One Week to Go

Is this the most important week of our lives?

Oh behave, Mr. Hyperbole!

Surely, the presidential election will determine an awful lot in our country, but does it really compare with:

• The week you got married (for the first, second or third time)?
• The week your child was born?
• The week your parent or spouse passed away?
• The week you lost your virginity? (I suppose I should have put this with the first bullet since we were all virgins when we got married, right?)
• The week you got baptized, confirmed, bar mitzvah'd, or consecrated by Mother Nature.

A little perspective is required. But that said, this election is extraordinarily important.

So was the 2000 election, but we just didn't know how important that was. If American knew 9/11 was going to happen, would we have elected a governor from Texas with no foreign policy experience and a reputation for not taking life too seriously. No way! Gore would have won in a landslide. Who knows how things would have turned out but you can be sure we wouldn't have lost more than 1,000 Americans in Iraq nor would have we run up a $500 billion deficit. People's First Amendment rights would be intact.

And we'd probably be in the midst of a Gore vs. McCain election. Imagine how much more civil and constructive that campaign would be.

Down the home stretch, let's all keep our perspective but not let up in our drive to get Kerry supporters to the polls.

What I did on my 45th birthday

I ate cake today.

I also had a donut. Yes. Cake AND a donut.

I also had a piece of apple pie made by my lovely wife, which was preceded by a carb fest of stuffed chicken breasts and mashed potatoes and gravy. (Oh, yeah, and lima beans just to add color.)

Cake, donut, pie. The triconfecta. (That's trifecta and confection combined.) The pie was the best treat of all. Sugar and love, love and sugar. Hooooorah!

I am 45 today and food makes me happy. I will have a beer in a few minutes. And tomorrow I will run.

I didn't just eat all day, though. I also signed a petition on the Sojourner's Web site. It starts out "God is Not a Republican or a Democrat." Just go to www.sojo.net/petition. We need to let Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and the guy who owns the Harbor Coffeehouse and other right wing political Christians know that they do not automatically speak for all followers of Jesus Christ.

I worry about Christianity when its adherents confuse their religion with their politics. Count me as one of the guilty. Just because I'm a Christian and I believe John Kerry is the better candidate does not mean that John Kerry is the choice of Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

Nuff said. Go to www.sojo.net/petition and sign the petition.

Kerry Kicked Bush Tush

I don't know who the media were watching, but in my estimation John Kerry kicked George Bush's kiester (or is it keester?) in the debate last night.

Joe Scarborough on Chris Matthews' show after the debate said George Bush talks like the common man, so he connects with middle America. If you want to know what the common man talks like, read the Fan Line in the Patriot News sports section. You want a president who talks like that? You want a president who hms and uhs and smirks?

John Kerry won this debate clean and fair. He went in with voters suspicious of his ability to appear presidential. He appeared far more powerful, far more statemanlike, far more composed than W.

Here are some polls and quotes:

CNN / GALLUP POLL ON WHO WON DEBATE Kerry: 53 Bush: 37
CBS POLL Kerry: 44 Bush: 26 Tie: 30
ABC POLL Kerry: 45 Bush 36: Tie: 17

Mort Kondracke: "This is the President's turf, this is the place that the President is supposed to dominate, terror and the war in Iraq. I don't think he really dominated tonight. I think Kerry looked like a commander-in-chief."

Kate O'Beirne, National Review Online's the Corner: "I thought the President was repetitive and reactive."

Jonah Goldberg, National Review Online's the Corner: "The Bush campaign miscalculated on having the first night be foreign policy night."

Bob Schieffer: "The President was somewhat defensive in the beginning"

Mark Shields: "The President showed a few times obvious anger"

Bill Kristol, Weekly Standard: "I think Kerry did pretty well tonight, he was forceful and articulate."

Bob Schieffer: "Kerry got off to a very good start."

Joe Scarborough: "It was John Kerry's best performance ever.As far as the debate goes, I don't see how anybody could look at this debate and not score this a very clear win on points for John Kerry."

(MSNBC)Andrea Mitchell: "This is the toughest we've ever seen John Kerry. He attacked the very core of the President's popularity. He's basically saying, who do you believe?"

(MSNBC)Tim Russert: "Tonight he seemed to find his voice for the Democratic view of the world."

Fred Barnes on FNC: "Kerry did very well and we will have a Presidential race from here on out."

Inspiration from Grover (the fascist, not the blue monster)

I liked Grover on Sesame Street. I don't like Grover in the Republican Party. His name is Grover Norquist and he's a cocky but effective SOB. We desperately need some people like him in the Democratic Party.

If you want some inspiration for the last few weeks of the campaign, read this:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.norquist.html

I think he's off the mark on several points, but he's imagining a utopian world that won't exist. Democrats are still powerful enough to muck things up in Congress and four more years of Bush moving to the right will pull together the left.

That said, this battle is NOT over. According to the latest Quinnipiac poll, Kerry is ahead in Pennsylvania by two percentage points. Many of the young voters in this country have not been polled.

Chins up, forward march!!!

Michael Moore's letter

In a letter to all of his Web site readers, film director Michael Moore upbraids Democrats and liberals (NOT the same thing necessarily) for being a bunch of crybabies. I agree. We wring our hands and complain about Bush, but how many of us have actually done anything about it? How many of us have recruited a new voter or talked to people about out beliefs?

• Send an e-mail today to a friend and urge him or her to vote for Kerry.
• Put a yard sign in your front yard. Let people know it's okay to vote for Kerry.
• Urge young people you know not to give up heart.

Do it soon! Respond and let me know what you're doing and what you're hearing from the Bushies.

Believe me... their cockiness is going to come back to haunt them.

Pride goeth before a fall!

The most important presidential election ever?

Is this the most important presidential election ever? No, that's ridiculous. But it is the most important election in a generation, probably since the election of Kennedy and maybe since Roosevelt beat Hoover in 1932.... and maybe even before.

Why? Because we are in a time of tumultuous change. We are now in a global economy like none ever experienced. The world has shrunk, thanks mostly to the Internet, but also because of cheap air travel, the telephone, and Federal Express. You can sell your Fiestaware dishes to someone in Japan in real time, like you're both sitting at your kitchen table looking at the dish set, and then you can ship it express and your new Japanese friend can eat sushi on Fiestaware three or four days after you ate a hot dog on it.

There's much more. You can type a phrase into Google and get hundreds of thousands of documents and Web sites. You can subscribe to a daily prayer or scripture reading, delivered to you without ever cracking an actual Bible. A hostage is beheaded in Iraq and you can see the video within minutes. The list seems to have no end... nor any rhyme or reason.

These specific uses of the Internet are insignificant. What is truly significant is that the instantaeous nature of the Internet, combined with the utter lack of discrimination about its users (i.e. everyone is colorless, sexless, ageless), has completely changed the way many of us--particularly the young--think about the world. In this world there are few absolutes, precious little stability, instant gratification, almost no privacy. It's called postmodernism.

Anything is possible today, isn't it? Really, think about it. To launch a business all you need is an idea, a computer and an "Internet for Dummies" book. People haven't felt this kind of sense of possibility and opportunity for a long time. Maybe since Neil Armstrong walked on the moon. Maybe since the apex of the move westward. (Opportunity for some, genocide for others.)

Compare that with the world 20 years ago during the Reagan administration. It was marked by stability, an absolute identity of the good guys and the bad guys, traditional values and systems. It was a mechanical world in which every thing and every one had a place, just like a skeleton or the internal combustion engine.

George W. Bush still lives in that world. That's why we invaded Iraq. Bad guys need to be brought to justice. We're right and Saddam is wrong. It's that simple. He forgets that terrorists today are not operating under the same set of rules we are. The Geneva Convention? Forget about it! Heck, we sodomize our prisoners, the terrorists behead there's. In the Arab world, there isn't much different. (Most Arab Muslims would probably prefer to have their heads cut off rather than live with the shame of being sodomized.) Just because we brought democracy on a khaki platter doesn't mean we're the good guys. It's a new world, W.

Another example... cut taxes to the rich to increase investment to increase jobs to decrease poverty. That's an argument with some merit in an industrial economy. But what about an economy that's based on information industries that are hiring Indians and Pakistanis a quarter of what they paid their former U.S. employees? This is now a service / retail / credit card economy. Cutting taxes to the rich means they can eat out and travel more and build bigger houses increasing the need for waiters, lawn cutters, cheap construction labor, and chamber maids. There are few heavy industries--the kind with good paying union jobs--to invest in anymore. Tax cuts just make the rich richer. In this economy a rising tide doesn't float all boats... just the yachts of the wealthy.

Like I said, it's a new world. The question is this: which of the two candidates do I trust to shape American policy in this new world? I honestly don't know if Kerry is the guy to do it, but he's shown that he adjusts to situations and that's what we need right now. Here's a guy who went to Vietnam, saw what was going on there, and came back a changed man. He then had the courage to go before a congressional panel and tell them that the war was wrong. That, my friends, is bravery.

W, on the other hand, has a perception of the present that is completely based in the past. He wants to mold the world to the will of the U.S. This is pure, unadulterated folly. Great nations and empires (and we are an empire built on economic might) fall when they deify themselves, thinking they are the determiners of the future. In George's mind, our military might, which is already fading in case no one has noticed, will be able to crush terrorism.

Anyway, I ramble. But you get the point. The world is changing rapidly. Bush is old school. When old and new cultures collide, there is always conflict. The culture war won't just be in the Middle East, it will be global. And that includes right here in the U.S. Kerry has the personality and skills to handle change. Bush does not.

Footnote: My pick for the most important ever: the election of Abraham Lincoln. If Lincoln had lost, the ripple effects could have been tremendous. The greatest impact would have been the perpetuation of a nation that was really two nations... an agrarian South and an industrial North. Who knows? Maybe slavery would have been abolished peacefully. But I think it's more likely that the South would have grown in power and stature until the North could no longer force its will upon it. Then the South could have seceded without a fight, forming a nation with a system of racism and subordination similar to apartheid.

But who knows?

Even in health care, Bush likes big business

I suppose as my first issue-related entry, it should be no surprise that I picked health care. I've been working in the field since 1986 and I've seen many changes. We've seen a lot of attempts at controlling costs and almost nothing worked. Looking back over these 18 years, the only really concentrated effort came from Bill and Hillary. They got snuffed out, creating a vacuum. Into that space stepped HMOs, who cut costs and hurt people. Great solution.

But along came George, a man who cares about you...
Now, George W. Bush pushed through the largest reform of Medicare ever... and it was basically a bill designed to pour federal money into the bottomless chasm of health care expenditures.

The Bush administration knew what it was doing. It's corporate welfare for the pharmaceutical and hospital industries. They knew it was going to break the bank and contribute to our record deficits. But many old people love Bush... as do Pharma lobbyists, hospital administrators, and doctors. (By the way, all opinions are mine and not my employer's, who shall remain nameless.)

Consider the following exerpt from the New York Times (damn liberal rag!):
WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 - The Bush administration illegallywithheld data from Congress on the cost of the new Medicare law, and as a penalty, the former head of the Medicare agency, Thomas A. Scully, should repay seven months of his salary to the government, federal investigators saidTuesday.
The investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, said Mr. Scully had threatened to fire the chief Medicare actuary, in violation of an explicit provision of federal appropriations law.

The actuary, of course, was going to blow the whistle on the Bush administration, which was lying to Congress and the American people about the costs. And he probably calls himself a Patriot!!! As we all know, in the Bush lexicon, a Patriot is someone who is willing to lie for the President.... like Mr. Scully, who is now reaping the rewards of his devotion to country.

The NY Times article continues...
Mr. Scully, who now works for a law firm and a private investment firm, has registered as a lobbyist for Abbott Laboratories, Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Caremark Rx and other health care companies, but says his actions in government were motivated solely by a desire to help Medicare beneficiaries and taxpayers.

I think I speak for all Americans when I say, "Thank you Tom Scully. You, sir, are a selfless Patriot."

And what other foxes are in the chicken house?

The Bush administration doesn't just like big pharma, they also like big insurance. During the past four years, we've seen double digit health insurance premium increases. The defense? An older and sicker population, combined with more expensive diagnostics and therapeutics, is driving up costs. Who can argue with that? Particularly in Pennsylvania, all you have to do is look around and see all the old people, the obese people, and the old AND obese people.

Poor insurance companies. They're barely making ends meet, aren't they? It doesn't matter that the Blues in PA have hundreds of millions of dollars in reserve. It's barely enough to cover the costs of providing care to the insureds who trust them.

Gag me with an EOB! Consider the following:
THE NATION'S HMOS NEARLY DOUBLED THEIR PROFITS DURING 2003, EARNING $10.2 BILLION, AN 86 PERCENT INCREASE OVER THE $5.5 BILLION REPORTED IN 2002.

According to Weiss Ratings, Inc., Blue Cross Blue Shield plans as a group produced a $5.4 billion profit, which is a $2.1 billion, or 63 percent, increase compared to the $3.3 billion profit recorded in 2002. Of the 56 Blues plans, 51, or 91.1 percent, reported positive earnings in 2003. Weiss Ratings, Inc., August 30, 2004

The new Medicare law, incidentally, also helps line the pockets of big insurance by reviving the Medicare HMO concept. That was disaster before. What's the difference now?

If the Department of Justice wasn't so busy taking away our rights, maybe it would have some time to investigate these obscene profits.