Limbaugh, Sotomayor & the Planets

Taken all in all, we live on an amazing planet. Besides all the natural vistas of oceans, and mountains and weather--there's also the life, in its wild diversity. The same single-celled original life forms evolved into caterpillars, birds, and people. That observance alone should be enough to give pause to all the petty bickering and name-calling between various groups of the same species--humans.

Then again, if you're lucky enough to live in the United States of America and be a citizen with all the rights and privileges etc--then you need to respect the freedom of your fellow citizen to air his or her opinion, even when you disagree with it--that's part of our laws under the Constitution.

Like when a person says that the President of the United States is ..."the greatest living example of a reverse racist, and now he's appointed one,..." that is permissable because of our freedoms.

I've heard speeches by Nazis and white supremecist groups right in the middle of our United States. They are allowed to express vitriol and hatred because in this country, freedom of speech is a paramount right under which we all live.

Sometimes, this is hard to stomach--like the above quote from Rush Limbaugh, a repugnant ignorant PR specialist who panders to the underbelly of Americans' discontent to stimulate a response similar to ultra-sugarfied chocolate-chip cookie dough. Doesn't mean it's good for you, but it's a money-maker for the cookie-guy who's got you on the hook.

Today Limbaugh is trying to educate us about racists and minorities who express racism, by criticizing our President's choice for Supreme Court Justice to replace Souter:

She's not the brain that they're portraying her to be. She's not a constitutional jurist," Limbaugh also said, referencing a New Republic article last month in which Jeffrey Rosen, the magazines legal affairs editor, wrote that "her opinions, although competent, are viewed by former prosecutors as not especially clean or tight, and sometimes miss the forest for the trees."

"She is an affirmative action case extraordinaire, and she has put down white men in favor of Latina women," Limbaugh said.

All this gets really boring if you're not a moron. And most of "we the people" aren't morons. Limbaugh hit a sore spot about racism with me, as if he knows about it--don't think so--pretty much going to be no more posts about him.

Then there is the question of how you get a platform for vacant tripe--I should't be so surprised: after all, Mein Kampf is still on shelves in bookstores around this amazing planet.

Letter to L. A. Times Like Playing Telephone

In my entry of May 3, 2009, I referred to an op-ed piece in the Los Angeles Times which stated as fact any number of issues regarding the controversy over vaccine safety. One such "fact" was "...The anti-vaccination movement has its roots in a 1998 study in the journal Lancet suggesting a possible link between autism and the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine, and recommending that the MMR components be given individually."

This is a pure assumption on the part of the writer, Ryan Coller, whose by line indicates he is "chief resident in pediatrics at UCLA's School of Medicine." In fact, a groundbreaking tome on the subject of vaccine injury, Dpt: A Shot in the Dark by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Fisher (Paperback - Mar 1986) preceded the Lancet study by over a decade.

But Coller has more than just his facts mixed up. As I pointed out in the above-mentioned blog post on this, all doctors don't all study everything -- specialists delve deeply into...specialties, with special knowledge and insight that other physicians may or may not have in their medical back ground.

In a letter to the editor of the Times about the Coller op-ed piece, I said that the Times should invite an "...objective mouthpiece who has honest, scientifically-backed-up arguments that vaccines are not proved safe..." I went on to mention Barbara Loe Fisher as a good candidate.

I concluded by saying, "...how can a pediatrician's back ground on the human immune system compare to say, a researcher who specializes in immunology? So many of them have expressed skepticism about vaccines' effectiveness and safety..."

In the Times actual printed version, this was how the above sentence was altered: "...So many pediatricians have expressed skepticism about vaccines' effectiveness and safety..." I was referring to immunologists, but perhaps I didn't make that clear--however wholesale alteration of what I wrote definitely changed my meaning.

In the explanation of submitting a letter to the editor at Los Angeles Times, this statement is included: "They typically run 150 words or less and may be edited." From that I did not conclude that edited meant anything more than space constraints. I didn't know they would alter sentences that might change the meaning of what I wrote. I have submitted and had printed several letters to the editor of the Los Angeles Times through the years, and this one is the first that had such a major alteration a reiteration of what I originally wrote.

Now--so you may judge for yourself--here is my original letter that I emailed to then Times, and second is the letter as printed in today's (May 7, 2009) edition:

Original email to Times:
1. You've run two recent op-ed pieces extolling the wonders of childhood vaccinations and vilifying the mindless ignorant parents who listen to the "wind" and get a bad feeling about shots causing autism. Why don't you invite an objective mouthpiece who has honest, scientifically-backed-up arguments that vaccines are not proven safe, and in fact the jury is still out on vaccines causing autism or any of a number of other auto-immune dysfunctions?

Barbara Loe Fisher, founder and head of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC.org) in Washington, DC, who has more credentials and expertise regarding this issue than some chief resident in pediatrics at a local hospital would be a perfect choice--if the Times is interested in a balanced view on this subject.

Also--how can a pediatrician's back ground on the human immune system compare to say, a researcher who specializes in immunology? So many of them have expressed skepticism about vaccines' effectiveness and safety--but then they might not fill whatever agenda the Times and the drug companies are following.

As Printed in today's edition of the Times:
2. The Times has run two recent Op-Ed articles extolling the wonders of childhood vaccinations and vilifying parents who listen to the "wind" and object to childhood shots for fear that they cause autism.

Why don't you invite an objective mouthpiece who has honest, scientifically backed-up arguments that vaccines are not proved safe, that the jury is still out on vaccines causing autism or any of a number of other autoimmune dysfunctions?

So many pediatricians have expressed skepticism about vaccines' effectiveness and safety--but then they might not fill whatever agenda the Times and the drug companies are following.

The Greater Scourge: Swine Flu or Idiots?

CNN: Federal officials now recommend that schools stop closing when a case of swine flu is confirmed at a school, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Tuesday.

Scientists believe that the H1N1 virus epidemic is no more dangerous than seasonal flu, and schools should act accordingly, Sebelius said.

That's good advice -- because there obviously are more cases of idiots than swine flu around.

Haikus by Kirsten

Haikus

Squirrel in the tree
Wanting the juicy berries
Each joyful morning

Water from the lake
Trickling down from the hard rocks
Peaceful to be near

Cold windy winter
Snowflakes fall from the grey sky
Making snow angels

Don't SHOOT Doctor, I'm OK

It is mind boggling, and frustrating, to explain the reasons that any conclusions about vaccine safety are presumptuous at least, and without merit at most.

The physicians and researchers who test vaccines for safety, in the R &D stage or for ultimate FDA approval, are employees of the vaccine manufacturers, and the tests and studies are done by same. There is no "third-party" objective control testing, by law there doesn't need to be.

There is concern about conflict of interest between congresspeople getting campaign contributions from banking interests, and then having to vote on issues that may affect the bottom line of those banks regarding housing foreclosures and credit lines. This possible conflict of interest is NOTHING compared to how your children's shots make it to your pediatrician's office, no less into the bloodstream of your kid's arm.

All drugs reach the market place through the same channels. Vioxx, which killed people as it was relieving muscle and nerve inflammation, was OK'd the same way--in fact drug maker Merck also squashed publicity about the side affects so that those who died could have been forewarned--but weren't. Merck makes vaccines too.

For some reason, The Los Angeles Times has published two op-ed pieces recently regarding the annoying ignorance of parents who are afraid to vaccinate their children because of a possible connection with vaccines to the growing cases of childhood autism. Today's editorial, written by a "physician and incoming chief resident in pediatrics at UCLA's school of medicine," hammers home the stupidity of a nanny who listened to her employers in Malibu about the possible adverse reactions to vaccines, especially contracting Autism.

Now I've had my discussions with pediatricians, physicians, researchers, and immunologists--even Andrew Wakefield, who authored the studies that the referred op-ed piece totally condemns. And I've never gotten a hard consensus that shots kids get are either safe, that they work at all, or that they don't possibly do more harm than we read about, from any of these giant minds of science.

Let me tell you about one of these immunologists--a man who studies how the human immune system works, not how to cure a baby's colic--Dr. Sudhir Gupta of the University of California at Irvine (UCI):

Dr. Gupta was a pioneer in the early 1990's to discover that there was an immune deficiency in the autistic child. The details are quite esoteric and frankly boring--but Dr. Gupta's solution was unique, and had never been tried. In order to repair the absence of immune cells in the child's system, Dr. Gupta prescribed Immuno Gamma Globulin infusions--intravenously. Once a month the child received the immune factors of 16,000 healthy individuals distilled down to a single hour-long infusion. This repaired the immune system, and allowed the other damage caused by the high Rubella titer to be back to normal.

Now--what causes a high Rubella (German Measles) titer? Well, if the kid didn't contract the German Measles from a friend or otherwise naturally, the high titer (measurable level of antibodies) had to come from the MMR (Mumps, Measles & Rubella) vaccine. In fact, the very mechanism that the rubella virus follows to wreck the development of a fetus whose mother has caught the disease, is exactly how the activity of the immune system acted in the child who received the MMR shot.

Gupta knew this. He knew a lot of stuff. He told me there would never be a vaccine for AIDS because the nature of AIDS was the ABSENCE of immunity--so how can you vaccinate for that? He predicted remission techniques which are in use today. But in the case of MMR causeing autism--there was no question that vaccines are dangerous, don't work like the PR says, and can damage little immune systems beyond recognition.

So my question to the Los Angeles Times, and Ryan Coller, is what's your gig? Do you really think polio was wiped out from vaccines? Anyone can google up statistics showing that the polio epidemic was waning before Jonas Salk ever injected a kid with his polio dead virus. How many people are debilitated today from Sabin's live virus. How come Salk never got the Nobel Prize? What to they know in Norway that we the people don't care about here?

How many parents are so certain that their little darlings went south after a vaccine? Who ever heard of asthma and autism and dyslexia back in the 1950's and 1960's when I was in school? Does Ryan Coller know about the connection between Autism, Dyslexia, Asthma, Childhood Diabetes, and on and on? Why doesn't he write about that?

Who is Ryan Coller anyway?

[UPDATE MAY 5, 2009]:
L.A. Times called to confirm they will print my letter concerning above issue either tomorrow (5/6/09) or later this week.

Bankers, Bacon and Flu

When it's about money, and it usually is, money talks. So when the Senate voted down help for homeowners faced with foreclosure yesterday the only real truth was the clout the banks have over congress, and ultimately over we, the people.

"The vote was 51 to 45, with 12 Democrats joining Republicans in opposing the proposal, under which bankruptcy judges could order lenders to reduce the principal on home mortgages. The proposal, which sailed through the House in March, was a key part of Obama's plan to reduce the tide of home foreclosures.

Its defeat in the Senate marked a turnaround for the Democratic supporters of the bill, who had hoped that the party's new majority would boost its chances for passage.

Instead, Democratic leaders were furious to see bankers lobbying against consumer protection measures after Congress had approved enormous sums to shore up the financial services industry."

If you ask me, Obama's balls seem to be in the ringer. Where's help when you need it?

But wait--he has Timothy F. Geithner as Treasury Secretary taking care of business--big business. In case you weren't sure, and I even know people who are not as "involved" in the daily news/political go 'round as me express skepticism--Tim's not entirely removed from conflicts of interest between we, the people, and them the bankers, according to a new report on the New York Times:

"Even as banks complain that the government has attached too many intrusive strings to its financial assistance, a range of critics — lawmakers, economists and even former Federal Reserve colleagues — say that the bailout Mr. Geithner has played such a central role in fashioning is overly generous to the financial industry at taxpayer expense...

An examination of Mr. Geithner’s five years as president of the New York Fed, an era of unbridled and ultimately disastrous risk-taking by the financial industry, shows that he forged unusually close relationships with executives of Wall Street’s giant financial institutions.

His actions, as a regulator and later a bailout king, often aligned with the industry’s interests and desires, according to interviews with financiers, regulators and analysts and a review of Federal Reserve records."

Is there no shame, Mr. Obama? Have you at last no objectivity anymore? Is everyone totally interconnected so even you, our deliverer, our promised hero, the one who was gonna kick out the old and bring in the new--Have you crossed over to...being inside the beltway? If so, we're indeed lost.

And since you are so smart and aware, you must be doing this knowingly--letting the chips fall outside of campaign promises and declarations. You--more than the last guy, who we assumed was a lost puppy in tow by sinister powers that be--actually have a clue about the direction these votes and advisers are taking us. So again, one must inquire, what happened to your...chutzpah? Even your press conference ratings are tanking.

"Nielsen said the president’s Wednesday prime-time press conference drew an audience of 28.8 million people. The event marked his 100th day in office and pulled in an 18.8 household rating on 10 TV networks at 8 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.

Viewership was 29 percent less than the president’s March 24 press conference, which was seen on 11 networks. That telecast brought in 40.4 million viewers for a 25.9 household rating. President Obama’s first prime-time press conference on Feb. 9 was watched by 49.5 million U.S. viewers on eight networks, generating a 30.8 household rating. Around 37.8 million people watched him get sworn in Jan. 20, for a 25.5 household rating."

Time you started taking charge again. Stir it up, like the campaign. Or get rid of Larry Summers and some of the other old guard who are so far in bed with the big bad bankers they don't know what a real American looks like.

There's a lot more to this influence-peddling business with Obama and his inner sanctum--but I have to go to check on my bacon on the front burner. I'm frying some up to make bacon bits for my salad--I want to eat healthy but lettuce without bacon bits is not something I can look forward to. But this swine-flu scare is making me nervous. Because if they start killing all the pigs, what will happen to my bacon? How will it affect the price, no less the supply?

As for the flu--let me know if you know anyone who gets it this year. Probably not.

Obama's Full Plate & More...

What's worse, getting the flu or getting nuked? Let's say you had this choice, you'd probably choose flu. Most cases of flu are temporarily debilitating, and then the human system immunity rises up and takes over, making the individual symptom free with the plus of having a built-in life-long immunity to that specific form of the flu virus.

If a nuclear bomb goes off near you, your cells are vaporized into a pre-molecular plasma from which you will never recover. You then become part of the cosmos from which you came. If you're not too close to the initial blast, and live through it, you can get the horrifying form of radiation sickness that causes physical visible manifestations and searing pain beyond description. The flu virus has got nothing on the bomb.

That's why I found the discussion on Real Time with Bill Maher so remarkable Friday night: Maher claimed that the Taliban was within 60 miles of the
capitol of Pakistan, Islamabad, and US forces were not overtly involved in counter measures to prevent a possible ultimate government takeover by these militia-terrorists who have repeatedly and directly threatened the US through their cohorts, Al Qaeda.

Yet the big story was becoming, and now is, that there are some reported outbreaks of a version of the flu virus in Mexico City that have elements of swine and bird flu mixed in. In fact, in a city of 20 million people, the largest on the planet, several dozen people have been said to have died from the flu, and several thousand people have the bug. The word "pandemic" is bantered around the media, and oh yes, of course, the drug companies are scrounging and scurrying to come up with a vaccine. There is money to be made in them thar shots! Let's remember the deaths of the pandemic in 1918 were from bacterial infections, for which there were no antibiotics. Shots wouldn't have helped then, they won't help now. Antibiotics will help with follow-up complications such as pneumonia.

Other remedies such as tamiflu and relenza can have worse adverse side effects than not taking them, and tamiflu,

"...the most commonly used drug in the fight against influenza, no
longer works against the dominant flu bug circulating in most of the United States, raising serious questions about how the nation might fare in a large flu pandemic, government health officials said." Yet these anti-virul drugs will certainly be hawked to anyone with the willing cash. What's really needed is a program of who should get, and who doesn't need, antibiotic protection, which can really save lives compromised by infection following a bout with flu.

Obama's got a lot on his plate, to say the least. There's the problem of the economy, or what is perceived as a huge problem by so many people around the world that they have changed their purchasing habits to further hamper economic growth and get out of the bottom of the current economic cycle downturn.

One of Obama's biggest advisers, Larry Summers, former Harvard President, is so interest-conflicted that one wonders how anything he does for or tells to Obama would possibly help anything about the economy.

Then our cool dude pres Barack has promised to repair the medical care system that's totally out of control-a big campaign pledge he made. That task alone would keep several experts busy for at least a year just to analyze, let alone come up with a plan to fix it--because unless you're ready to get the insurance companies out of the loop--Anthem, Blue Shield, Kaiser etc--you're not going to cut health care costs because the insurance companies are the bleeders of the system. Not to mention big pharma, which is a separate blog
post of its own. As the MC said in Cabaret, "Mony Money Money Money."

There's 2 big problemas. So picture now as Obama retreats from the limelight and back to the halls of the White House, and he gets briefed on the latest in international bogeymen--in private, classified, top secret!

And that's the biggest piece on his plate--Al Qaeda wants to nuke New York. Don't you think? Isn't that really their ultimate dream--to set of an atom bomb in the middle of Manhattan?And as every day passes, this possibility becomes more of a reality.

And Obama wants to solve the economy crisis, and he wants to make sure everyone gets proper health care without going broke in the process. But if the bad guys set off a nuclear bomb in New York, that would make the other hassles our president is faced with non-issues in comparison.

My dad has a friend who's made a lot of money in investments. He tells my dad there cold be a revolution in this country, because the poor people will rise up against the rich. After all, the poor people see all the nice cars and refrigerators that the wealthy people have, and they feel left out so they'll get their muskets and hide in the forest with the swamp rat while waiting for their big chance to take over. Like Washington when he beat the Red Coats.

My dad has some right-wing friends who like to say whatever comes into their brains, and since they are rich they think they know what they're talking about. Just like the pundits who claim there is no more racism in this country--it's a thing of the past. So where does the Southern Poverty Law Center get these statistics for hate groups and enclaves around the country?--my dad's friend should be concerned about the disenfranchised right-wing nuts who are part of militia groups who have, unlike "poor people," the wherewith all and contacts to attain real bad weapons and train others in their use. Then they go into neighborhoods or schools and show off what they know.

I'm all in favor of revolution, like Jefferson who said "Every generation needs a new revolution.” There should be one every few years--but without the guns. We have a ballot! A good revolution would get rid of the tax code, nationalize medical care for everyone, and overhaul the antiquated gread school curriculum to remove homework from the lives of otherwise fumnctional families. But poor people rising up like the Bolshevicks agains the Czar is a scary scenario only in that the mind who conjured it is so out of touch.

I remember a scary conversation I had with a friend some years back while we were sitting on a bench in Disneyland waiting for our children to finish one of the rides. Joe was one of those insiders as a kid -- well, older "kid" he was 25 --during the Vietnam War--he was a flyer, recruited as a cowboy pilot who could get into enemy territory and leave no tracks. He didn't even wear dog tags on his bombing raids which were all classified.

He managed to get shot down, but unlike John McCain who got caught and had to go through those years at the Hanoi Hilton, Joe got out clean. His insider knowledge didn't stop with the end of Vietnam and the 1970's. He doesn't tell me details, but he described the possibility of a nuclear bomb that could be incorporated into several business-like briefcases, each one separately a non-descript bunch of paraphernalia, but if several of these "briefcases" were to be in different rooms of a hotel, let's say, they could be unified through radio and electromagnetic connection to detonate a nuclear weapon. That's what he told me.

The events of 9/11 were huge and phenomenal--most of us can't really believe to this day what happened. Two tall skyscrapers and several other buildings were flattened by hijacked airliners commandeered by terrorists with nothing but box cutters and a knowledge of how to fly a plane.

Wouldn't the mentality, the mindset, behind that attack really be to want to blow up lower Manhattan? Isn't that the next plan on the docket? Isn't that why there haven't been any attacks since 9/11--because they lie in patience and preparation.

Isn't this what Obama knows is his biggest challenge--how to prevent such an attack? 3,000 people died on 9/11--what would be the cultural psychological effect of several million people dying in a nuclear event? What war would we engage in to avenge that scenario?

While we watch Obama gyrate about the economy, health care, and Afghanistan, we should know that in the dark corridors of his residence after the spotlight is off and the real light comes on, our president is busy trying to figure out how to keep us from being nuked. Otherwise, the rest doesn't matter, does it?

What--was Friday a slow news day? So let's worry about the flu! And tell Huffington Post to get back to work and stop jumping on the flu-panic bandwagon.

Optimistic Message of Faith & Renewal

Some cool golden words from...my wife:

"learning to focus on what we desire and surrendering control is more than a knack-it's an eventual state of our being. ...Persistence really means faith-in your deservedness and your self worth. You are here for a reason, you desire for a reason, you expect for a reason, and you shall receive for a reason."

More HERE

Eric Holder Pardon My Prejudice

Barack Obama's appointee US Attorney General Eric Holder threw down the gauntlet of challenge to the latest generation of Americans about our racist society:

"Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards."

This amazing statement was a matter of simple truth, yet so many pundits, politicians, and "experts" found it controversial and alienating.

Andrew Grant-Thomas, Deputy Director of the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at Ohio State University, praised Holder’s general message but said the wording of the speech may alienate some. “He’s right on the substance, but that’s probably not the most politic way of saying it. I’m certain there are people who
will hear him and say, ’That’s obnoxious,”’ he said, adding that what was missing from Holder’s speech were specific examples of what painful subjects need to be addressed.

Picky picky--Holder's message was simple and provocative: "...to get to the heart of this country one must examine its racial soul." As a Jew I could say yeah, but what about the Jews? Or as a champion of immigration rights, I could say, you left out the Mexicans. But that wasn't Holder's point. It was way more basic:

"Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion, and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we, average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race."

I know exactly what Holder means, because I wrote a book about it several years ago, "Pardon My Prejudice: America's Excuse for Bigotry." No it hasn't been published, and yes it's a book whose time has arrived. The book's ironic title refers exactly to what Holder is talking about:

"...we must feel comfortable enough with one another, and tolerant enough of each other, to have frank conversations about the racial matters that continue to divide us."

The title "Pardon My prejudice" comes from my experience in retail where all sorts of average Americans walk through your life every day. I owned a store that rented videos among other things, and one night a gentleman and his wife came in to find a movie to watch. I had seen this man on other visits--a friendly older family guy who just wanted to pass the time and get his movie rental. At one point, one of my clerks, a young woman, asked if he would like to see a certain movie. The film had an interracial cast, and he said he didn't want it because of the--he used the "n" word--in it. The clerk was non-plussed. She had heard this sort of talk before. But it was an open and rude remark. The man's wife overheard the comment, and since she was unsure if her husband's obnoxious language would cause a problem, she approached my clerk to smooth things over. She said, "You'll have to pardon my husband--he's a bit of a racist."

This silly excuse was so bizarre, that's why my clerk wanted to tell me the story later. I had a habit of escorting customers out of the store who spoke out of line like that, so since I wasn't there at the time, I learned about the conversation from my clerk.

Now, with Holder's speech, it makes sense that this issue is not just confronting me, but it is in the psyche of our habits as a society. That's another reason Holder's remarks ring so true to me, as a child of the fifties and seeing first-hand the "breaking news" of the civil rights struggle, when he says,

"it is hard for me to accept that the result of those efforts was to create an America that is more prosperous, more positively race conscious and yet is voluntarily socially segregated."

My book is about experiences of prejudice and bigotry around us every day. It is not meant to point fingers of blame or judgment. I mean to remind us all of how much we see ans hear this mindless hatred all the time, and how little we react to it. Again, Holder's comments summon us to the call:

"Our history has demonstrated that the vast majority of Americans are uncomfortable with, and would like to not have to deal with, racial matters and that is why those, black or white, elected or self-appointed, who promise relief in easy, quick solutions, no matter how divisive, are embraced. We are then free to retreat to our race-protected cocoons where much is comfortable and where progress is not really made."

There is a solution, and it doesn't lie in complacency and inaction. We have to come to grips with the irrationality of our prejudices and beliefs about our fellow human beings. We have to stop fearing those who are not just like us, who have different beliefs, looks, even goals. Until we Americans understand that what made this country great, as a melting pot, is being crushed into the sand of ignorance and bigotry, we will never get out of our rut of hatred, fear, and economic deprivance. Those who understand what Holder was saying, will lead us all into a new light of tolerance, and prosperity.

Securing the City & Other Concerns

Christopher Dickey's book, Securing the City, is a fascinating report of how the New York City Police have become the 21st century FBI/CIA/homeland security all in one. Chris and I spent the day together yesterday--we have been good friends for almost 40 years and haven't visited in four years. Chris is travelling around the country on his book tour to promote and educate about the amazing global undertaking of the NYPD because New York City, as we all well know, is the numero uno target of any terrorist trying top make a big point in the world.

The simple fact that only Chris's book, and his talks, are publicizing the crusade of the New York Police to acquire human intelligence first hand throughout the world--just like the CIA is supposed to do--makes every word on the page of his book, and every speech he delivers, informative beyond any news service possible. Chris has ventured into the inner sanctum of what the NYPD is up to, including, but not limited to, the essence of the characters involved, most interestingly Ray Kelly, Chief of Police and mastermind of this new security force, as well as the high tech instruments of surveillance, especially the helicopter right out of the latest Batman movie:

"...state-of-the-art crime-fighting, terror-busting, order-keeping techno toy, with its enormous lens that can magnify any scene on the streets almost one thousand times, then double that digitally; that can watch a crime in progress from miles away, can look in windows, can sense the body heat of people on rooftops or running along sidewalks, can track beepers slipped under cars, can do so very many things that the man in the helmet watching the screens and moving the images with the joystick in his lap, NYPD Detective David Zschau, is often a little bit at a loss for words, “It really is an amazing tool,” he keeps saying."

Securing the City is a page-turning thriller about reality, terrorism, New York City, and how our lives have changed in the last decade. What fun!

But terrorism is only part of the latest fascinating news to inspire me to add a blog post after so many...full moons. The fierce spectre of big pharma has raised its ugly head again this week, with the decision of a court case from 2007 being delivered regarding vaccines as the cause of autism. In fact, the good news is that though the judges decided that autism is not caused by vaccines, those parents and advocates who know the opposite, are simply not deterred by the opaque and silly shenanigans of a so-called big-time government show.

Without belaboring here the details--and they are many and huge--of the holes in the government's defense (Note that the government is the plaintiff since the vaccine makers are off the hook for any liability), or the lack of any good studies showing the connection of vaccines to the development of all sorts of auto-immune diseases, of which autism is one special part--it is sufficient to point to the one intelligent remark of a parent, Rick Rollens, who has fought the battle to expose the dangers of vaccines for years, "Rollens and others said these verdicts won't make parents stop questioning the safety of vaccines, especially when parents witness changes in their children right after vaccination. "There's no denying what happens to your child when you see it first-hand," said Rollens, a Sacramento, Calif., resident. "Maybe we haven't asked all the right questions yet."

And then there's Barbara, our dear friend and the only expert to testify in Washington DC with no axe to grind--just the truth at her back:

“I think it is a mistake to conclude that because these few test cases were denied compensation, that it’s been decided vaccines don’t play any role in regressive autism,” said Barbara Loe Fisher, president of the National Vaccine Information Center.

But really, as Rollens says, unless you're a parent and see it first hand--the obvious immediate change after a shot, and your instinct that tells you something really has gone wrong and it's not the air we breathe or the water we drink--then the reliance on anecdotal evidence will never be enough. But also, as Rollens says, the right tests haven't been done yet, and the right questions remain unasked--bad economy or not, would you want to risk the end of a billion+ - dollar cash cow like government-mandated vaccines? Even if the science is over 250 years old and arcane, and even if the exponential increase in autism, dyslexia, ADDH, asthma, childhood diabetes, SIDS--even if the increase in these syndromes exactly correlates to the increase in dosages of childhood vaccines--are these drug companies and complicit physicians that greedy? Or brainwashed? Or both?

Halfway Around the World is Halfway Home

Do you believe in coincidences? Do you think events happen at random? Do you feel alone in this big universe, with no direction and no meaning?

I emailed my sister happy Thanksgiving--"aren't you glad your daughter is not in Mumbai?" After the events of the last two days with over 160 dead and more injured due to terrorists in Mumbai, India, this greeting seemed appropriate, since my niece had spent last summer as a student from Princeton working on setting up housing in Mumbai. Yes my sister agreed, although in fact, at the time my niece was in Mumbai in July, there were a synchronized terrorist attacks in a nearby town, Ahmedabad, that now appears may have been a dry run for this week's horror.

At the time my niece was in Mumbai, my sister was "skype"--ing her from her laptop in a hospital room at Mass General, where my mom was about to undergo heart bypass and aortic valve replacement surgery. Mom was feeling pretty good, and didn't want to be constrained in a ward room in Boston when her favorite past time was to play several rounds of 18 holes of golf at her home in Palm Beach, FL. 80 years young, symptomless, and active, that's where mom bumped into her cardiologist who wanted to test some new fangled equipment for measuring heart blood flow in cardiac stress tests, and suggested while walking down the fairway that mom try out this equipment for free, on the house, 4 months before she was due for her regular cardiac check up. That's when they found the 2 life-threatening situations--clogged arteries and a very narrow aortic heart valve.

That's how the tall, handsome physician of Indian descent explained it to mom and me in the hospital room in Boston (I had flown in from Los Angeles in case mom needed extra moral support) the day before he was going to open mom's chest and "easily" repair the problem, which otherwise would "kill her momentarily." Seemed like divine intervention to me at the time, what with the cardiologist "bumping" into my mother on the golf course, and her not having any symptoms to make her run to the doctor's office for a checkup. The tall handsome Indian heart surgeon said she may have weeks to live without surgical intervention, certainly not months. If mom was ever going to hit the links again, she was going to have to have the surgery right away--they wouldn't allow her to leave the hospital.

I had heard about the terrorist attacks in Ahmedabad and decided not to mention it since my sister and mom might not have heard about it, and my niece was within shouting distance of the area of travesty half a world away in Mumbai. Meanwhile, this very busy and business-like heart surgeon said he just got off the plane from Holland; he had been at a medical conference in Eindhoven. He asked politely, expecting a "no" answer, had we ever been to Eindhoven, Netherlands? It just so happened that Mom had married a guy who ran a subsidiary company of the giant electronics firm Dutch Phillips, headquartered in Eindhoven, so she politely responded yes, she'd been there many times, and how was the doctor's trip, considering he was going to do lengthy surgery on mom the next day she hoped he'd had a comfortable and restful flight...How many Indian heart surgeons who had just been to Eindhoven were there at Mass General last July?

Then a young Doctor trepidatiously entered mom's curtained-off space, with permission from mom's surgeon, to ask if he could do a study during mom's open heart surgery about the accuracy of an ear thermometer--the most exact measurement of human body temperature comes from the chamber of the heart accessible directly during open heart surgery, which made my mother's upcoming procedure convenient for this young researcher's needs. He wouldn't be in the way, and only needed to take several dozen measurements of her heart temperature and compare it with the ear thermometer while she was under anesthesia and wouldn't know about it anyway. Mom definitely wanted to help advance the cause of knowledge in medicine considering the circumstance under which she would probably be dead shortly had it not been for that very same advanced medicinal knowledge to which she had the advantage. When the young Doctor said he was from India (another one!), after we asked about his obvious and almost unintelligible non-American accent, my mom said her granddaughter was there right now, and as I cringed about what was next on the conversational agenda, this nice young fellow asked had we heard about the awful violence going on over there right now, almost exactly where granddaughter/niece was? Oh well, my half-hearted attempt at keeping the international news secret was for naught, it might have popped up on the CNN news crawl on the TV hanging over mom's bed any minute anyway...

So I and my family had Thanksgiving lunch yesterday here in the San Fernando Valley at the rest home of my mother-in-law who has befriended an elderly man of 90 who comes from Boston, where I lived so long ago and met my ex-wife, who I haven't seen or heard from in 30 years. So we dined with my mother-in-law's pal's family as well. It turns out I found out recently that my mother-in-law's elderly friend had moved out to California from Boston a few years ago, is my ex father-in-law, whose only surviving daughter is (coincidentally) my ex wife, and somehow her dad and my mother-in-law became close friends in the rest home without knowing the former connection of their children, as well as the children not knowing either. As Spock would say, the odds of this chance relationship are astronomical, and as Captain Kirk would respond, the odds are always improving.

My ex-wife's present husband is an immigrant South African who as an attorney handles immigration cases--mostly Indians. He was explaining to me during our lunch about the value that these people bring to the United States, and how awful so many of them were feeling about the current events in Mumbai. My ex-wife's husband also said that based on his travels and experience, he felt that America is the greatest country on earth. His welcome of immigrants wouldn't be extended however to those from "south of the border," as he explained, because of the deleterious effect on the economy the huge numbers of "illegals" presented. I started to reply that US government statistics show an economic boost from all immigrants no matter of origin, but we were interrupted by lunch or whatever, and just as well, since I'm not about to change any opinions of the guy who married my wife during our first lunch meeting anyway.

I thought about the bigotry that surrounds us all the time, and of the tremendous anti-Muslim feeling throughout the world right down to my neighbors. I wondered about how many cross-currents and moments of serendipity we all experience, and pass off to coincidence, ignoring the underlying element of care and concern that the universe really contains for us all, regardless of our religions or nationalities. As we hear of events in South Asia, a place where most of us have never visited, and see Jews from New York being killed by murderers who aren't even clearly identified, and a major city in India under siege because it represents one of the biggest icons of freedom on earth, and the irrational increased hatred that will be engendered against Muslims because the killers may be Muslim, a voice of reason writes an op-ed piece in today's Los Angeles Times--Indian former undersecretary-general of the United Nations:

"If these tragic events lead to the demonization of the Muslims of India, the terrorists will have won. For India to be India, its gateway -- to the multiple Indias within, and the heaving seas without -- must always remain open."

Who may listen to these thoughtful words, and how many of us still believe in coincidences?

Welcome the Intellectually Elite Leader of the Free World

Obama's election is even the more remarkable because of the latent fear and suspicion aroused in the average American towards the intellectual elite. Obama is a supreme example of the educated, well-read, smart achiever who rises above the mediocre yet doesn't condescend to his audience. In fact, he is the ultimate teacher who asks those around him to rise to his level, while making them feel that it's possible if not inevitable.

The clarity of these aspects of his character--humility alongside of confidence--were clear in his first press conference today as President Elect. In his brief answer to a question about what he is reading to prepare for taking office, he simply stated,

"I have re-read some of Lincoln's writings, who's always an extraordinary inspiration."

What is fascinating about this remark is that, with all due respect to a good guess, Obama has probably read more than the reporter who asked the question, not to mention most of his fellow citizens. The reference to the Lincoln passages are assumed to be a throw-away line from a man who most likely devours more, in a single sitting, of articles and literature than most of us do in a lot longer amount of time.

So it came as no surprise in a short AP blurb in the Los Angeles Times to read that Obama is considered a peer among his fellow writers, including some of the greatest of living authors.

"Dreams From My Father" and Obama's "The Audacity of Hope" have each sold millions of copies and have been praised as the rare works by politicians that can be read for pleasure. Obama's student poetry was even lauded -- and compared to Langston Hughes' work -- by the most discerning of critics, Harold Bloom.

JFK, a speed reader and quick on his feet, and Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar and considered brilliant among presidents, were two who occupied the White House within memory who triumphed because of their intellect. No doubt Obama follows in this tradition, but even more obvious at this point in history, following the presidency of one of the prime examples of willful ignorance and stupidity, is the shining reason this country needs leadership of the true elite, intellectual as well as courageous. And we can take pride that's what we voted for.

McCain: How to Try to Win an Election Without Using Your Brain

The screamers are out there calling Obama a socialist and even a communist.

My Master's Thesis was a script for a documentary film about the Alger Hiss case. I was in the graduate program for film production at Boston University class of 1974, and the country was in the middle of the Watergate quagmire and the Vietnam War. Young readers might ask, "Who (or what) is Alger Hiss?" Younger readers still might not remember Watergate or Nixon at all.

During the days of Watergate hearings in the US Senate, and then the House Judiciary Committee debating articles of impeachment against then president Richard Nixon, I was researching the Hiss case because it had so many parallels with Watergate, not the least of which was the central character of Richard M. Nixon in both.

Alger Hiss had been a member of the Truman State Department in the late 1940's, and was later President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. In the late 1940's, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), of which the young freshman congressman Nixon was a member, interviewed anybody they could find who would implicate democrats working in the government as communist agents for Russia. The plan, which often worked, was to paint, through association and innuendo, the named democrat as being friendly to Russia.

While Russia was a US ally during WWII, in the post war climate communism became as big of a threat as nazism in the mind of the American public. As a dictatorship under Stalin, Russia really was more of a totalitarian oppressive regime than it was a dedicated ideological expression of any such promise of political communism--if there was such a thing. But the demonstration of taint was enough to help republicans get votes because of the fear of the democratic party being more left-wing oriented and therefore closer to communism, and possibly even containing communists among them.

This highly-flawed and detrimental tactic proved so successful in getting republicans elected, that Nixon himself used it repeatedly from congressman, to senator, to VP and then president. When Nixon ran against Helen Gahagan Douglas, a respected democratic member of congress, for senator from California, he referred to her as "the pink lady," because communists were considered "reds," and he said she was "pink right down to her underwear." He won. Two decades later, Nixon won a huge landslide over democratic challenger George McGovern for president, partly by stating constantly that McGovern's left-leaning politics were dangerous.

The Watergate break-in of the democratic party headquarters, which initiated the exposure of Nixon's, and his aides', criminal activity, purportedly was to find evidence of funding contributions from foreign communist sources, such as Cuba, for the McGovern campaign. That way, the republicans would be able to continue to implicate democrats as tainted with communists.

The persistent denouncement of Barak Obama by John McCain as a "socialist" is more of the same routine now, 60 years after Alger Hiss first appeared before HUAC. Maybe younger folks don't remember the joke of McCarthyism and the ruination of careers and lives caused by mindless false accusations. Or maybe they're not paying that much attention to the details of another smear campaign, but there's no doubt some of this nonsensical finger-pointing has an impact, or it would not still be used. The host of the number-one-rated cable TV show, Bill O'Reilly, on the TV show "The View" called Obama a communist.

Pandering and fear tactics are one thing when used by a desperate politician like McCain, but one wonders about media mavens appealing to the lowest common denominator by repeating that Obama's a "socialist." After all these years of communist witch hunting, it would seem time has come to find a new issue to showcase--one with which we the people really need to grapple.

You Won't Get The Flu

You probably won't get the flu. You might get sick with some sort of systemic virus, but your doctor would have to swab and culture your throat to get a definitive positive result from a lab that you have one or another form of the 860 - plus influenza viruses out there. Most people don't do this, their doctor just says stay home and get plenty of rest, and patient assumes it was the flu.

That doesn't stop the big government snow job from the CDC saying there are 36,000 deaths from the flu every year. They haven't got a clue how many people die from flu, but there are vaccines to sell and big pharma lobbyists stuffing pockets of US government agents to stand in as shills:

A CDC spokesman, Mr. Curtis Allen told Insight Magazine

“There are a couple problems with determining the number of deaths related to the flu because most people don't die from influenza - they die from complications of influenza - so the numbers [of deaths] are based on mathematical formulas. We don't know exactly how many people get the flu each year because it's not a reportable disease and most physicians don't do the test [nasal swab] to indicate whether [the symptoms are caused by] influenza.”

The CDC also says

Yearly, adults can average one to three and children three to six influenza-like illnesses (ILIs). The vaccine does not prevent influenza-like illnesses caused by infectious agents other than influenza [strains found in the shot], and many persons vaccinated against influenza will still get the flu.

In the year 2004, when the flu vaccine shortage was a huge news item for months, the number of flu cases were lower than any recent year:

An unusually mild flu season in 2004 cut the flu death rate -- the number of deaths per 100,000 people -- by 7 percent. And it likely had a ripple effect by not worsening the condition of frail patients who ultimately died of something else, government health scientists said.

At a time when the government is asking the congressional representatives for a 700 billion dollar bailout of big banks and saying, "trust us or else," shouldn't we question everything we're told by these guys, like how important it is to spend $25 on a flu shot that doesn't work? And I had to hear Charles Osgood quote the CDC about this on the radio with not so much as a peep of skepticism. Journalists are now PR spokespeople for drug makers. Buyer beware.

Obama is the new Lincoln; Sorry JFK

Got an email from a friend I met in Trader Joe's who is "wary" of Obama's candidacy. "I just don't feel I can trust Obama..," she writes. She referenced a piece by David Brooks in yesterday's New York Times, "Where’s the Landslide?" which implies there should be one by now with Obama trouncing McCain in the polls. Couple of Brooks's notions:

His age probably has something to do with it. So does his race. But the polls and focus groups suggest that people aren’t dismissive of Obama or hostile to him....the root of it is probably this: Obama has been a sojourner.

Brooks is making a case of Obama being "removed" from the battle, an observer who is interested but not affected. My friend from Trader Joe's has a "funny" feeling and Brooks's piece struck a chord.

I don't know how it's possible for me to remember the 1960 election since I was 10 years old at the time, and I have trouble remembering the names of several of the members of my immediate family. But I remember clearly that John F. Kennedy was perceived as a neophyte, with little experience against the towering figure of 8 years Vice President Nixon, who was now going to slide into the office after his boss, Eisenhower, was done. That's how my family, friends, and schoolmates saw the process back then. Yet both Kennedy and Nixon were young, just like Obama. And the ultimate winner then was no proven entity any more than Obama is now. And then as now, Kennedy and Obama both make amazing, rallying, and inspiring speeches.

Brooks can write all he wants about the experience and back ground and whatever else about Obama, but I will let you in on a little secret--about American society, and elections, and human nature--the Obama doubts center on one thing and one thing only, and that is the inherent inability of my fellow citizens to overcome their natural instinct for prejudice and bigotry. "Sojourner" my ass -- Obama doesn't fit the comfortable mold of any one's mindset.

There was another candidate for President of the US who had a varied back ground and didn't seem fit for the job:

His family was forced out of their home.
He had to work to support them.
Failed in business
Ran for state legislature - lost
Also lost his job - wanted to go to law school but couldn't get in.
Borrowed some money from a friend to begin a business and by the end of the year he was bankrupt. He spends the next 17 years of his life paying off his debt.
Ran for state legislature again - won.
Was engaged to be married, sweetheart died and his heart was broken.
Had a total nervous breakdown and was in bed for six months.
Sought to become speaker of the state legislature - defeated.
Sought to become elector - defeated.
Ran for Congress - lost.
Ran for Congress again - this time he won - went to Washington and did a good job.
Ran for re-election to Congress - lost.
Sought the job of land officer in his home state - rejected.
Ran for Senate of the United States - lost.
Sought the Vice-Presidential nomination at his party's national convention - got less than 100 votes.
Ran for U.S. Senate again - again he lost.
Elected president of the United States.

Abraham Lincoln. But you knew that. He was a young guy, with a weird sense of humor, prone to bipolar attacks of depression, visions, and not handsome to boot. But he was a wonderful speech writer, regardless of how he sounded when he gave the speech--and that seems to be a big plus in esteem and popularity: Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, JFK, Martin Luther King, Bobby Kennedy, Reagan, and now Obama. Anyway, any thing's better than the criminal dolt who's in there now, or the absent-minded dufus who wants to take his place. They can't configure a sentence that's coherent.