Category / Politics

Progressives, Conservatives, and Emperors Agree: Abolish The Democratic and Republican Parties February 15, 2010 at 12:51 pm

PROCLAMATION.

Norton I., Dei Gratia, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico, being desirous of allaying the dissensions of party strife now existing within our realm, do hereby dissolve and abolish the Democratic and Republican parties, and also do hereby decree the disfranchisement and imprisonment, for not more than ten, nor less than five years, to all persons leading to any violation of this imperial decree.                        Norton I.

San Francisco Herald
August 13, 1869
Source

On Peace and War: Obama Nobel Acceptance Speech in Oslo December 10, 2009 at 1:47 pm

President Obama accepted the Nobel Peace Prize today in Oslo, Norway. In my opinion, this was one of the best speeches Obama has given since being elected President.

Watch the video of his entire speech: CNN (w/ transcript) NY Times

Here are a few select quotes that resonated with me:

I understand why war is not popular, but I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it.

For if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something.

Those who want peace cannot sit idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.

And within America, there’s long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists; a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values around the world. I reject these choices.

The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached — their faith in human progress — must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey. For if we lose that faith — if we dismiss it as silly or naive; if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace — then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.

The Old Anti-War Arguments Don’t Apply To Afghanistan December 5, 2009 at 3:51 pm

3,000 innocent civilians were killed on 9/11. They didn’t deserve it. Over 7,000 innocent civilians have been killed in Afghanistan. They didn’t deserve to die either. The difference is that al-Qaeda kills civilians on purpose. And that is a huge difference.

My country has done horrible things in my name. Fighting terrorists is not one of them. That doesn’t mean that everything is justified in the war on terror. We didn’t need to torture. We didn’t need to invade Iraq. It’s one thing to challenge the strategy in fighting terrorism, and quite another thing to deny the reality of the threat.

Obama on Afghanistan WarWhen Obama announced this latest troop increase in Afghanistan, many peace advocates were quick to oppose the decision. The situation looks all too familiar: the American imperialist empire subjugating the disempowered with its military might. But does this perspective describe the reality?

I’m full of discontent with my country. As a nation, we’re not even close to perfect. Just check my twitter stream for regular updates of my grievances. The terrorist threat is played up for a number of reasons, from the sinister to the cynical. This is extremely unfortunate, because it distracts from the serious work of preventing terrorist attacks. Let’s protect our freedoms and prevent war spending from bankrupting our nation, but let’s not return to the pre-9/11 air of invincibility (See: Nobody could have predicted…).

America is the biggest, toughest guy in the room, and he’s been a bully in the past. That doesn’t make it OK for any douchebag with a chip on his shoulder to walk up and bitchslap his daughter.

We’re not fighting Vietnamese Communists and we’re not Soviet invaders. Is there any treasure worth plundering in Afghanistan? The old anti-war arguments don’t apply here.

The fog of war is thick, and I may be wrong. It’s possible that the escalation of troops in Afghanistan was authorized based on ulterior motives. This may be the case, but I haven’t yet seen any strong evidence supporting this perspective. If you have, then by all means share.

Peace advocates serve a crucial purpose: they require the leadership to provide a strong justification for the sacrifices of our military and the deaths of civilians caught in the crossfire. Reasonable opposition to the war can pressure our leaders into bringing it to a swift conclusion. Likening the war to a quest for U.S. global dominance is a bit old-fashioned.

Homeboy Dropoffs: Socialized Medicine in the U.S. August 5, 2009 at 8:44 am

Here’s a little bit of hospital slang I learned from a friend: the homeboy dropoff. In at least one Southern California hospital, that’s what they call it when gangsters drive their bullet-ridden or overdosing buddies to the hospital, only to drop the homeboy on the curb outside of the emergency room as they rush off to avoid being identified.

Emergency room homeboy dropoffs

Homeboy dropoffs usually involve drug overdoses or life-threatening wounds from gang fights. Since these activities are illegal, a homeboy has to be in really bad shape before he’ll be brought to an emergency room. Hospital staff will rush to his rescue, working to save his life while there’s still time. When confronted with this situation, emergency room doctors and nurses don’t ask questions or consider consequences; all that matters is preventing the death of a human being. On the other hand, the scumbag friends who shoved him out of the car and sped off… they weren’t too worried about their homie at that point.

Sometimes, the homeboy survives the ordeal and has the opportunity to meet the person who saved his life: a complete stranger. This can be a powerful life-changing experience for people caught in the cycle of gang violence or drug addiction. A second chance at life. Some need a third or fourth chance before they learn their lesson, and some never do learn.

Hypothetically speaking, let’s say this gangbanger/junkie has no health insurance and can’t afford to pay the hospital bill. Let’s go one step further and say he’s also an illegal immigrant. Who pays for his life-saving emergency care? The answer: We all do. Depending on various factors, uninsured E.R. costs are paid by some combination of federal, state, county, and hospital funds. Ultimately, the burden falls upon the people who can afford their own health care. Sound like socialized medicine to you?

This is the current health care system in the United States. Socialized medicine is nothing new in this country. As an American taxpayer, part of you might be a little pissed off to find out your tax dollars are being spent on homeboy dropoffs. Instead, take pride in the compassion and respect for life expressed by this aspect of our health care system. And given the vast resources available to us in America, not many people would want doctors to simply stand by and let the homeboy die in front of the hospital.

The debate about health care reform is not really about homeboy dropoffs. They’re already covered (emergency room visit, not follow-up care). We need serious reform because health insurance, medical procedures, and prescription drugs are becoming too expensive for regular working Americans to afford. If middle-class folks can’t afford health insurance, then it’s hard to justify government-subsidized health care for the Americans living in poverty. Costs are going up while the number of insured is shrinking. If we continue at this rate, the entire thing falls apart – including the private health insurance business. We need to fix the health care system so it works for everybody.

Strong, smart health care reform should drastically cut the overall cost of health care, insurance, and pharmaceuticals. Don’t blame the homeboy dropoffs for the fact that America overpays for health care.

American Health Care vs. Socialized Medicine July 23, 2009 at 2:04 am

Health care reform is the big debate in American politics right now, with the so-called public option being likened to European-style socialized medicine. That’s supposed to be a bad thing, I guess.

By the magical knowledge-bearing powers of the internet, I discovered some research which compares the United States with 18 other industrialized nations by the rate of preventable deaths. Preventable deaths are defined as: “deaths from certain causes before age 75 that are potentially preventable with timely and effective health care.”

In a Commonwealth Fund-supported study comparing preventable deaths in 19 industrialized countries, researchers found that the United States placed last. While the other nations improved dramatically between the two study periods—1997–98 and 2002–03—the U.S. improved only slightly on the measure.

US preventable deaths

Source: Measuring the Health of Nations: Updating an Earlier Analysis

To make it worse, the United States also spends more on health care than any other nation. Before you get too upset, you have to remember that health care is treated as an industry in this country. So if we judge the health care sector alongside other commercial enterprises, everything’s going great. Why change?