majors in colleges. I would say, "Kid, if you want to be paid no matter if what you do and say is right or wrong, you have a wide choice of specialties to choose from!" And then give them the list which I would call "The List of Majors with a License to Act Surprised."
In reality, though, you did not have to be a rocket scientist or pretend you know anything about anything, you could have just used some common sense. If people are continuing to lose jobs, there is no economic recovery possible regardless of how much you inflate the stock market bubble and how many times you repeat the mantra that the crisis is over. If people are not getting paid, they will be buying less stuff, which will eventually translate into lower orders for all sorts of goods, including durables. If people either don't have jobs, or have a low job security, plus the credit markets get a lot tighter, there will be no revival of the housing market. To EXPECT anything otherwise, and then to ACT SURPRISED is sheer incompetence. I wonder if those same economic "analysts" would be understanding if they took their ailing Mother to see a doctor, the doctor gave her the wrong diagnosis, and then acted surprised when the Mother died. Behavior like this somehow doesn't quite make the cut in medicine.
Wow! This should be a major counseling advice to give to our youth choosing their majors in colleges. I would say, "Kid, if you want to be paid no matter if what you do and say is right or wrong, you have a wide choice of specialties to choose from!" And then give them the list which I would call "The List of Majors with a License to Act Surprised."
In reality, though, you did not have to be a rocket scientist or pretend you know anything about anything, you could have just used some common sense. If people are continuing to lose jobs, there is no economic recovery possible regardless of how much you inflate the stock market bubble and how many times you repeat the mantra that the crisis is over. If people are not getting paid, they will be buying less stuff, which will eventually translate into lower orders for all sorts of goods, including durables. If people either don't have jobs, or have a low job security, plus the credit markets get a lot tighter, there will be no revival of the housing market. To EXPECT anything otherwise, and then to ACT SURPRISED is sheer incompetence. I wonder if those same economic "analysts" would be understanding if they took their ailing Mother to see a doctor, the doctor gave her the wrong diagnosis, and then acted surprised when the Mother died. Behavior like this somehow doesn't quite make the cut in medicine.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
EU Commission Blames Georgia for South Ossetia War
Here is a complete quote from today's publication in the German newspaper Spiegel (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,650228,00.html)
"Independent Experts Blame Georgia for South Ossetia War
An EU expert commission has put the blame for last summer's South Ossetia war on Georgia, but also holds Russia partly responsible, SPIEGEL has learned. The findings, which are still under wraps, are likely to reignite the debate on the causes of the war when they are published.
The independent commission appointed by the European Union to investigate the war between Georgia and Russia last summer has concluded that Tbilisi is responsible for causing the five-day conflict, SPIEGEL has learned.
According to diplomats in Brussels who are familiar with the contents of the secret document, the EU experts also assign part of the responsibility for the war to Russia, however. The report, which stems from an initiative by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and his colleagues from the Benelux countries, concludes that Moscow escalated the conflict through its massive deployment of troops.
The international commission, which is headed by Heidi Tagliavini, wants to keep its findings under wraps until next week because the Swiss diplomat first wants to present the controversial results to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in New York. After that, the ambassadors of the 27 EU member states in Brussels and the Georgian and Russian governments will be simultaneously informed of the commission's findings.
The publication of the report is set to spark renewed debate about who is responsible for the war. Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has already complained that "some idiots say we started the war." Tbilisi is mainly afraid that the report will reduce the chances of Georgia being allowed to join NATO within the near future.
The conflict broke out on Aug. 7, 2008 when Georgia attacked the breakaway region of South Ossetia. Russian forces quickly repelled the Georgian attack and advanced into Georgia. Hundreds of people, including many civilians, are believed to have died during the fighting before a ceasefire was agreed upon on Aug. 12."
They forgot to mention that those hundreds of people killed were peaceful Ossetians sleeping in their houses showered by mortar fire by the glorious Georgrian troops which chose to attack in the middle of the night on the night when the Olympic games started, their hope being that the whole world was busy looking in a different direction. I don't believe deaths among the civilian population are claimed to have been caused by the Russian troops.
Does anybody including Senator McCain still feel that we are all Georgians now?
"Independent Experts Blame Georgia for South Ossetia War
An EU expert commission has put the blame for last summer's South Ossetia war on Georgia, but also holds Russia partly responsible, SPIEGEL has learned. The findings, which are still under wraps, are likely to reignite the debate on the causes of the war when they are published.
The independent commission appointed by the European Union to investigate the war between Georgia and Russia last summer has concluded that Tbilisi is responsible for causing the five-day conflict, SPIEGEL has learned.
According to diplomats in Brussels who are familiar with the contents of the secret document, the EU experts also assign part of the responsibility for the war to Russia, however. The report, which stems from an initiative by German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and his colleagues from the Benelux countries, concludes that Moscow escalated the conflict through its massive deployment of troops.
The international commission, which is headed by Heidi Tagliavini, wants to keep its findings under wraps until next week because the Swiss diplomat first wants to present the controversial results to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in New York. After that, the ambassadors of the 27 EU member states in Brussels and the Georgian and Russian governments will be simultaneously informed of the commission's findings.
The publication of the report is set to spark renewed debate about who is responsible for the war. Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has already complained that "some idiots say we started the war." Tbilisi is mainly afraid that the report will reduce the chances of Georgia being allowed to join NATO within the near future.
The conflict broke out on Aug. 7, 2008 when Georgia attacked the breakaway region of South Ossetia. Russian forces quickly repelled the Georgian attack and advanced into Georgia. Hundreds of people, including many civilians, are believed to have died during the fighting before a ceasefire was agreed upon on Aug. 12."
They forgot to mention that those hundreds of people killed were peaceful Ossetians sleeping in their houses showered by mortar fire by the glorious Georgrian troops which chose to attack in the middle of the night on the night when the Olympic games started, their hope being that the whole world was busy looking in a different direction. I don't believe deaths among the civilian population are claimed to have been caused by the Russian troops.
Does anybody including Senator McCain still feel that we are all Georgians now?
Monday, September 21, 2009
Green Shoots of Socialist Russia in the US
When we came to the US at the very beginning of the 1990s, we did not know what to expect. We just expected it to be totally different, in fact the opposite of what the Soviet Union was. And in many respects, it proved to be true. People lived in private single family homes, everybody owned a car, people smiled to strangers in the streets, and service people were super nice and polite.
It was hard if not impossible to explain to Americans what the reality of our life used to be like. Crammed living spaces, and several generations of one family living in the same tiny apartment were a rule of life, not an exception. People rarely moved from one apartment to the next - it was not uncommon to live for 40-50 years in exactly the same place. Then there were "communal flats" which used to be the main form of urban housing till the 50s, and were still quite common in the 80s, surviving even to this day. Americans struggled to understand what it was - several families living in the same apartment and sharing the kitchen and the only bathroom. Tenements, really - something that America has long forgotten.
I am terrified to see that such living arrangements are making a come back in this country. A recent issue of the People magazine ran an article on a family where the parents welcomed their grown kids with spouses/significant others and grand kids to move back home to help survive the lost income in this economic downturn. Their household size went up from 3 people to 12 practically overnight. I keep hearing personal stories similar to that one from all around me.
Then there is such thing as Craigslist with its Rooms for Rent ads. Check them out for your city - there will be dozens upon dozens of new ones added daily. And the nature of those ads has changed from those where students are looking to sub-lease a space in a pretty shabby apartment, to homeowners from nice neighborhoods, people like me, looking to allow somebody to move into their Bonus room, or the Basement and help pay the mortgage with rental income. A personal friend of mine who has a townhouse she was always very proud of is looking to take in two lodgers to help make ends meet. So whereas in Russia in the past 20 years it became less of a trend for strangers to be sharing living quarters, or for adult children to be living with their parents, in America the trend is reversed, and the new trend is gaining the momentum.
[The only good thing about this is that they invariably give rise to lots of very funny jokes about mother-in-laws. No wonder: if one has to share the kitchen with one's mother-in-law for any extended period of time without the opportunity to move out, one's remedy of last resort is only laughter. So look out for the new in-laws jokes to appear soon!]
Then there is the famed American stellar service which is giving way, too. A friend of mine was flying to Europe with her daughter on buddy-passes. A buddy-pass is a ticket which a person who works for an airline can let you use - it allows you to pay a discounted fare, but you are not guaranteed a seat on a flight, you are only given one if there are some left over. My friend is a permanent resident of the US, but she has a Russian passport. Her daughter was born here. The Delta employee was not only exceptionally rude and incompetent, but she was also deriving apparent satisfaction from putting down a person who was completely in her power. Thus, when she asked my friend for a German visa and was shown one in the passport - she exclaimed in indignation: "How am I supposed to read it?! It is not in English!" Well, duh! Germans tend to write in German, and if this clod was incapable of understanding the dates, she should not have been working where she was. My friend had to patiently explain what the numbers and words on the visa meant, and when the Delta broad realized that the return ticket was issued for the date on which the visa was expiring, she suggested that my friend go and extend the visa. Like, right now. Before boarding the plane which was leaving in 30 minutes. Then she got on the phone with someone with the following lines heard by my friend: "Listen, I have this Russian here [sic!] who is trying to go to Germany. Her return ticket is on the date when the visa is up. Why should we let her go? That's what I think. I think she should go and extend the visa." Etc. Finally, reluctantly she processed my friend's boarding pass, and after the cliche "have a nice flight" added with a sly smile: "By the way, your buddy-pass comes with a very low priority, and the flights are really full, so your chance of getting on the plane are slim to none!" [My friend made it to the flight, and flew to Germany business class.] My friend told me that she has never felt more humiliated in her life in America. It made her feel exactly like we felt in Russia at the hands of some government bureaucrat. The woman was acting with an air of impunity, obviously enjoying her power of making a client miserable. How socialism-like!
So it is with great disappointment that I report observing green shoots of socialism not in the governmental take over or some companies, and not in the expansion of public programs, but in the little things like how we live and how we treat each other. Maybe, this is simply the sign of lesser prosperity? Anyway, just like once you get your ears frost bitten, they become more sensitive to cold, - once you suffered from those demeaning circumstances, you become more sensitive to even the smallest shift in their direction. And I am seeing the shift.
It was hard if not impossible to explain to Americans what the reality of our life used to be like. Crammed living spaces, and several generations of one family living in the same tiny apartment were a rule of life, not an exception. People rarely moved from one apartment to the next - it was not uncommon to live for 40-50 years in exactly the same place. Then there were "communal flats" which used to be the main form of urban housing till the 50s, and were still quite common in the 80s, surviving even to this day. Americans struggled to understand what it was - several families living in the same apartment and sharing the kitchen and the only bathroom. Tenements, really - something that America has long forgotten.
I am terrified to see that such living arrangements are making a come back in this country. A recent issue of the People magazine ran an article on a family where the parents welcomed their grown kids with spouses/significant others and grand kids to move back home to help survive the lost income in this economic downturn. Their household size went up from 3 people to 12 practically overnight. I keep hearing personal stories similar to that one from all around me.
Then there is such thing as Craigslist with its Rooms for Rent ads. Check them out for your city - there will be dozens upon dozens of new ones added daily. And the nature of those ads has changed from those where students are looking to sub-lease a space in a pretty shabby apartment, to homeowners from nice neighborhoods, people like me, looking to allow somebody to move into their Bonus room, or the Basement and help pay the mortgage with rental income. A personal friend of mine who has a townhouse she was always very proud of is looking to take in two lodgers to help make ends meet. So whereas in Russia in the past 20 years it became less of a trend for strangers to be sharing living quarters, or for adult children to be living with their parents, in America the trend is reversed, and the new trend is gaining the momentum.
[The only good thing about this is that they invariably give rise to lots of very funny jokes about mother-in-laws. No wonder: if one has to share the kitchen with one's mother-in-law for any extended period of time without the opportunity to move out, one's remedy of last resort is only laughter. So look out for the new in-laws jokes to appear soon!]
Then there is the famed American stellar service which is giving way, too. A friend of mine was flying to Europe with her daughter on buddy-passes. A buddy-pass is a ticket which a person who works for an airline can let you use - it allows you to pay a discounted fare, but you are not guaranteed a seat on a flight, you are only given one if there are some left over. My friend is a permanent resident of the US, but she has a Russian passport. Her daughter was born here. The Delta employee was not only exceptionally rude and incompetent, but she was also deriving apparent satisfaction from putting down a person who was completely in her power. Thus, when she asked my friend for a German visa and was shown one in the passport - she exclaimed in indignation: "How am I supposed to read it?! It is not in English!" Well, duh! Germans tend to write in German, and if this clod was incapable of understanding the dates, she should not have been working where she was. My friend had to patiently explain what the numbers and words on the visa meant, and when the Delta broad realized that the return ticket was issued for the date on which the visa was expiring, she suggested that my friend go and extend the visa. Like, right now. Before boarding the plane which was leaving in 30 minutes. Then she got on the phone with someone with the following lines heard by my friend: "Listen, I have this Russian here [sic!] who is trying to go to Germany. Her return ticket is on the date when the visa is up. Why should we let her go? That's what I think. I think she should go and extend the visa." Etc. Finally, reluctantly she processed my friend's boarding pass, and after the cliche "have a nice flight" added with a sly smile: "By the way, your buddy-pass comes with a very low priority, and the flights are really full, so your chance of getting on the plane are slim to none!" [My friend made it to the flight, and flew to Germany business class.] My friend told me that she has never felt more humiliated in her life in America. It made her feel exactly like we felt in Russia at the hands of some government bureaucrat. The woman was acting with an air of impunity, obviously enjoying her power of making a client miserable. How socialism-like!
So it is with great disappointment that I report observing green shoots of socialism not in the governmental take over or some companies, and not in the expansion of public programs, but in the little things like how we live and how we treat each other. Maybe, this is simply the sign of lesser prosperity? Anyway, just like once you get your ears frost bitten, they become more sensitive to cold, - once you suffered from those demeaning circumstances, you become more sensitive to even the smallest shift in their direction. And I am seeing the shift.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Clear Vision
We had company over last night. One guest who is an ophthalmologist (eye surgeon) was telling how she recently outraged a family by refusing to do a cataract surgery on their elderly mother. The elderly woman was in a nursing home with a far progressed Alzheimer's, and the family knew her vision was down due to a cataract. So they brought her in with a request of restoring her vision surgically so that their Mom could have a few more months or years of enjoying clear vision while senselessly staring into the ceiling or wherever her gaze happened to fall. The doctor said that upon the examination, the patient was totally unresponsive, sitting in a chair and banging her forearm against her chest repeatedly. She would not make an eye contact, she would not answer any simple questions, and the doctor had no way of examining how bad her eyesight was. A surgery - WHICH THIS PATIENT WOULD BE ENTITLED TO FOR FREE UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM - would have meant that after the procedure she would have to be restrained and wearing a helmet to prevent her from rubbing her eyes for a period of time. There were also some other medical ramifications which made the survival of the surgery and the recovery process very problematic at best. Bottom line - this was an unnecessary procedure, it was not going to enhance the patient's quality of life in any way, and it was medically dangerous. The family was furious with the doctor's decision and accused her of refusing to operate because the patient had Alzheimer's (duh! hello, Sarah Palin with her "death panels!"). The doctor has referred them to a different physician who, in her words, would operate on a corpse.
Things like that run up the cost of our health care without helping the nation to feel better. A girl with diabetes working two part time jobs would be without health insurance coverage for her preexisting condition for a number of years even if she buys a policy, while some nonagenarians in a vegetative state qualify to get a heart transplant for free. What use is clear vision to an Alzheimer patient whose brain is gone?
I want to mention two excellent books, both written by physicians, which explain what makes the American medical system sick (beyond the run amock malpractice system which alone accounts for 25% of the unnecessary spending on defensive medicne). The authors were not supported by grants from any special interest groups, like pharmaceutical or insurance companies. Both books refere to multiple studies the results of which are so often twisted and fed to the public in the altered form to justify bigger spending (but not better results). So here are those books:
John Abramson, M. D. "Overdosed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine. How the Pharmaceutical Companies Are Corrupting Science, Misleading Doctors, and Threatening Your Health." HarperCollins Publishers, 2005.
Nortin M. Hadler, M.D, "Worried Sick. A Prescription for Health in and Overtreated America." The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 2008.
Things like that run up the cost of our health care without helping the nation to feel better. A girl with diabetes working two part time jobs would be without health insurance coverage for her preexisting condition for a number of years even if she buys a policy, while some nonagenarians in a vegetative state qualify to get a heart transplant for free. What use is clear vision to an Alzheimer patient whose brain is gone?
I want to mention two excellent books, both written by physicians, which explain what makes the American medical system sick (beyond the run amock malpractice system which alone accounts for 25% of the unnecessary spending on defensive medicne). The authors were not supported by grants from any special interest groups, like pharmaceutical or insurance companies. Both books refere to multiple studies the results of which are so often twisted and fed to the public in the altered form to justify bigger spending (but not better results). So here are those books:
John Abramson, M. D. "Overdosed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine. How the Pharmaceutical Companies Are Corrupting Science, Misleading Doctors, and Threatening Your Health." HarperCollins Publishers, 2005.
Nortin M. Hadler, M.D, "Worried Sick. A Prescription for Health in and Overtreated America." The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 2008.
The Myth of American Exceptionalism
I have been reading a new book by a British journalist Godfrey Hodgson "The Myth of American Exceptional ism". He has first studied and then worked in the US for most of his illustrious career for almost half the century, and he wrote extensively about American politics and history. He more or less concludes that at some point the America he loved and respected, the beacon of freedom, has slipped into the Messianism and the fallacy of believing in its own supreme greatness and uniqueness. Hence it not only is rapidly losing the respect of the world, but it is also refusing to see how this greatness and prosperity is slipping away from it. Complacency and greatness are two things incompatible.
Today, MSNBC is reporting about Americans going to China (mainland China) for jobs at a fast rate. It turns out that our recent graduates who have extreme difficulties finding even marginal jobs in the US, have a much brighter prospect of finding one in China. The article even goes on to quote one person saying that China today is what America used to be in the 1930s. Here is the link to that article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32937628/ns/business-world_business//.
In everyday life I see all the time that we are complacent and uninformed. The other day my hair stylist asked me how we felt about the health reform, and was dismayed that both my husband who is a physician, and myself felt it was timely and necessary. Unavoidable in fact. She went on to claim that we had the best health care in the world, and was truly amazed when I told her that we are trailing behind EVERY developed country on Earth in our life expectancy and outcomes of many diseases despite spending times more money on our medical system. I told her that Germans and French have a system which ensures better outcomes and longer life spans despite the fact that they eat butter, smoke, don't take cholesterol or pain pills and spend considerably less money as a society on their health care system while having everyone covered. She really has not heard that before. She asked in disbelief: "So-o-o... Why do they ALL want to come here for treatments???" And was again incredulous when she heard the answer: "Well, ... they DON'T!"
Some systems are better than others. I do not think there is much positive to be said about the Canadian system, or even the British one. Some of the things which make the British system dangerous are not going to apply in our situation anyway, like for example the fact that since they have joined the EU any doctor with a diploma from the medical school anywhere in Europe can come and practice medicine in Britain. Some countries' medical education is still substandard. This clearly is not going to happen in the US where licensing rules are very strict and religiously enforced. So I am not advocating blindly following some inferior models. But we need to recognize that there are models which are clearly superior.
We need to come to the realization that we are not the greatest in many respects. My father who is a math professor in one of the US universities has said long ago that a) if the US stops accepting foreigners into grad schools, all the US graduate schools in mathematics can be closed, and b) that it would have made much more sense economically for him to learn Chinese and to to go teach students in China rather than teach Chinese students math in the US in the language which is foreign to both the professor and the students. Like I said, he made this observation years and years ago, and the situation has not improved since then. There has long been a joke in Russian that American universities are places where Jewish professors from Russia teach Chinese students math in English. Every joke, as we know, is a joke only to a degree.
If we ignore the facts, and continue to pat ourselves on the back complacently basking in the myth of our greatness, we are going to irrevocably miss the boat into the future.
Today, MSNBC is reporting about Americans going to China (mainland China) for jobs at a fast rate. It turns out that our recent graduates who have extreme difficulties finding even marginal jobs in the US, have a much brighter prospect of finding one in China. The article even goes on to quote one person saying that China today is what America used to be in the 1930s. Here is the link to that article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32937628/ns/business-world_business//.
In everyday life I see all the time that we are complacent and uninformed. The other day my hair stylist asked me how we felt about the health reform, and was dismayed that both my husband who is a physician, and myself felt it was timely and necessary. Unavoidable in fact. She went on to claim that we had the best health care in the world, and was truly amazed when I told her that we are trailing behind EVERY developed country on Earth in our life expectancy and outcomes of many diseases despite spending times more money on our medical system. I told her that Germans and French have a system which ensures better outcomes and longer life spans despite the fact that they eat butter, smoke, don't take cholesterol or pain pills and spend considerably less money as a society on their health care system while having everyone covered. She really has not heard that before. She asked in disbelief: "So-o-o... Why do they ALL want to come here for treatments???" And was again incredulous when she heard the answer: "Well, ... they DON'T!"
Some systems are better than others. I do not think there is much positive to be said about the Canadian system, or even the British one. Some of the things which make the British system dangerous are not going to apply in our situation anyway, like for example the fact that since they have joined the EU any doctor with a diploma from the medical school anywhere in Europe can come and practice medicine in Britain. Some countries' medical education is still substandard. This clearly is not going to happen in the US where licensing rules are very strict and religiously enforced. So I am not advocating blindly following some inferior models. But we need to recognize that there are models which are clearly superior.
We need to come to the realization that we are not the greatest in many respects. My father who is a math professor in one of the US universities has said long ago that a) if the US stops accepting foreigners into grad schools, all the US graduate schools in mathematics can be closed, and b) that it would have made much more sense economically for him to learn Chinese and to to go teach students in China rather than teach Chinese students math in the US in the language which is foreign to both the professor and the students. Like I said, he made this observation years and years ago, and the situation has not improved since then. There has long been a joke in Russian that American universities are places where Jewish professors from Russia teach Chinese students math in English. Every joke, as we know, is a joke only to a degree.
If we ignore the facts, and continue to pat ourselves on the back complacently basking in the myth of our greatness, we are going to irrevocably miss the boat into the future.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Pride and Prejudice
I have a rare blood type. In fact, I am missing some gene, and that screws up my regular and unremarkable type O. This makes my blood incompatible with any other normal type O blood, and I could not receive a blood transfusion from people who have it (mechanically, I could, but it would be rejected by my body, so it would do more harm than good). About 1 in 2 million people have the same abnormality, and chances are not all of them have a type O blood. This means that there are possibly fewer than 50 people in the US whose blood would be compatible with mine. This means that I am one disaster away from not having any chance at all. If I need a blood transfusion in an emergency, blood banks are almost sure not to have anything to offer to me. And if I ever need a bone marrow transplant, - forget it. Most people would have at least some reasonable second chance. I will have none.
This certainly makes me unique in some way. Am I ashamed of being different? No. Am I proud of being special? No. This is the way I am, it is somewhat inconvenient, but oh well!
This morning I heard a recording of a conversation on NPR between a grandpa and his grandson. It turns out that both are gay. Grandpa came out of the closet in the 70s after he had been married and had fathered several children. He said it was not easy to eventually have to tell each of his children about his sexual orientation. But then he said that his proudest moment came when he told his then 9-year-old grandson about being gay. The grandson who is by now a young man proceeds to tell about his own discovery of his homosexuality. The grandpa takes obvious pleasure in hearing that his grandson is like himself. There is some warm and satisfied laughter exchanged by the two men. This left me profoundly perplexed.
Would it make me truly pleased to find out that my child or my grandchild had the same "unique" blood type I do? Not at all. That uniqueness could make their life hard and could subject them to danger. I would certainly accept it - what else can you do about it? But to act truly pleased? Strange at best.
I see nothing to be ashamed of about being a homosexual. But to be not ashamed and to be proud are two different things. Similarly of not being proud of my rare blood type, I am not proud to be a heterosexual. What is there to be proud of? This is the way I was, well, - made. There is no achievement or accomplishment of my own. I have always thought that the gay pride was actually overcompensating for the perceived prejudice. But two wrongs don't make one right, it would seem.
Homosexuals will always be a minority group - this is just the law of life. It is not easy to be a minority. It can be dangerous. So why would anybody who is gay be truly pleased that their child or grandchild also turned out to be gay? Just because he or she is "like you"? Seems psychologically odd to me.
This certainly makes me unique in some way. Am I ashamed of being different? No. Am I proud of being special? No. This is the way I am, it is somewhat inconvenient, but oh well!
This morning I heard a recording of a conversation on NPR between a grandpa and his grandson. It turns out that both are gay. Grandpa came out of the closet in the 70s after he had been married and had fathered several children. He said it was not easy to eventually have to tell each of his children about his sexual orientation. But then he said that his proudest moment came when he told his then 9-year-old grandson about being gay. The grandson who is by now a young man proceeds to tell about his own discovery of his homosexuality. The grandpa takes obvious pleasure in hearing that his grandson is like himself. There is some warm and satisfied laughter exchanged by the two men. This left me profoundly perplexed.
Would it make me truly pleased to find out that my child or my grandchild had the same "unique" blood type I do? Not at all. That uniqueness could make their life hard and could subject them to danger. I would certainly accept it - what else can you do about it? But to act truly pleased? Strange at best.
I see nothing to be ashamed of about being a homosexual. But to be not ashamed and to be proud are two different things. Similarly of not being proud of my rare blood type, I am not proud to be a heterosexual. What is there to be proud of? This is the way I was, well, - made. There is no achievement or accomplishment of my own. I have always thought that the gay pride was actually overcompensating for the perceived prejudice. But two wrongs don't make one right, it would seem.
Homosexuals will always be a minority group - this is just the law of life. It is not easy to be a minority. It can be dangerous. So why would anybody who is gay be truly pleased that their child or grandchild also turned out to be gay? Just because he or she is "like you"? Seems psychologically odd to me.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Sunset on Bald Head Island
We just came back from a short vacation on Bald. Head Island. Here are a few shots of its glorious sunsets. 
Gerald Celente calling our "recovery" a cover-up
What he says is making sense to me. Average people I talk with don't understand how we can have an economic recovery and a continued loss of jobs at the same time. It is interesting that Celente finds the hope of American Renaissance in going back to the basics on which this country was built - and those basics are not some Christian principles, or general humanitarian values - those principles are the rule of money.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhaEc_4zuFI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhaEc_4zuFI
In God We Trust?
I received a mass mailer from a co-worker today alerting me to the fact that a movement to remove the phrase "In God We Trust" from the US money is gaining the momentum and urging me, along with others on her mailing list, to protest this on some website. This made me think how I feel about the issue. And I realized that I simply do not care one way or the other. I feel a lot stronger about keeping a prayer in schools - at least, I think it could potentially lead to something good, and I personally saw no downside to it as long as the participation was voluntary. Having this phrase on our currency is - well - odd. I have concluded some time ago that many of my fellow Americans pray to God at a Sunday church service, but worship the green buck in the time in between. If godly principles come in contradiction with the green buck principles, the green buck rules (unless we are talking about the Sunday service). So why do we even want to keep this saying "In God We Trust" on our money? It is hypocritical at best. Or cynical at worst. Or even blasphemous.
On the other hand, I seriously don't read and don't care what or who is on our money. I still don't know whose face is on a $1, $5, $10, or a $50 bill. To me it is just paper which I can exchange for goods and services. For all I care, those bills could have Harry Potter's face on them, and I wouldn't notice. So I remain perplexed why anybody who is a true believer would care that such a mundane object as money, which may be the source of all evil, by the way, should have the saying "In God We Trust." What next? The fight for the right and sacred obligation to keep the phrasse "In God We Trust" prominently displayed in every public restroom?
On the other hand, I seriously don't read and don't care what or who is on our money. I still don't know whose face is on a $1, $5, $10, or a $50 bill. To me it is just paper which I can exchange for goods and services. For all I care, those bills could have Harry Potter's face on them, and I wouldn't notice. So I remain perplexed why anybody who is a true believer would care that such a mundane object as money, which may be the source of all evil, by the way, should have the saying "In God We Trust." What next? The fight for the right and sacred obligation to keep the phrasse "In God We Trust" prominently displayed in every public restroom?
One standard of George Lopez
My son loves to watch the George Lopez show late at night on Nickelodeon. I sometimes watch it with him. I remember one episode when a sex offender moves into George's neighborhood, and he is ready to rise up in arms against the predator. His mood changes rapidly when he finds out that the sex offender is a woman, and a young and extremely attractive woman at that. All of a sudden, all he does is introduces himself, welcomes her to the community and tells her he is there if she needs him. His wife is completely appalled by his behavior, and she accuses him of double standards. To which George Lopez replies: "NO! There is only ONE standard! One for men, and one for women!" Ha-ha-ha.
I sort of remembered that episode when I saw in the news today that the United Nations has released a report by its investigators who concluded that Israel's actions in the Gaza strip in December 2008 - January 2009 amount to war crimes and crimes againt humanity.
Here are some excerpts from that report:
"“The mission finds that the conduct of the Israeli armed forces constitute grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention in respect of willful killings and willfully causing great suffering to protected persons and as such give rise to individual criminal responsibility,” the report’s executive summary said. “It also finds that the direct targeting and arbitrary killing of Palestinian civilians is a violation of the right to life.”
It went on to criticize the “deliberate and systematic policy on the part of the Israeli armed forces to target industrial sites and water installations,” and the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields.
On the objectives and strategy of Israel’s military operation, the mission concluded that military planners deliberately followed a doctrine which involved “the application of disproportionate force and the causing of great damage and destruction to civilian property and infrastructure, and suffering to civilian populations.” (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32057&Cr=palestin&Cr1=)
The mission did not exonerate the Palestinians in the conflict, noting "“There’s no question that the firing of rockets and mortars [by armed groups from Gaza] was deliberate and calculated to cause loss of life and injury to civilians and damage to civilian structures. The mission found that these actions also amount to serious war crimes and also possibly crimes against humanity.”
Fox News concluded its extremely short report on this matter with the phrase: "Israel refused to cooperate with the investigation, saying the U.N. Human Rights Council that ordered it was biased against the Jewish state." Any Russian would remember a phrase from a cult war movie which states that what sticks in a person's mind is the last thing you said in a conversation. So it is symptomatic that the last statement in this article was that the findings are not valid because of the anti-Semitic bias. That is what the readers are likely to remember.
Well, well, well. I remember there was a tremendous outcry in the media when last year Russia went into South Ossetia to protect its citizens from random bombing and shelling by Georgian armed forces. Senator McCain felt strongly enough about it to make a silly statement that we were all Georgians now. Our media spared no harsh words for Russia for using excessive military force - and that was the least of what the US found wrong with it. So why is the news about Israeli war crimes confined to some middle pages of the newspapers and to brief mentions? And why am I reminded of ONE STANDARD of George Lopez?
I think in relation to Israel, the US behaves totally like Ryan's Mom (for those who do not have a clue what I am talking about, please watch an extremely funny episode of a Canadian stand-up comedian Russell Peters about Ryan's Mom: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVcePxjFujs). Personally, I have no respect for Ryan’s Mom's parenting methods, nor for the results it achieves.
I sort of remembered that episode when I saw in the news today that the United Nations has released a report by its investigators who concluded that Israel's actions in the Gaza strip in December 2008 - January 2009 amount to war crimes and crimes againt humanity.
Here are some excerpts from that report:
"“The mission finds that the conduct of the Israeli armed forces constitute grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention in respect of willful killings and willfully causing great suffering to protected persons and as such give rise to individual criminal responsibility,” the report’s executive summary said. “It also finds that the direct targeting and arbitrary killing of Palestinian civilians is a violation of the right to life.”
It went on to criticize the “deliberate and systematic policy on the part of the Israeli armed forces to target industrial sites and water installations,” and the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields.
On the objectives and strategy of Israel’s military operation, the mission concluded that military planners deliberately followed a doctrine which involved “the application of disproportionate force and the causing of great damage and destruction to civilian property and infrastructure, and suffering to civilian populations.” (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=32057&Cr=palestin&Cr1=)
The mission did not exonerate the Palestinians in the conflict, noting "“There’s no question that the firing of rockets and mortars [by armed groups from Gaza] was deliberate and calculated to cause loss of life and injury to civilians and damage to civilian structures. The mission found that these actions also amount to serious war crimes and also possibly crimes against humanity.”
Fox News concluded its extremely short report on this matter with the phrase: "Israel refused to cooperate with the investigation, saying the U.N. Human Rights Council that ordered it was biased against the Jewish state." Any Russian would remember a phrase from a cult war movie which states that what sticks in a person's mind is the last thing you said in a conversation. So it is symptomatic that the last statement in this article was that the findings are not valid because of the anti-Semitic bias. That is what the readers are likely to remember.
Well, well, well. I remember there was a tremendous outcry in the media when last year Russia went into South Ossetia to protect its citizens from random bombing and shelling by Georgian armed forces. Senator McCain felt strongly enough about it to make a silly statement that we were all Georgians now. Our media spared no harsh words for Russia for using excessive military force - and that was the least of what the US found wrong with it. So why is the news about Israeli war crimes confined to some middle pages of the newspapers and to brief mentions? And why am I reminded of ONE STANDARD of George Lopez?
I think in relation to Israel, the US behaves totally like Ryan's Mom (for those who do not have a clue what I am talking about, please watch an extremely funny episode of a Canadian stand-up comedian Russell Peters about Ryan's Mom: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVcePxjFujs). Personally, I have no respect for Ryan’s Mom's parenting methods, nor for the results it achieves.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Parental Insecurities
President Obama addressed the nation's school children yesterday via a live televised address. I am not sure if it was shown to high school children - I don't have kids in grade school any more, and my son's high school did not show the address, nor did it contact the parents discussing why it did not. It is possible that the rationale was that it is too late to be preaching basic values to teenagers in high school. I am not sure. I certainly hope that the school did not make this decision because a school for rich white kids does not need to air an address by a black President (many of the parents of those white rich kids voted for this President, and to this day they have not removed the Obama stickers off their rear bumpers as they drop their children off at school).
What surprised me was that this speech has caused such a stir. A friend of mine who I love and respect very much called me yesterday morning and asked me if I felt threatened by my son being exposed to the socialist propaganda in Obama's speech. She had her son opt out of listening to the speech in his school. Well, first of all, I do not see what was so socialist in encouraging kids to do their best in school. (Unless it is now a basic capitalist value to not study well which I won't rule out completely - just look how pathetic our academic school achievements look compared to the rest of the world.) And secondly, no I do not feel threatened by exposing my son to speeches by all sorts of individuals. I feel very confident that as a parent who talks to her children, I can undo any harm done by those people. I think it is healthy for a child to be exposed to different views on the subject, to develop some critical thinking of his own, and to be able to argue one's position against some opposing views.
I don't even feel threatened by the teachers some of which consistently preach tree hugging, environmental Nazism, and man-made tales of man-made global warming. I feel annoyed that my son's time and our money is being wasted in classes like that. I did unsuccessfully try to reason with one of my son's "science" teachers who spent a year promoting her environmental political agenda, as well as with the school administration to make the curriculum a bit more relevant to the declared course of study. However, other than a waste of time I did not fear any indoctrination of my child into those extreme values. You see, I TALK with my child. Over the years I managed not to lose my child's TRUST. And I in turn trust my child to think for himself and to make judgments by himself.
It perplexes me why the public is up in arms against a 20-minute speech, or wants to eliminate great books like "Huckleberry Finn" from the curriculum, yet nobody that I know of was objecting to that substandard instruction our "science" teacher provided for a year. It sure seems to me that the public's priorities are seriously screwed up.
I think the most important value we have in this country is the freedom of speech. And this means that as a society we are going to be consistently exposed to some views with which we disagree. This is normal. I see my mission as a parent not to indoctrinate my child into my particular set of political beliefs, but to raise him as an independent thinker. Doing that without exposing him to a variety of views is impossible. To me opting out of listening to some speeches which MIGHT contain something you disagree with amounts to censorship and ultimately, to propaganda of your own views. Communists felt threatened by the capitalist values which they feared might corrupt the hearts of their citizens, and that is why they completely censored them from our eyes and ears. Why parents in America feel as insecure beats me.
What surprised me was that this speech has caused such a stir. A friend of mine who I love and respect very much called me yesterday morning and asked me if I felt threatened by my son being exposed to the socialist propaganda in Obama's speech. She had her son opt out of listening to the speech in his school. Well, first of all, I do not see what was so socialist in encouraging kids to do their best in school. (Unless it is now a basic capitalist value to not study well which I won't rule out completely - just look how pathetic our academic school achievements look compared to the rest of the world.) And secondly, no I do not feel threatened by exposing my son to speeches by all sorts of individuals. I feel very confident that as a parent who talks to her children, I can undo any harm done by those people. I think it is healthy for a child to be exposed to different views on the subject, to develop some critical thinking of his own, and to be able to argue one's position against some opposing views.
I don't even feel threatened by the teachers some of which consistently preach tree hugging, environmental Nazism, and man-made tales of man-made global warming. I feel annoyed that my son's time and our money is being wasted in classes like that. I did unsuccessfully try to reason with one of my son's "science" teachers who spent a year promoting her environmental political agenda, as well as with the school administration to make the curriculum a bit more relevant to the declared course of study. However, other than a waste of time I did not fear any indoctrination of my child into those extreme values. You see, I TALK with my child. Over the years I managed not to lose my child's TRUST. And I in turn trust my child to think for himself and to make judgments by himself.
It perplexes me why the public is up in arms against a 20-minute speech, or wants to eliminate great books like "Huckleberry Finn" from the curriculum, yet nobody that I know of was objecting to that substandard instruction our "science" teacher provided for a year. It sure seems to me that the public's priorities are seriously screwed up.
I think the most important value we have in this country is the freedom of speech. And this means that as a society we are going to be consistently exposed to some views with which we disagree. This is normal. I see my mission as a parent not to indoctrinate my child into my particular set of political beliefs, but to raise him as an independent thinker. Doing that without exposing him to a variety of views is impossible. To me opting out of listening to some speeches which MIGHT contain something you disagree with amounts to censorship and ultimately, to propaganda of your own views. Communists felt threatened by the capitalist values which they feared might corrupt the hearts of their citizens, and that is why they completely censored them from our eyes and ears. Why parents in America feel as insecure beats me.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Joy of living
Chances are, you may have already watched this video on YouTube. It is very popular. The guy in the video struck me as someone who is truly enjoying living. This is something that no crisis can take away from him. A triumpf of human imagination, skill, perseverence, and courage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z19zFlPah-o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z19zFlPah-o
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
A Convenient Lie
We all know that Al Gore is the biggest inventor of our time. First, he invented the Internet. Then, he invented the man-made global warming. The media was harassing us by the tale of the man-made global warming all throughout the Bush rule years. I haven't heard it lately. Maybe because the falsehood of this notion has become too obvious. Maybe because Democrats are now in power - mission accomplished, and the tool of achieving the goal is retired. Maybe because we are having one of the coolest years on record, and the obvious stupidity of the notion of global warming strikes even the journalists. Maybe because the global economic crisis reduced the size of the trough from which the "scientists" supporting the myth of man-made global warming were collecting their 30 silver coins in the form of grants. Maybe, all of the above.
I will be writing more on how this false notion, though, became a new dogma of political correctness forced down our children's throats in schools. But for now, I just want to list a few facts and resources which debunk the myth of the man-made global warming.
First, there is an excellent British-made 2-hour long documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" which is available for purchase online, and although it will not play on your DVD, it will play on your computer. Lots of data and solid research behind that movie. Hear it from the scientists who did not sell out for the potilically motivated grants.
Secondly, there have been periods on Earth when the climate change was much more abrupt, and the human civilization was not around then. For example, as the last ice age ended abruptly around 11,700 years ago, the Northern Hemishphere over Greenland warmed by dramatic 10 degrees Celsius in just 50 years. (Data quoted by Thomas Friedman in his column.) Compare this to the hysteria over an increase of at most .5 degree F over the past 20 years.
The Arctic cap may be melting, but the Antarctic ice has actually been growing. This reflects just a shift in ice growth patterns. You can look up the pictures and data collected daily since 1979 at http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere. Although it mostly deals with the data from the Arctic, the Antarctic data can be found towards the bottom of the page under the main block of photos on the left (look for SH - South Hemisphere data).
Rising sea levels have been mentioned as an immediate threat and an evidence of the man-made global warming. We need to remember that about 35,000 years ago, seal levels were where they are now. For the next 20,000 years they were dropping till they declined by almost 500 feet. Since that low point they have been going up. So no drama here, unless you have a vested interest in seeing one in it.
About 32,000 U.S. scientists signed a petition questioning the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change's views (http://www.petitionproject.org/).
Finally, recently "a prominent federal scientist" in Associated Press definition, Tom Knutson, has reversed his long-standing conclusion that global warming is going to cause more hurricanes in the Atlantic, and as a result of a new study, published online in the journal "Nature Geoscience" has concluded that warmer temperatures "will actually reduce the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic and those making landfall". (I think a meteorologist is the best job to have: make your prediction - get paid, reverse your prediction - get paid, never get anything right - get paid.)
So there is NO environmental disaster in the making by our release of CO2 into the atmosphere. I think Al Gore has known that all along since his own house, according to reports, generates about 20 times larger carbon footprint than an average American house. I don't blame him - 30 silver coins is 30 silver coins, and the guy needs to make his living since he lost the election.
However, his movie for which he got an Oscar called "An Inconvenient Truth" should be more appropriately called "A Convenient Lie."
I will be writing more on how this false notion, though, became a new dogma of political correctness forced down our children's throats in schools. But for now, I just want to list a few facts and resources which debunk the myth of the man-made global warming.
First, there is an excellent British-made 2-hour long documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" which is available for purchase online, and although it will not play on your DVD, it will play on your computer. Lots of data and solid research behind that movie. Hear it from the scientists who did not sell out for the potilically motivated grants.
Secondly, there have been periods on Earth when the climate change was much more abrupt, and the human civilization was not around then. For example, as the last ice age ended abruptly around 11,700 years ago, the Northern Hemishphere over Greenland warmed by dramatic 10 degrees Celsius in just 50 years. (Data quoted by Thomas Friedman in his column.) Compare this to the hysteria over an increase of at most .5 degree F over the past 20 years.
The Arctic cap may be melting, but the Antarctic ice has actually been growing. This reflects just a shift in ice growth patterns. You can look up the pictures and data collected daily since 1979 at http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere. Although it mostly deals with the data from the Arctic, the Antarctic data can be found towards the bottom of the page under the main block of photos on the left (look for SH - South Hemisphere data).
Rising sea levels have been mentioned as an immediate threat and an evidence of the man-made global warming. We need to remember that about 35,000 years ago, seal levels were where they are now. For the next 20,000 years they were dropping till they declined by almost 500 feet. Since that low point they have been going up. So no drama here, unless you have a vested interest in seeing one in it.
About 32,000 U.S. scientists signed a petition questioning the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change's views (http://www.petitionproject.org/).
Finally, recently "a prominent federal scientist" in Associated Press definition, Tom Knutson, has reversed his long-standing conclusion that global warming is going to cause more hurricanes in the Atlantic, and as a result of a new study, published online in the journal "Nature Geoscience" has concluded that warmer temperatures "will actually reduce the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic and those making landfall". (I think a meteorologist is the best job to have: make your prediction - get paid, reverse your prediction - get paid, never get anything right - get paid.)
So there is NO environmental disaster in the making by our release of CO2 into the atmosphere. I think Al Gore has known that all along since his own house, according to reports, generates about 20 times larger carbon footprint than an average American house. I don't blame him - 30 silver coins is 30 silver coins, and the guy needs to make his living since he lost the election.
However, his movie for which he got an Oscar called "An Inconvenient Truth" should be more appropriately called "A Convenient Lie."
Separation of Church and Conscience - Part II
Fox News is reporting today:
"A Phoenix-area pastor has started to draw protesters to his congregation after he delivered a sermon titled, "Why I Hate Barack Obama," and told his parishioners that he prays for President Obama's death.
Pastor Steven Anderson stood by his sermon in an interview with MyFOXPhoenix, which reports that the pastor continues to encourage his parishioners to join him in praying for the president's death.
"I hope that God strikes Barack Obama with brain cancer so he can die like Ted Kennedy and I hope it happens today," he told MyFOXPhoenix on Sunday. He called his message "spiritual warfare" and said he does not condone killing. [...]
"I'm gonna pray that he dies and goes to hell when I go to bed tonight. That's what I'm gonna pray," he told his congregation."
(http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/31/phoenix-pastor-draws-protests-telling-church-prays-obamas-death/?test=latestnews)
A few days ago I expressed surprise at a minister spreading a very unchristian message of not sharing your wealth. I realize we have freedom of speech in America. But is there freedom of speech within the Church? The Church after all, is an ideological institution charged with a propaganda mission. There are certain tenets of faith which I would imagine should be upheld by the ministers, at least in their sermons. One of which is to love your enemy ("Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." Matthew 5:44). To pray for someone's death seems to be not only in exceptionally bad taste, but it also runs contrary to the church doctrine, and it should not be tolerated by the Church if the Church wants to retain the authority as a spiritual leader.
Messages of hate and calls for violence should not be tolerated when they come from spiritual leaders of any faith - Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or any other. A Christian pastor praying for the death of a US President is no better than a Muslim cleric whipping his parishioners into a frenzy praying for the destruction of America.
"A Phoenix-area pastor has started to draw protesters to his congregation after he delivered a sermon titled, "Why I Hate Barack Obama," and told his parishioners that he prays for President Obama's death.
Pastor Steven Anderson stood by his sermon in an interview with MyFOXPhoenix, which reports that the pastor continues to encourage his parishioners to join him in praying for the president's death.
"I hope that God strikes Barack Obama with brain cancer so he can die like Ted Kennedy and I hope it happens today," he told MyFOXPhoenix on Sunday. He called his message "spiritual warfare" and said he does not condone killing. [...]
"I'm gonna pray that he dies and goes to hell when I go to bed tonight. That's what I'm gonna pray," he told his congregation."
(http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/31/phoenix-pastor-draws-protests-telling-church-prays-obamas-death/?test=latestnews)
A few days ago I expressed surprise at a minister spreading a very unchristian message of not sharing your wealth. I realize we have freedom of speech in America. But is there freedom of speech within the Church? The Church after all, is an ideological institution charged with a propaganda mission. There are certain tenets of faith which I would imagine should be upheld by the ministers, at least in their sermons. One of which is to love your enemy ("Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." Matthew 5:44). To pray for someone's death seems to be not only in exceptionally bad taste, but it also runs contrary to the church doctrine, and it should not be tolerated by the Church if the Church wants to retain the authority as a spiritual leader.
Messages of hate and calls for violence should not be tolerated when they come from spiritual leaders of any faith - Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or any other. A Christian pastor praying for the death of a US President is no better than a Muslim cleric whipping his parishioners into a frenzy praying for the destruction of America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
