It's time to get active

Our Rights

2010-12-01T23:23:00.002-05:00

Only 31 words --- Think about it!!!

Isn't life strange?
I never met one Veteran who enlisted to fight for Socialism

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG,

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS,

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL!

If Muslims can pray on Madison Avenue, why are Christians banned from praying in public and erecting religious displays on their holy days?

What happened to our National Day of Prayer? Obama says we can't have that, yet Muslims are allowed to block off Madison Ave. in N. Y. and pray in the middle of the street! And, it's a monthly ritual!

Tell me again, whose country is this? Ours or the Muslims?

I was asked to send this on if I agree, or delete if I don't. It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God.

Therefore I have a very hard time understanding why there is such a problem in having 'In God! We Trust' on our money and having 'God' in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I believe it's time we stand up for what we believe!

The Fable of the Death Panel

2009-12-01T00:00:00.008-05:00

Chris Sanchez slowly opened his eyes and sat himself upright in his chair. Chris was angry with himself for having dozed off. This was probably the most important day of Chris’ life and here he was dreaming again – the same old dream, 2009 just before the world changed forever. It took Chris months and all the connections that he could muster for him to finally get an appointment with the Department of Life Preservation, the Terminators, as Chris liked to call it. When 2020 rolled around, Chris had just turned 72 and received a very unwelcome birthday surprise, a myocardial infarction. He was actually lucky with the heart attack in that he survived despite the fact that Life Preservation allows only minimal intervention for someone with a medical profile like his.

Chris was fully awake now and turned his attention to the polite little balding man with the bushy gray black mustache sitting in front of him. Chris didn’t get the man’s name, but that didn’t really matter. He watched the man very carefully review Chris’ request for a follow-up cardiac procedure on the four screen workstation that looked like the machines that turn of the century day traders used. Chris saw that one screen had a neat summary of the cardiac event; the second screen displayed Chris’ profile with rankings relative to other people requesting the same procedure. This screen and its information was in accordance with the Life Preservation Act of 2010 which basically stated that limited medical resources were assigned on a priority basis. The factors determining the priority were never disclosed publicly being classified by the government for reasons of national security. The computer that the little bald man was using was programmed with the top secret algorithm that allocated medical resources. Chris, of course, didn’t know this.

As much as he tried, Chris couldn’t see screens three and four where baldy had been processing his request which had just finished now. Now that the request execution had completed, baldy was satisfied with the results and turned to Chris to discuss his request. Before barren head could open his mouth, Chris started, “I want you know that it’s almost twenty years to the day when my mother had a heart attack similar to mine. She was exactly the same age as I’m now and she had no problem getting all the treatment she needed. She’s still around now. In fact she came along with me and is sitting in the waiting room.” Baldy was taking all this in and nodding tactfully and responded gently, “We know all about your mother. The fact that she had an MI at 72 and two subsequent heart attacks was considered when processing your request.” Seeing that he wasn’t getting anywhere, Chris started getting hot under the collar and added, “You know it’s weird that my mother is 92 and she’ll outlive me. You’re not going to approve treatment. Are you?” Baldy, still cool and calm, answered Chris with a warm understanding smile, “Dr. Sanchez, you should know better than anyone else that the government’s program is all about preserving life and that each citizen must do his part for the betterment of society. You know, of course, that most people aren’t allowed to question the department’s decisions.” Seeing that Chris still wasn’t accepting the department’s decision, Chris’ host, now with a dour look on his face, added sardonically “Doctor you really surprise me. You were one of the staunchest supporters of Life Preservation! OK, OK! Let me try to process your request one final time.”

Baldy was busy working on screens three and four again and Chris’ mind started wandering back again to when it all started. In the years leading up to 2009, Dr. Christopher J. Sanchez was an internist and assistant director at a major US research hospital. He was always a strong patient advocate and did everything in his power to provide the best medical care not only his own patients but also for anyone that he found out about needing medical help. In short, Sanchez was one of the good guys. 2009 ushered in many changes. Probably the most astounding dealt with the new reality in medicine and many people became concerned that the scene that was now unfolding was a serious possibility. Sanchez was one of them, but he did a lot more than just worry about what was going to happen to his patients and all those that depended on him.

In mid 2009, Dr. Sanchez decided to don yet another hat to his ever growing collection and singlehandedly launched the biggest patient advocacy campaign in history. He became a hero, but that’s not what he was after. He wanted to make sure that no patient would be denied medical treatment ever, no matter what the situation was, no matter what the cost. Simple, straightforward idea, nothing could go wrong, but Dr. Sanchez was not taking any chances. He met many times with key members of Congress and many of his influential colleagues to make sure that any provisions that finally became law clearly considered the patient’s interest first.

The latter half of 2009 was the busiest time of Chris’ life. He attended to all his medical duties and hospital administrative chores, as well as running a very effective campaign with what seemed a very obstinate and sly Congress. By early 2010, Dr. Sanchez’s efforts bore fruit in the form of the Life Preservation Act of 2010, known to some as the Sanchez Bill. At first Life Preservation was hailed as the universal panacea, the cure to the healthcare woes that had been ailing this country for such a long time. Chris even had to add appearances on talk shows and late night entertainment to his other activities.

It didn’t take long for Chris and the rest of America to figure out that they had been suckered by Congress and that the structural components of Life Preservation was fool’s gold. Upon minute examination of the implementation components, which Congress craftily concealed, it was discovered that Congress’ intention was to preserve one life at the expense of another. This was healthcare rationing par excellence. Chris became a national pariah overnight and no longer could do anything about the monster he helped to create. The people were furious and Chris was not the only one who fell from grace. Americans booted almost every member of Congress involved with Life Preservation, but the new Congress still didn’t have enough votes in 2011to override the Presidential veto; so the misery continued.

Relief finally came when a new President took office on January 20, 2013. This inauguration day was like no other in America’s history. The President dispensed with all the inaugural activities and made the shortest inaugural address ever, “Americans are facing great evil. There will be time for speeches later. Now we need to get to work.” With that, Congress and the President worked around the clock and delivered the repeal of the Life Preservation Act a scant two days later on January 22, 2013. People all over the country threw parties and rejoiced even though the country suffered the worst January in more than a century. The times were sure pretty crazy.

It may have been a sheer coincidence that Life Preservation was repealed forty years to the day after the Supreme Court handed down the Roe v. Wade decision on January 22, 1973 or maybe it was a harbinger of the events that unfolded next. With the President’s signature barely dry on the repeal of Life Preservation, Congress began to dismantle all the Life Preservation machinery put into place by the previous administration. Within weeks, one Audley Talke, a regional director at Parental Planning, challenged the repeal of Life Preservation. Talke had a rare cancer and was one of those who had received treatment under the terms of the now defunct Life Preservation Act. The treatment was ridiculously expensive and he should not have been covered given his profile. But, Talke was different. He had the right connections through his position with Parental Planning and somehow finagled treatment. Talke had received treatment starting in mid 2010 right after the Life Preservation apparatus was put into place, but Talke’s doctors decided to stop this treatment on January 22, 2013. This was no coincidence (?). The doctors determined that the treatment wasn’t effective and was actually doing harm as well. That didn’t stop Talke from bringing a lawsuit against the US government, claiming that his treatment ended with the repeal of the Life Preservation act. He enlisted the formidable legal machinery of Parental Planning and within weeks the Supreme Court was looking into Talke v. United States. It seems that whenever the Supremes hear a case, Parental Planning is somehow in the thick of things.

Justice John Marshall Burger-Frye is a cantankerous old man. He’s a contrarian. If the country says black, he’ll say red and what’s worse, he’ll rule red simply because he can get away with it. He’s in his post for life and no one can challenge him save the other Justices on the bench. Burger-Frye also has a creative flare, pulling out judicial precedent from thin air and basing his decisions on the stuff he makes up. Like so many supreme justices that sat before he did, Burger-Frye had no problem legislating social policy if it suited his fancy. He had been dabbling with the bioethical principles behind legalized euthanasia, especially Peter Singer’s teachings in which Singer proposes a new morality based on Singer’s notion of “quality of life”. When Talke v. United States came before him, Burger-Frye was ready. It didn’t take the justice long to read “quality of life” into the constitution. The rest is history. The people be damned, Congress be damned, even the President be damned. The Supreme Court has ruled. Life Preservation became law that could no longer be overturned.

Chris had his familiar dream again, except that this was no dream. It was everyone’s nightmare. As Chris was waking, he heard the little balding man with the bushy gray black mustache say politely, “Dr. Sanchez. Do wake up. I have the final results of your inquiry…”

The dramatic saga of Dr. Christopher Sanchez is obviously a fictional story, but serves as a good backdrop for serious discussion. There are quite a few points here that could be examined in greater detail, but I’d like to focus on one point – the most obvious – the Death Panel. Some people may argue that this is baldy and his cohorts at the Department of Life Preservation and that “Death Panel” is a fictional construct which lives in the ghoulish dominion of this story. The truth, however, is more gruesome than any fiction could ever be. Even if this was not a fable but was really a report from the year 2020, the men and women of an organization like Life Preservation are merely public servants carrying out their orders. (Yeah, that sounds familiar). There is a real Death Panel here and it’s not imaginary – yes, in the year 2009. Actually this Death Panel has been around for quite a while. This panel is deadlier than any other mere group of bureaucrats could ever be. Yes, we’re talking about those men and women in their black robes that sit unchallenged judging all – the Supreme Court.

How can I say this? A little trip back in time with just a few quick stops will convince you. You can check the facts in many American history books or on the internet. At the nation’s founding , the architects of the constitution constructed a system of government based on three coequal components, each providing a check against either of the other two usurping power. This is the stuff of junior high school, except that this balance was soon broken in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison when Supreme Court justice John Marshall pulled a fast one. It was 1803 and he forever seized power for his court to negate the judgments of the other two branches, and the will of the people to boot. It was a mere fifteen years after the ratification of the constitution and our nation found itself at the mercy of a judicial dictatorship.

Fast forward to 1857 to one of the darkest times in America’s history and we find that the Supreme Court had grown more powerful with each case they considered. By this time the Court had already invalidated numerous acts of Congress and it became clear that as far as the court was concerned the people’s will didn’t count anymore. In the Dred Scott decision of 1857 the Court really showed its true colors by reading into the Constitution whatever it wished. The Dred Scott case was complex indeed. He was a slave that had been taken by his owners for an extended period to Illinois, a free state. He traveled later to the Wisconsin Territory (present day Minnesota) in which the federal government outlawed slavery under the Missouri Compromise of 1820. By all rights Scott should have become a free man, yet he failed to win his freedom in a series of lawsuits spanning ten years. The case was finally decided in early 1857 by the Supreme Court. Not only did the court strike down the Missouri Compromise by ruling that it was unconstitutional, but Scott was denied freedom by the Court's decision also. Why? The court concluded that because Scott was black, he was not a citizen and therefore had no right to sue. The Court went on to say that the framers of the Constitution believed that blacks "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the Negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it.” Unbelievable! You won’t find anything remotely close to this in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence with its bold “All men are created equal.” So, how did the 1857 court deal with the Declaration? Totally out of control. Referring to the language in the Declaration of Independence that includes the phrase, "all men are created equal," the court reasoned that "it is too clear for dispute, that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration. . . ."

Justice didn’t matter. The Constitution wasn’t the court’s guide either. The court bent the Constitution any way it wanted and in 1973 it made the ultimate breach. In that year the court decided Roe v. Wade and became the Supreme Death Panel. Yes, the court was concerned about all the difficulties that some women were having when they became pregnant unintentionally. What did the court do with all this compassion? Citing population control among other abhorrent rationalizations, it proceeded to strike down all existing abortion laws, ruling that a woman and her doctor could kill her unborn child. Does that statement sound excessive? Actually, anyway you slice it, that’s exactly what is happening. So why were 50,000,000 babies killed since 1973 and not protected under the Fourteenth Amendment which provides “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”? With legalese conniving the Purveyors of Death found the same convenient answer that the Dred Scott court used and said that the unborn is not a person – go kill it.

The Death Meisters weren’t quite through yet. In 2000 they just felt the great urge to overturn the Nebraska law banning partial birth abortions, a most gruesome practice. Oh, you’re not sure what partial birth abortion is? Let me demonstrate. Close your eyes. Imagine that you are in an elevator and the elevator door has closed. Below where you are standing, something has opened a large slit in the floor and grabs you by the legs. This monster, that’s what it has to be, sticks up a tentacle and grabs you by the legs. With tremendous force, it pulls you toward it through the slit. You are struggling to stop this thing but there’s nothing that you can do. The monster is way too powerful. With most of your body through the elevator opening, the monster suddenly reaches into the slit again with another tentacle, but this one has a razor sharp claw at its end. The tentacle’s swift movement ends as the monster rips into the back of your head and cuts a gaping hole there. You’re probably dead by now, but the monster makes sure and uses that multi-purpose tentacle to suck out your brain through the hole in your head and pull the rest of your limp body through the slit.

[ On two separate occasions President Bill Clinton vetoed bills passed by Congress which were designed to ban the inhumane partial birth abortion procedure. Not deterred, Congress passed yet another ban on this brutality, but this time with George W. Bush at the helm, the ban became law. How did candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama respond to this law during the 2008 campaign? Both candidates expressed dismay that the law diminished the ability of a woman to kill her child, er right to choose. I definitely don’t want to get on an elevator with either Clinton, or Obama for that matter. ]

In conclusion, now that the Supreme Court has tasted blood, how long will it be until it makes euthanasia the law of the land?

Before Carthago delenda est we need dare justicia ad judici.

Do It Yourself Healthcare Reform

2009-08-31T00:00:00.006-04:00

Voters tell Congress what they want in the upcoming bill. It’s as simple as that. Here are a few proposals. Voters will be presented with a list of Proposals Only , no implementation. Voters choose the proposals they want via a ratification process.

Here's what the proposals look like.

Simple! Voters pick what they like.

Only after voters chose what they want, do we let Congress decide how to implement the voter ratified healthcare reform proposals. This will then be submitted to voters in a referendum.

Voters are in control during the entire process.
Long and complicated. Yes. It’s too important to do any other way.

For more information on this approach of presenting political proposals, please check out Healthcare Reform via Use Cases

If you’re interested in adding more reform proposals, please submit other relevant proposals to this blog. I’ll convert it to appropriate Use Case Diagrams.

Healthcare Reform via Use Cases

2009-08-23T00:00:00.008-04:00

One of the greatest things about an open society is the ability to learn, learn, learn. Learning is certainly so exhilarating as we can literally discover the world. Learning also gives us the opportunity to explore how other people solve a problem similar to ours but in a different context. Probably most out-of-the-box solutions that we hear about really stem from an in-the-box solution in its native context.

Speaking of native, maybe the Native Americans from the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in the Dakotas (which, by the way, means friend) can teach us something about standing up on our hind legs. You see the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation is a sovereign nation, but every now and then they have to assert their rights lest they be trampled upon. In 1997, the SRSR did just that, suing the county and state for motor vehicle tax collection and winning.

This blog is about Healthcare Reform and we will appeal to the Software world to help us corral healthcare issues. As it turns out, by turning our view outward, we will be able apply a super-effective “out-of-the-box” solution to what ails healthcare reform.

Let’s first summarize the problems with Healthcare Reform efforts to date: 1) the inability of previous administrations to bring reform to fruition, and 2) the total disconnect between the public on the one hand and the administration and Congress on the other. Let us also be clear that the second problem drives the first. This disconnect has been apparent in the Town Hall meetings with angry citizens venting at our politicians, yet these pols don’t get it.

Now is the time for change, real change - “out-of-the-box” change.
Let’s briefly describe a problem in the Software Development arena that is similar to the recent experience with healthcare reform… In a nutshell, many large software projects failed miserably. They went over budget, over schedule, didn’t deliver what users wanted, and, in many cases, were despised by users and management alike. Even though these projects were well funded and were staffed by the best and the brightest, they failed anyway. This experience was repeated over, and over again, independently of organization, independently of location, etc. This was a huge problem that went on for many years, eventually to be resolved by the top computer scientists in the world. Why were projects failing so often and so painfully?

The answer was as remarkable as it was simple. The root cause of all the failures in the software industry was the absolute neglect of stakeholders by software architects and the like. The architects and developers built terrific systems that no one wanted or could use. They built systems in a vacuum. Let’s be clear about what this means… Like our members of Congress, the architects and developers were simply paying lip service to stakeholders’ needs and desires.

What are stakeholders? In a word, these are the people who care most about the system. They are the ones with the most to gain and, conversely, the most to lose. This begs the question then, why did competent architects and developers miss the mark by not considering stakeholders’ needs? The explanation actually lies in human nature itself. Like most of us, these professionals thought, no, were sure, that they knew exactly what their clients, the stakeholders, really needed. This wasn’t malicious or egotistical; it was just human nature. Furthermore, it wasn’t the professionals who were flawed. It was the development process itself that was the problem. It didn’t include a methodology to properly court the stakeholders and incorporate their needs into the development process. It sure sounds a lot like what Congress and the administration are doing with Healthcare Reform.

Use Cases A spectacular discovery, Use Cases, revolutionized Computer Science with a most compelling and natural way to capture and convey information. As we just explored, the problem with software development was that stakeholders were not controlling what went into software systems. To deal with these issues, the Use Case methodology provides the means for stakeholder control. The beauty of the Use Case methodology is that no special training is needed to benefit from it. Some examples are worth thousands of words…

The “Use Case” approach is not new to the world of strategic healthcare planning. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) used this very approach in some of its efforts.What’s new here is having citizens vote on which Use Cases to include in Healthcare revision legislation.

Fortunately, the Software Development Community has resolved all these problems, mainly by institutionalizing stakeholder involvement as part of the development process. My next post will describe how to bring this experience to public policy.

The whole point of the Use Case approach is to let the stakeholders get their rightful say in what gets implemented.

On Healthcare Reform

2009-07-27T03:00:00.000-04:00

There is a lot that’s good with healthcare in the United States. People from all over the world travel here because we have the best hospitals, the best doctors. Medicine in the United States provides the best care in the world. Still there are issues with our healthcare system that are of concern and must be addressed. Insurance costs have gone up dramatically in the last few years and there are still some people who are under-insured.

In theory, people should be thrilled with the prospect of improving healthcare. So why is there so much apprehension with the healthcare proposals coming out of Washington? The short answer is that the reform being proposed is dealing with a lot more than we bargained for. Another side of this coin is that the objectives for reform are very slippery moving targets. All we hear from Washington are a bunch of solutions, but solutions to what. It seems very much like instead of solving problems, we are creating new ones.

I’d like to offer an approach to achieving meaningful, acceptable healthcare reform that I believe will be welcomed by our people. This is totally different from anything that was ever done in the political arena (as far as I know). The process that I envision proceeds in several steps. Indeed, the process is somewhat convoluted, but there is so much at stake.

Step 1: Compose The
Declaration of Healthcare Reform The House of Representatives will put together a 30-50 page document listing the objectives, and only objectives, not implementation methodology, of healthcare reform. This is essentially a set of bullet points, written in layman’s English, as to what healthcare reform will accomplish. The resulting declaration of healthcare reform objectives may contain any objective that the House sees fit to include, such as, 100% healthcare coverage for illegal aliens. However, any objective that is not included in the final declaration will not find implementation in the final healthcare reform package.

Step 1a: Presidential Thumbs up We don’t want to leave the President out of the loop in this important part of the process. Why? Because by all accounts the President should have a broader view of our citizens' needs. Indeed, the Presidential Thumbs up is a different approach for obtaining Presidential approval. My intent is to supply the President with a vehicle for input into the declaration process. So, if the President approves of the Declaration, he or she will call a public press conference and publicly give the Presidential “Thumbs-up”, signaling that the process proceeds to Step 2. On the other hand, if the he or she does not approve of the Declaration, the President will register disapproval at the press conference with a Presidential “Thumbs-down” and the declaration goes back to the House for revision.

This is healthcare reform for our citizens and by our citizens. So it is absolutely essential that the President has an informal role in this process. That is why I chose this informal concurrence modality. If we would become more formal at this point of the process, it would bring us back to the “business as usual” thinking. That is the last thing we need, if we are to make progress with healthcare reform in a reasonable amount of time. I am also certain that no President would feel slighted if there is a real opportunity for movement with healthcare reform.

Step 2: Ratify The Declaration of Healthcare Reform Voters across the nation will have the opportunity to examine the objectives in the Declaration and approve or disapprove each bullet point. The voters’ ratification will proceed on a per bullet point basis, requiring 2/3 vote for each objective to be included in the final implementation. Those objectives that obtain a 2/3 vote will be implemented, the others will not. The ratification process will follow a strictly popular vote principle.

Step 3: Trial Implementation of Healthcare Reform Congress now has in hand the Declaration of Healthcare Reform as ratified by the people. Both houses will compose provisional legislation which implements the objectives of the ratified declaration. The legislation will be formulated as a set of bullet points detailing how the declaration’s objectives are met. All the bullet points relating to a single objective will then be formulated as a single referendum item to be considered by voters as ballot proposals hopefully in time for the 2010 election cycle. There will be a separate ballot proposal for each objective.

Step 4: Voter Referendum Although this is not the way it is done in Washington, people, voters, must be entitled to choose how their healthcare will work. This is the reason for the objectives and referenda. By the way, who says that healthcare should be administered by the Federal government? Perhaps this should be done by the state? Or, perhaps, local government will simply police the quality of healthcare? All this will be determined between the voter ratified Declaration and the referenda.

This is certainly very unlike the usual approach to legislation. So, why am I suggesting such a drastically different road to providing healthcare reform? People do want reform, but they are wary of what politicians have been cooking up. HillaryCare failed to win the day and it seems like current attempts won’t fare better. It’s about time that we put our citizens in the driver seat in choosing our own destiny.

A little bit of explanation on how the Declaration of Healthcare Reform is composed would be helpful. On the one hand, the Congressional agenda for healthcare can be displayed in its full glory. Congress can add the objective of rationing. It can also add the objective of capping medical malpractice awards. It can add the objective of funding all healthcare via a single payer, or an objective against a single payer system. Obviously both objectives can’t make it to the final Declaration. The objectives should be clear and quantitative wherever possible. For example, the objective of capping medical malpractice awards can include a general schedule of awards for various categories. Again, only objectives are included, no implementation. Implementation is dealt with in the last stage.

The Senate is not included in the Declaration stage at all. With 435 strong, the House alone will provide sufficient input into formulating the Declaration. It is also an added benefit to put the members of the House under a magnifying glass. Since objectives are much more transparent than implementations, voters will get to see how their Congressmen stand on the issues. This should give the members greater incentive in dealing fairly with the objectives in the Declaration.

The final question then is of Constitutionality. In this regard we can’t falter. The Constitution has been so badly battered lately, that we can’t afford it taking more flak. If this whole approach is unconstitutional, then it must be dropped forthwith, and we have to find another way.

How to stop Cap and Trade

2009-07-24T00:00:00.004-04:00

Congratulations, you’re already part of the way there. "A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." – Confucius and Lao-tzu

The Cap & Trade Legislation is predicated on the flimsy supposition that there may be global warming because of human activity and the even flimsier supposition that we can do something about it. This is prompting the administration and Congress to consider imposing a heavy tax burden on our citizens, as well as inflicting staggering lifestyle changes on our society. It’s pretty clear that our citizens’ well being is not being considered at all.

Unfortunately, our representatives in Washington have no backbone. They belong to one party one day and then switch to another the next day. First they support legislation because that’s the way the wind is blowing. When the wind changes, so do they.

These guys are here for now; so, we have to deal with it. The good news, though, is we can make them obey the will of the people. We just have to make sure that these Congressmen and Senators are made aware of the people’s will in no uncertain terms. 1000 people at each Congressman’s office with signed petitions of another 5000 people will do nicely. Let’s call these activities or demonstrations “Tea Party Plus”, perhaps “Cap and Trade Party”, or how about “Tea Party 2454”.

Is this realistic? You betcha. A lot of us are very angry and we don’t want to watch our beloved country wind up as a footnote to history. What we need to is organize into action groups with very specific objectives and goals. Lest we forget, this sort of anger and these types of action groups compelled politicians to make the most profound changes to our society when Martin Luther King and others led the Civil Rights movement in 1960’s.

The next point is not to get panicky. It may take a few months to accomplish the goals of “Tea Party 2454”, but, as Sarah Palin said on the eve of Independence Day, “A good point guard drives through a full court press, protecting the ball, keeping her eye on the basket”. With our eyes on the basket, we will win for all America.

How about Online Petitions? Online petitions are OK – Congressmen do pay attention to them, but they don’t have the same power, the same in-your-face impact as 1000 people showing up in a Congressman’s office demanding action. We are really dealing with a form of combat here. So, whereas online petitions can be likened to airpower, the organizers are the foot soldiers of the organization’s infantry. They are the ones who will win the war. That’s the lesson we learned from Dr. King.

What are the objectives? We need to become informed of the issues framing Cap and Trade from a scientific perspective, from a social perspective, from a financial perspective, and from a political perspective. We need to understand our point of view on the issues as well as the point of view of those who are pushing for Cap and Trade. We need to be able to honestly explain these issues to those who will join us in our cause – the signers and the marchers.

What are the goals? The goals are straightforward and quantifiable. We formulate a petition to a) ask Congress to cease and desist with any activities related to Cap and Trade, or b) ask Congress to repeal any Cap and Trade legislation that may have been passed. We will have 5000 voters sign the petition in each Congressional district irrespective of political affiliation or preference. Furthermore, we will form a committee of 1000 people to march the petition to the Congressman’s office on the appointed day. We will attempt to coordinate all the marches so that they occur on the same day.

How do we accomplish the objectives? Getting organized is crucial. Being informed is crucial. Communicating with our fellow citizens is crucial. This is a three legged stool which will be strong enough to support us all. Furthermore, the Stop Cap and Trade Organization will be divided into three distinct groups: a mind trust, which is the information repository, organizers, who will recruit signers and marchers, and coordinators.

The mind trust group will learn the relevant issues, translate them into plain-speak, and relay this information to the rest of the organization. This group does not have to become expert on the issues; you can be pretty certain that members of Congress know very little about any of Cap and Trade. Again, the “mind trust” does not have to read through hundreds of pages of legislation; here, again, our group can take a clue from Congress. Rather, the “mind trust” should learn the relevant issues so as to help the organizers with their recruitment efforts. The “mind trust” will also be the central information clearinghouse for the Stop Cap and Trade Organization.

In case you haven’t guessed it by now, our “organizers” are similar to the critters we became acquainted with in the last election. We most definitely need to differentiate ourselves from them, but, we must learn from them also. This is for keeps. I won’t get into all this right here. Those of you who will become the “organizers” will find out what I’m talking about. But, let me explain that the “organizers” will meet with all sorts of people and convey our message. Moreover, the “organizers” will encourage voters to sign our petitions and march with us.

This brings us to the last group. Some people are good at coordinating and like to do it. We will definitely need a lot of help in that area.

On Cap & Trade

2009-07-20T00:00:00.004-04:00

The Cap and Trade legislation, also known as American Clean Energy and Security Act H.R. 2454, is a total non-starter. It’s DOA. All work that Congress has done for this bill up to this point should be scrapped immediately.

If, perchance, it takes a little while for our power to be recognized and our voice to be heard, then we will need to completely repeal any Cap and Trade legislation.

Why take such an absolute position? Consider these scenarios…

Scenario 1: It’s early evening and Tom and Linda are just getting ready to sit down to the dinner table with their two teenage kids. This is certainly a rare event since most of the time everyone in the family is off on different directions. Just as the family gets started with dinner, the doorbell rings and a good looking couple, decently dressed, ask to talk to Tom briefly about an urgent matter. As it turns out, the two aren’t actually a couple; rather, they’re volunteers helping a community cancer hospital with a charity drive. They explain that the hospital is looking to get involved in some serious new projects in order to improve the services that it offers its patients. These two people volunteered to help the hospital collect funds for the projects. Tom politely listens to their pitch and after they’re done, Tom invites them to sit down so that he can discuss their request with Linda. Tom leaves his guests for a short time and then returns with $100 check for the hospital’s drive. As he gives them the check, he tells them about some family experiences with cancer and that he knows that the hospital does very good work. He explains that he wishes that he could give more, but the family budget is pretty stretched out.

Scenario 2: It’s early evening and Barry and Jane are just getting ready to sit down to the dinner table with their two teenage kids. This is certainly a rare event since most of the time everyone in the family is off on different directions. Just as the family gets started with dinner, the doorbell rings and two official looking people, a man and a woman, ask to talk to Barry about an urgent matter. The man starts, “We need to talk about the American Clean Energy and Security Act.” Barry responds, “You mean Cap and Trade.” “Yes that’s right; you need sign this form authorizing us to collect $175/year from you.” Barry replies rather startled, “Whoa. Let me get my wife in here.” Barry gives Jane a quick rundown of what’s going on; then, Jane tells the pair, “I heard that the actual cost of this will be much more. And, by the way, what makes you think that we are interested anyway.” The woman responds coolly, “The ice caps are melting and polar bears are dying.” Barry and Jane jump out of their seats simultaneously, “Soooo! We’re sure that this is important, but we have other priorities.” Undeterred, the woman retorts, “But there is the issue of increased probability and intensity of droughts and heat waves.” Barry and Jane again in unison exclaim, “Oh really. Where do you get this stuff?” The man started mumbling something about scientists having concluded that global warming is a major concern. Our staunch couple would have none of this and told the pair “Well, we know a thing or two about science, don’t we? You’d best leave.”

The first scenario is replayed millions of time all over our country. Our country, the United States of America is populated by many different peoples, from different walks of life and different cultural backgrounds. However, we are all united because we are moral; we are righteous; we care for one and other, even for people that are very different from ourselves; we protect our environment and our surroundings; we are not stupid, though – we know what’s important and what’s not. Yes, Americans are the most charitable people on the face of the earth. So, multitudes of causes are supported by generous and thoughtful Americans. And, yes we consider critically which causes and which projects are worthy of our attention and our money.

Americans have always paid special attention to environmental concerns, but we use a level headed approach here. Overall, we are pretty astute when it comes to the protection of our environment; we critically evaluate environmental programs by weighing cost vs. benefit, or, better yet, cost vs. concern. I’m willing to bet that 80% of voters would react as our couple did in scenario 2. Nonetheless, people really do worry about the environment. That’s why I’m proposing that we set aside $5 Million a year over the next 10 years to support further research into the global environment.

On Science

2009-07-16T00:00:00.004-04:00

The approach of any normal and sane scientist is to think about his or her craft as: Science is a collection of suppositions. Supposition also translates to theory, the better known ones being Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, and Freud's Theory of Personality. Amazingly, nobody considers these and other notable scientific theories as uncontestable facts. Rational scientists know better. Even though these theories’ acceptance was established after tremendous effort, scientists are aware they may possibly be invalidated in the future. So, when a “scientist” tells you that such and such is an irrefutable fact, he is full of crap. Period.

How can I make such a bold statement? Let’s consider a few examples…

It was three years after my first wife Yetta, R.I.P., was diagnosed with the deadliest form of ovarian cancer. Most women used to succumb to this disease within a year or so (this was over 20 years ago). Yetta, though, was still trucking even after two radical surgeries and two nine-month courses of the most powerful chemotherapy treatments, but she still had the cancer. We were running out of options and so we started combing the country for answers. One day we walked into the office of a handsome, bright eyed research oncologist that was introduced to us as one of the smartest scientists in the field. It certainly was not hard to believe that. There must have been 100 diplomas of all sorts plastering the walls of his office, not to mention all sorts of awards. The doctor first talked to Yetta about her history with the cancer. He then told us of his remarkable research project by which he could cure ovarian cancer even in advanced stages. His procedure involved entirely removing the patient’s blood supply, running the blood through a machine that supercharges the white blood cells, and then reintroducing the supercharged blood back into the patient. The supercharged white cells would attack the cancer and destroy it completely. Being a science guy, I pretty much understood quite a bit of the technical stuff that he was talking about and I was excited. Yetta, on the other hand, was skeptical. This whole thing sounded too radical, too dangerous even though the doctor most emphatically guaranteed us that this would work. The most jarring aspect of this whole encounter was that the doctor called us several times to urge Yetta to undergo the procedure. He was adamant. He insisted that he found the cure for ovarian cancer. Fortunately, Yetta had the sense and perseverance not to let this “scientist” experiment on her – we opted not to go ahead with the procedure. We soon found out that another ovarian patient that we knew did go for the procedure and died shortly thereafter. His whole program was closed down about a year after we met him. Yetta was still alive at the time.

Fortunately, most people don’t relate to this story of my late wife. Cholesterol, on the hand, is something we all know about, even those of us that don’t have a “cholesterol problem”. Well, let’s see. Where are we at right now vis-à-vis cholesterol? Scientists used to tell us that “cholesterol is b-a-a-a-d for you.” Somewhere along the line, some scientists discovered (decided?) that “cholesterol is actually good for you.” Other scientists, or may be the same ones, came up with a more creative theory “there is good cholesterol and there is b-a-a-a-d cholesterol.” Maybe, this is true, but the point is that science is fluid. Scientists that are telling the truth can’t make pronouncements that are cast in stone.

“Look up in the sky. Is it going to rain?” “Or, my bones tell me that it will rain soon.” Meteorologists, for the most part, are better at atmospheric prognostication than their non-modern counterparts who relied on Aristotle’s teachings for their meteorological wisdom. But, how much better are they really? How often do these guys predict some major storm that never materializes? Better yet – predicting hurricane landfall seems to be a black art. Finally, our weathermen can give us clues about local conditions and for limited spans of time; strangely, the Farmer’s Almanac long range predictions seem to be just as reliable as those of our vaunted scientific weathermen. How, then, are we supposed to believe glorified weathermen who prophesize planetary level events for decades’ time span and tell us about global blah-blah-blah? You gotta be kidding.

Lest we forget, there is our friend, Dr. Sigmund Freud. Up until recently, Freud’s theories were the Gibraltar of psychoanalysis. To question Freud was inconceivable, yet, here we are and what was once considered incontrovertible truths are now lame old thinking. This is the nature of all fields of science. Anyone who tells you different is either a fool or a liar, or both.

On the Middle East

2009-07-13T00:00:00.002-04:00

Our government has such a great deal of interest into the goings on of one particular region on Earth – the Middle East. So many administrations have attempted to micro manage the region’s affairs, with disastrous results for the most part. For example, a recent attempt here on part of the government to instill democracy enabled a terrorist group to rise to power. This, clearly, was not our government’s intention.

Why then do we spend so much of our energy here? Is it because Israel, the seeming epicenter of our attention, has such historical significance, being the ancient homeland of the Jews and the birthplace of Christianity? Well then, why not turn our attention to the African continent with its rich history and significance to many of our people? Furthermore, why hasn’t the US been more involved with the problems that bedevil Africans – genocide, AIDS, brutal governments?

The inescapable truth is that our government has been pursuing its own self interest in the Middle East. All our machinations in the region have been to make the locals happy and assure the continuing availability of the region’s oil supply. Hooray. Protecting our own interests is the absolutely right thing to do, but, as most things government, this is being done in about the stupidest way possible.

The United States has an abundant store of oil and other energy sources. These could easily be tapped and relieve our dependence on foreign energy. What a boon for the United States, and the world in general, for that matter. We would create many meaningful jobs, we could proclaim our independence from foreign oil, and the Middle East becomes just another region. The whole world’s calculus would change. Israel and her neighbors would probably be able to forge the long needed peace in short order under the new calculus.

Achieving self reliance would go a long way to advance national healing and a balance so that we are once again on the right side of justice. It has been a long time since the days of President Reagan when America would defend democracy, eschew evil, and support her allies. When America is strong and independent, we are the beacon light for the world.

Martin Luther King

2009-07-12T00:00:00.003-04:00

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is a true icon in American history. Certainly, there was controversy at times as to how Dr. King responded to some of the events of his day, but that should only be expected when attempting the impossible feats of ending segregation in public schools, obtaining meaningful civil rights legislation, among the many wonderful things that Dr. King accomplished in his life. For example, Dr. King’s stated opposition to the Vietnam War turned even some of his staunch supporters against him, but, as it turned out, Martin Luther King truly had a panoramic view of the world, and, indeed, the Vietnam War ended.

Yes, the world has changed. Barack Obama has become President of the United States, an event that would have been unimaginable a generation ago. Stan O’Neal – you wouldn’t know it by his name, but, he is the grandson of a former slave – was the CEO of Merrill Lynch for over 6 years and he effectively stewarded that company until, of course, the major financial collapse. Wilma Mankiller is unknown to most people, but she has a most compelling story as she did the unthinkable and was elected the first female principal chief of the Cherokee Nation. Chief Mankiller received wide acclaim for bringing tremendous advances to the Cherokees, including significantly improving education and health care, overseeing the construction of new schools, creating job-training centers, and establishing health clinics.

The great strides that our society has made that enable such gifted and talented individuals to live up to their potential most certainly are attributed directly to the foresight and wisdom of Dr. King to strive for equality. But the triumphs of the Obama’s and O’Neal’s and such others is only part of the story; Affirmative Action and its many nuances is the other part. Affirmative Action is not a clearly defined law; rather, it is a set of guidelines established by businesses, schools, and all levels of government. Affirmative Action, which came about following the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Civil Rights Act of 1968, has manifested itself as a mechanical quota system. On the one hand, Affirmative Action has caused a huge backlash – the outcry against so-called reverse discrimination; on the other hand, Malcolm X, while not a mainline civil rights thinker, considered Affirmative Action a dead-end as far back as 40 years ago. The contention then, as now, is: how can someone hold his head high knowing that the only reason he obtained some job or position is because he fulfilled a quota? There are many who now understand, as did Malcolm X, that Affirmative Action hasn’t helped minority and disadvantaged people realize real equality. Dr. King’s dreams, and all our dreams for that matter, are still far from being fulfilled. There still remains much that we must accomplish.

Dr. King, of course, was a martyr and gave his life for the cause of freedom. But the greatest gift that he gave to us is to show us how ordinary, beleaguered, and, yes, even downtrodden, disenfranchised, people can fight the system by peaceful, non-violent means. It has been said that Dr. King was the greatest community organizer of them all. The March on Washington and the “I have a dream” speech was the culmination (and the beginning) of years of community organizing. Parenthetically, it would seem that Sarah Palin has now found her inner community organizer. Bravo. I’m sure that there’s a lot that she and all of us can learn from Dr. King.

Counter Tsunami

2009-07-08T00:00:00.002-04:00

A united people, one mind, one heart, one voice – this is the essence of an unstoppable political force which will once again regain freedom for all the people of the United States. We witnessed this during the era of Civil Rights when the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. and other courageous leaders stood up against bigotry and oppression. And these leaders accomplished the seemingly impossible. This is because Dr. King and the others made people really understand how bad things were and that they needed to stand together to make things right. And, yes, people did whatever it took to fight against the oppressors.

Rosa Parks, regarded as the “Mother of the Civil Rights Movement”, was a gentle soul, but she knew she had to stand up for what was right (in her case, sitting did the trick) even though she was risking terrible retribution at the hands of her oppressors. Her courage and the courage of many like her gave strength and energy to all sorts of people to unite and change the very fabric of our nation.

Many of us have become activated – we sit glued to the radio, listening to talk show hosts explaining how our liberty is inexorably slipping away. Activation also means contributing to various PAC’s, Political Action Committees, and signing online petitions. We are worried, we are concerned, we hope our activation will somehow set things right. It won’t. It’s not enough.

We need to take the next step and get energized. We need to get organized. Instead of just sending emails to Congressmen and local politicians, we need to march into their offices, 1000 strong, 10,000 strong, whatever it takes. We need to clearly understand the issues and we need to explain this to our fellow citizens. Our very freedom is at stake.

It may seem a little strange using the “Counter Tsunami” metaphor in trying to capture these thoughts. Let me explain. The “Political Tsunami” analogy is really apt at expressing the notion that the political upheaval that we are experiencing is so monumental. There have never been any events in the history of the United States like this where the relationship of the citizen to government is changing in such a fundamental fashion. Yes, “Political Tsunami” is the only way to describe this. So, then, how can we stop the seeming unstoppable? The only answer is a force of equal or greater magnitude, a “Counter Tsunami”.

During my research in “Controlled Nuclear Fusion”, I examined methods for artificially producing tsunami like waves, called solitons. The idea there was to have a lot of little waves interact coherently – in unison. In theory, it is possible to produce forces rivaling that of the most powerful natural tsunami. This is something we all know intuitively and there is a mathematical model to support this idea also.

Wakeup Call

2009-07-07T03:00:00.000-04:00

The inevitable happens 7/7/09

For months, actually more than a year, my wife and I kept telling my stepson to take care of his dental problems. He kept neglecting to go to the dentist – this part is convoluted and I don’t want to go into it. We begged him to take care of this, we offered him all sorts of help, and we explained patiently and firmly that this behavior was dangerous, even potentially deadly. Even after he lost a couple of teeth, he still didn’t get it. Well, he called us over the weekend and told us that he had a lot of pain and his face had swelled up a lot.

We quickly arranged for his dental appointment and, even though he is an adult, we took charge over that whole activity. Today, I went to the appointment with him and made sure that he would let the dentist do what’s necessary. My stepson had a huge abscess deep in a root; had I not accompanied him, he would have walked out of the office before the dentist completed the procedure. My wife and I plan to be in as take-charge a role as possible to see him get back to health.

This whole incident was my clarion call. “Oh my gosh”, I thought, “I was talking about this and worrying about this for months. Now here it is”. The inevitable happens. It really does… you see it over, and over, and over again.

But, there is another moral to this particular story: we can change destiny – we just have to take charge of our destiny and of those around us.
For years now the Federal government has been becoming larger, more powerful, and, what’s the most worrisome, increasingly controlling and intrusive. We all know this. Some of us who have become activated have been carefully following the unfolding of incredible events, such as government takeover of banks and major manufacturers, and, yes, states handing out IOU’s. We see the inevitable coming – the government will completely control our lives.

Can we stop this and get our country back? You betcha, but only if we become energized and act in unison.

Note: I asked my stepson for permission to recount his story.

Political Tsunami

2009-07-07T00:00:00.006-04:00

I didn’t pick the Tsunami metaphor for the political environment just because that is about the worst natural disaster that can possibly happen. Until December 2004, most people had never heard of this phenomenon, this terrible freak of nature. I’m a little different in this regard, because I had done some work in this area during my research in plasma physics for Controlled Nuclear Fusion.

You see I was studying solitons, a mathematical model which describes a peculiar kind of wave that travels undisturbed over extremely long distances. This behavior is most strange since waves typically dissipate as they travel. The soliton doesn’t change an iota – this gives it its great power. Some scientists believe that the soliton is the mathematical model for tsunamis. Furthermore, scientists believe that the formation of soliton/tsunamis is caused by a small number of large forces acting in unison. The reason for this belief is that a single large force, such as an underground earthquake, would result in a typical wave that disperses as it travels, not a tsunami. To form that huge, destructive water column that travels unabated requires the underlying forces to act coherently, a term in physics that translates roughly as, in-unison.

To a person with my background, seeing this convergence of political and social forces translates to only one conclusion: Political Tsunami. You see, we have 2 of the three branches of government firmly committed to increasing government intervention and control, the 3rd branch is hot on the heels of the other two. The media has abandoned its traditional role of watchdog and arbiter over government machinations. Now, the media is in lockstep with government thinking, and even its policy. Instead of bringing people an unbiased assessment of government performance, the media has become the government’s cheerleader.

The Creator has endowed us with great abilities. We can look at the heavens and contemplate the universe and its wonders. We can fathom the ocean depths and understand the raw power of its fury. However, the Creator loves his other creations as much as He loves Man. He bestowed upon His creatures a keen awareness of their surroundings, enabling them to react to dire threats long before humans even have a clue that there’s anything wrong. This was witnessed during the 2004 tsunami in the Indian Ocean, as snakes and lizards survived atop of trees , and it was reported of Sri Lanka's Wildlife Department that "No elephants are dead, not even a dead hare or rabbit. I think animals can sense disaster. They have a sixth sense. They know when things are happening."

The Political Tsunami is raging towards us all, but, unlike the animals, only a small portion of us understand the depth of its force and how we all will be engulfed. But, there is hope in that very tsunami metaphor, as we started to explore in “Alaskan Treasure” and we’ll take up in “Counter Tsunami”.

Alaskan Treasure

2009-07-06T03:00:00.014-04:00

I was to starting to form the mental image of the new, revitalized Sarah Palin, our champion, and how she would help us set forth an appropriate climate control policy for our nation in this trying time. Our champion would help us master the formidable problem of healthcare for our nation… How do we provide for those that don’t have adequate coverage, and yet not run up the national deficit doing it, or, even worse, have the government take control of something that should really be in the hands of individuals?

Yes, our champion certainly will have a lot on her plate once she moves from the governor’s office to her new champion’s venue. But this image was somehow wrong. Can one champion, yes, even one as moral and powerful as Sarah Palin take on the “Political Tsunami” by herself. I fretted over this a lot as I realized that the champion approach to national healing could not possibly cope with the massive political upheaval that we are now experiencing. This is so depressing. And I thought and thought… “there was something that Sarah said on Friday… let me review that speech again… there it is – those golden words”.

In the middle of her notice to Alaska that she was stepping down, Governor Palin proclaimed the key to America’s freedom, those marvelous words:

“I've never believed that I, nor anyone else, needs a title to do this - to make a difference... to HELP people.”

Here, at last, we activated people, who for some time now have sensed the Tsunami coming, have the tools – this simple and magnificent concept – that we need to launch the “Counter Tsunami” and win back freedom for us and all Americans. People with the right motivation and the right tools can accomplish wonderful things. We’re all pretty smart; we certainly have had the motivation; now thanks to the Alaskan treasure that Governor Palin revealed to us right before Independence Day, we will regain independence again for all.

“I've never believed that I, nor anyone else, needs a title to do this - to make a difference... to HELP people” was proclaimed over 4000 miles from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, but this will stand next to “I have a dream” as a defining moment in America’s history. Please understand that I sincerely hope that no one will be offended by seeing Sarah Palin and Martin Luther King, Jr. in the same sentence – I’m not comparing this speech to Dr. King’s masterpiece of rhetoric, but it will accomplish the same goal of energizing a suffering people. And even though she didn’t sit in a Birmingham jail like Dr. King, Sarah Palin has also endured much at the hands of her critics, yet she still stands tall and is willing to fight for our liberty. But make no mistake about it, we live in more desperate times now than when Dr. King fought for Civil Rights – if we don’t act now, we will all, black and white, rich and poor, be swallowed up by the encroaching “Political Tsunami” that has taken on a life of its own.

A Champion is born

2009-07-05T03:00:00.001-04:00

Sarah Palin shocker 7/3/09

I was driving home from the gym on Friday afternoon and I turned on the radio to listen to the Sean Hannity show as I often do when I’m near a radio in the late afternoon. Sean is a pleasant radio host, well informed, fun to listen to, and, by and large, I agree with most of the things that he says. But Sean was off that day, probably because the day before Independence Day should not be a big news day. Governor Palin certainly changed that with the announcement that she would be stepping down as Governor. Sean’s replacement, and I apologize that I don’t remember the gentleman’s name, was anxiously trying to put together a coherent analysis of this surprising event. Well, he did a pretty good job, adding his own take on the announcement to what Sarah Palin herself told her audience. As you all know, she talked about the two millions dollars that Alaska’s government spent on “opposition research” to answer frivolous ethics complaints against her. She also said that, and I paraphrase, that “Life is too short to compromise time and resources and just ‘Sit down and shut up’ and ‘go with the flow’”. The talk show host added another dimension to what the Governor said by discussing the horrific treatment that she and her family endured at the hands of the media.
After my initial shock wore off, I thought about what Governor Palin said and what bloggers on her Facebook page were saying, and I realized that she had made a proper decision for Alaska and her family.

A Champion is born 7/5/09

July 4 came and went. I started getting comfortable with the idea that Sarah Palin would no longer be the Governor of Alaska. Would she run for President in 2012? Maybe? I think she should, but, that’s another matter. It also dawned on me that she would be an extremely important force in the political landscape whether or not she holds public office again. After all, she did allude to this very idea in Friday’s speech (even though it went over my head at the time). Then, I got very excited… among the many factors driving the decision that she intimated to us on Friday, Sarah Palin was becoming our champion. She certainly fits the mold of the great champions of history… strong, moral, courageous, and committed to serving others. She has a nationwide presence and is a clear, outspoken leader in the issues that matter most to our nation. We certainly find ourselves in a time that we desperately need a champion.

Healthcare Rally

2009-06-24T03:00:00.000-04:00

My wife forwarded me an email notice about a rally in front of ABC studios in Manhattan to voice concern about Obama’s Health Care plan. Sounds like something that I should do. I’ve been stewing in my own brew for too long. Every night I commiserate with some talk show host about how the country is going down the tubes. I keep getting more depressed and more anxious. Well, this time I’m going to do more than just listen to bad news – I will do something about the situation. Yes, that’s what I will do.

I arrived at West 67th Street just outside of ABC Studios at the appointed time expecting hundreds of cheering, chanting people. After I got over my initial disappointment, I realized, “Hey, this is really good. There are 5 other people here, they all think the same way that I do, and they even brought their own homemade posters. We got a great rally going here.” This is exactly what I told the other people and they cheered up quite a bit. We talked for a while and everyone told of his/her take of what was going on politically. We then decided to move our rally down to the corner of Columbus & 67th Street. This corner is the main entrance to ABC Studios and sports a much larger volume of pedestrian traffic.

Moving over to the main entrance was a really good idea. A few more folks who couldn’t find us at the side entrance joined the rally – the rally became large – we were 12 strong. People walking up and down Columbus stopped to look at our posters.
All wasn’t well though. Some people hurled pretty flagrant insults at us. Other people were offended, and, I may add, rightfully so, at some of the more negative posters. We all quickly decided to ditch the bad posters because this was conveying the wrong message. Someone had some markers and poster paper and we put together a much less offensive message. Obviously, the rally proceeded with a more civil demeanor. Yet, there was still something nagging me about all this.

We were all standing there like a bunch of cigar store dummies holding those silly posters. I didn’t travel to Manhattan to be a poster boy. Not that I minded – I would do anything if it helped the cause. But, we are here to get our message across to people – we’re certainly not accomplishing that very well. I got the flash that this group, myself included, is just a bunch of shy folk and we’re afraid to talk to people. Well, now is not the time to be shy. There’s too much at stake. So, I decided that I would do whatever it takes, shy or no shy. I started to smile politely at the people who were slowing down to look at our posters. I engaged some of these people in conversation. And I didn’t talk at these people; I asked them what they thought and what were their concerns. I asked them about their ideas about health care. Some people agreed strongly with Obama’s plan and chided me for not doing the same. That’s OK; at least we were communicating; we were having a dialog.

A few others in our group picked up on what I was doing, and, overall, our rally turned out to be real success. The biggest take-away from this story is that people are interested in what you have to say; just, don’t bang them over the head with it.