Spring Valley, Walla Walla, June 2010

Define: Scruple

scruple – a doubt or hesitation that troubles the conscience or that comes from the difficulty of determining whether something is right

Novacaine for Scruples - antidote for doubt, what I know for certain, what is right

Wild Sweet Pea, Lake Cresent, WA

Read again Esp my comments that follow

Op Ed from EJ Dionne today and my response, which garnered 9 'recommend' notes.

Arm the Senate!

By E.J. Dionne Jr.Monday, July 27, 2009
Isn't it time to dismantle the metal detectors, send the guards at the doors away and allow Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights by being free to carry their firearms into the nation's Capitol?

I've been studying the deep thoughts of senators who regularly express their undying loyalty to the National Rifle Association, and I have decided that they should practice what they preach. They tell us that the best defense against crime is an armed citizenry and that laws restricting guns do nothing to stop violence.

If they believe that, why don't they live by it?

Why would freedom-loving lawmakers want to hide behind guards and metal detectors? Shouldn't NRA members be outraged that Second Amendment rights mean nothing in the very seat of our democracy?

Congress seems to think that gun restrictions are for wimps. It voted this year to allow people to bring their weapons into national parks, and pro-gun legislators have pushed for the right to carry in taverns, colleges and workplaces. Shouldn't Congress set an example in its own workplace?

So why not let Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) pack the weapon of his choice on the Senate floor? Thune is the author of an amendment that would have allowed gun owners who had valid permits to carry concealed weapons into any state, even states with more restrictive gun laws. The amendment got 58 votes last week, two short of the 60 it needed to pass.

Judging by what Thune said in defense of his amendment, he'd clearly feel safer if everyone in the Capitol could carry a gun.

"Law-abiding individuals have the right to self-defense, especially because the Supreme Court has consistently found that police have no constitutional obligation to protect individuals from other individuals," he said. I guess that Thune doesn't think those guards and the Capitol Police have any obligation to protect him.

He went on: "The benefits of conceal and carry extend to more than just the individuals who actually carry the firearms. Since criminals are unable to tell who is and who is not carrying a firearm just by looking at a potential victim, they are less likely to commit a crime when they fear they may come in direct contact with an individual who is armed."

In other words, keeping guns out of the Capitol makes all our elected officials far less safe. If just a few senators had weapons, the criminals wouldn't know which ones were armed, and all senators would be safer, right? Isn't that better than highly intrusive gun control -- i.e., keeping people with guns out of the Capitol in the first place?
"Additionally," Thune said helpfully, "research shows that when unrestricted conceal and carry laws are passed, not only does it benefit those who are armed, but it also benefits others around them such as children."

This is a fantastic opportunity. Arming all our legislators would make it safer for children, so senators could feel much more secure bringing their kids into the Capitol. This would promote family values and might even reduce the number of highly publicized extramarital affairs.

During the debate, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) quoted a constituent who told him: "When my family and I go out at night, it makes me feel safer just knowing I am able to have my concealed weapon."

Why shouldn't Vitter feel equally safe in the Capitol? Why should he have to go out on the streets to carry a gun?

The pro-gun folks love their studies. Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) offered this one: "A study for the Department of Justice found 40 percent of felons had not committed certain crimes because they feared the potential victims would be armed."

That doesn't tell us much about the other 60 percent, but what the heck? If it's good enough for Barrasso, let the good senator introduce the amendment to allow concealed carry in the Capitol.

Barrasso already dislikes the District of Columbia's tough restrictions on weapons. "The gun laws in the District outlaw law-abiding citizens from self-defense," he complained. So go for it, Senator! Make our nation's Capitol an island of firearms liberty in a sea of oppression.

Don't think this column is offered lightly. I want these guys to put up or shut up. If the NRA's servants in Congress don't take their arguments seriously enough to apply them to their own lives, maybe the rest of us should do more to stop them from imposing their nonsense on our country.
ejdionne@washpost.com

and my reponse:

CharlesOfPortAnegles wrote:
EJ,Well said, the hypocrisy is knee deep.

Out here in the West - where men are men and sheep are scared - the gun activists are barely able to conceal the sub-text of their rhetoric: "If you disagree with me I'll shoot you". That is, and always has been, the underlying text of the NRA. They want to proclaim the right -- not to defend their beloved nation -- but the right to snuff you out. But of course, this isn't 'gang' behavior, heavens no, these white crack'as aren't anything like the Bloods and Crypts and aren't at all like the Mafia. Bull. That's exactly what they are.

I’ve known many 2nd Amendment delusionists: they harbor a secret agenda: “let the niggas kill themselves off”. They excuse their own agenda because it suites their racist ideology; they want to be armed because they want the blacks to be armed, and they take great delight in watching blacks shoot each other. Then they use the fear generated by such violence to justify their gun totting agenda. It’s a sick syndrome.

One of these right wing nuts, my brother, announced that 9/11 ‘could never happen again’ because his militia group was protecting the boarders and nation. I asked him, “So, where were you on 9/11, and 9/12? And how does sitting in the forest on the US/Canadian boarder protect the US from suicide airplane hijackers?” He had nothing to say, but within minutes was spouting another canned line from Rush Limbaugh. All rhetoric, no substance.

I'm a liberal, so what? I don't care if you own a gun, I don't care if you buy a gun. But I'm not going to bend over and let you use coercion and threats for our own ends. The second amendment is neither a ‘pass’ for intimidation nor a pretext for civil war.
Arm the Senate!

Reality Check from David Axelrod

Dear Friend,

This is probably one of the longest emails I’ve ever sent, but it could be the most important.

Across the country we are seeing vigorous debate about health insurance reform. Unfortunately, some of the old tactics we know so well are back — even the viral emails that fly unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts of lies and distortions.

As President Obama said at the town hall in New Hampshire, “where we do disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that's actually been proposed.”

So let’s start a chain email of our own. At the end of my email, you’ll find a lot of information about health insurance reform, distilled into 8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage, 8 common myths about reform and 8 reasons we need health insurance reform now.

Right now, someone you know probably has a question about reform that could be answered by what’s below. So what are you waiting for? Forward this email.

Thanks,
David

David Axelrod
Senior Adviser to the President

P.S. We launched www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck this week to knock down the rumors and lies that are floating around the internet. You can find the information below, and much more, there. For example, we've just added a video of Nancy-Ann DeParle from our Health Reform Office tackling a viral email head on.



8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage
1. Ends Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurance companies will be prohibited from refusing you coverage because of your medical history.
2. Ends Exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses.
3. Ends Cost-Sharing for Preventive Care: Insurance companies must fully cover, without charge, regular checkups and tests that help you prevent illness, such as mammograms or eye and foot exams for diabetics.
4. Ends Dropping of Coverage for Seriously Ill: Insurance companies will be prohibited from dropping or watering down insurance coverage for those who become seriously ill.
5. Ends Gender Discrimination: Insurance companies will be prohibited from charging you more because of your gender.
6. Ends Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage: Insurance companies will be prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on the coverage you receive.
7. Extends Coverage for Young Adults: Children would continue to be eligible for family coverage through the age of 26.
8. Guarantees Insurance Renewal: Insurance companies will be required to renew any policy as long as the policyholder pays their premium in full. Insurance companies won't be allowed to refuse renewal because someone became sick.
Learn more and get details: http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/health-insurance-consumer-protections/

8 common myths about health insurance reform
1. Reform will stop "rationing" - not increase it: It’s a myth that reform will mean a "government takeover" of health care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, reform will forbid many forms of rationing that are currently being used by insurance companies.
2. We can’t afford reform: It's the status quo we can't afford. It’s a myth that reform will bust the budget. To the contrary, the President has identified ways to pay for the vast majority of the up-front costs by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse within existing government health programs; ending big subsidies to insurance companies; and increasing efficiency with such steps as coordinating care and streamlining paperwork. In the long term, reform can help bring down costs that will otherwise lead to a fiscal crisis.
3. Reform would encourage "euthanasia": It does not. It’s a malicious myth that reform would encourage or even require euthanasia for seniors. For seniors who want to consult with their family and physicians about end-of life decisions, reform will help to cover these voluntary, private consultations for those who want help with these personal and difficult family decisions.
4. Vets' health care is safe and sound: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will affect veterans' access to the care they get now. To the contrary, the President's budget significantly expands coverage under the VA, extending care to 500,000 more veterans who were previously excluded. The VA Healthcare system will continue to be available for all eligible veterans.
5. Reform will benefit small business - not burden it: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on small businesses, provide tax credits to help them pay for employee coverage and help level the playing field with big firms who pay much less to cover their employees on average.
6. Your Medicare is safe, and stronger with reform: It’s myth that Health Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform will improve the long-term financial health of Medicare, ensure better coordination, eliminate waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance companies, and help to close the Medicare "doughnut" hole to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors.
7. You can keep your own insurance: It’s myth that reform will force you out of your current insurance plan or force you to change doctors. To the contrary, reform will expand your choices, not eliminate them.
8. No, government will not do anything with your bank account: It is an absurd myth that government will be in charge of your bank accounts. Health insurance reform will simplify administration, making it easier and more convenient for you to pay bills in a method that you choose. Just like paying a phone bill or a utility bill, you can pay by traditional check, or by a direct electronic payment. And forms will be standardized so they will be easier to understand. The choice is up to you – and the same rules of privacy will apply as they do for all other electronic payments that people make.
Learn more and get details:
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck/faq

8 Reasons We Need Health Insurance Reform Now
1. Coverage Denied to Millions: A recent national survey estimated that 12.6 million non-elderly adults – 36 percent of those who tried to purchase health insurance directly from an insurance company in the individual insurance market – were in fact discriminated against because of a pre-existing condition in the previous three years or dropped from coverage when they became seriously ill. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/denied_coverage/index.html
2. Less Care for More Costs: With each passing year, Americans are paying more for health care coverage. Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages. In 2008, the average premium for a family plan purchased through an employer was $12,680, nearly the annual earnings of a full-time minimum wage job. Americans pay more than ever for health insurance, but get less coverage. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hiddencosts/index.html
3. Roadblocks to Care for Women: Women’s reproductive health requires more regular contact with health care providers, including yearly pap smears, mammograms, and obstetric care. Women are also more likely to report fair or poor health than men (9.5% versus 9.0%). While rates of chronic conditions such as diabetes and high blood pressure are similar to men, women are twice as likely to suffer from headaches and are more likely to experience joint, back or neck pain. These chronic conditions often require regular and frequent treatment and follow-up care. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/women/index.html
4. Hard Times in the Heartland: Throughout rural America, there are nearly 50 million people who face challenges in accessing health care. The past several decades have consistently shown higher rates of poverty, mortality, uninsurance, and limited access to a primary health care provider in rural areas. With the recent economic downturn, there is potential for an increase in many of the health disparities and access concerns that are already elevated in rural communities. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hardtimes
5. Small Businesses Struggle to Provide Health Coverage: Nearly one-third of the uninsured – 13 million people – are employees of firms with less than 100 workers. From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. Much of this decline stems from small business. The percentage of small businesses offering coverage dropped from 68% to 59%, while large firms held stable at 99%. About a third of such workers in firms with fewer than 50 employees obtain insurance through a spouse. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/helpbottomline
6. The Tragedies are Personal: Half of all personal bankruptcies are at least partly the result of medical expenses. The typical elderly couple may have to save nearly $300,000 to pay for health costs not covered by Medicare alone. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction
7. Diminishing Access to Care: From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. An estimated 87 million people - one in every three Americans under the age of 65 - were uninsured at some point in 2007 and 2008. More than 80% of the uninsured are in working families. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction/diminishing/index.html
8. The Trends are Troubling: Without reform, health care costs will continue to skyrocket unabated, putting unbearable strain on families, businesses, and state and federal government budgets. Perhaps the most visible sign of the need for health care reform is the 46 million Americans currently without health insurance - projections suggest that this number will rise to about 72 million in 2040 in the absence of reform. Learn more: http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/assets/documents/CEA_Health_Care_Report.pdf

A Hole in One

Another gem from Reza. Reza, hey, what do you do all day for work?

Greed beyond measure - The Insurance Industry

http://www.youtube.com/user/bravenewfilms#play/user/2AA5441BBF136B8C

I highly recommend this video and others by bravenewfilms and sickforprofit.

It truly is a Wally-World. Yikes!

Wal-Mart's influence grows

By Jim Hopkins, USA TODAY

We are a Wal-Mart Nation. Wal-Mart's influence on the U.S. economy has reached levels not seen by a single company since the 19th-century rise of Standard Oil, economists and historians say.

Even if you don't shop at Wal-Mart, the retail powerhouse increasingly is dictating your product choices — and what you pay — as its relentless price cutting helps keep inflation low.

Wal-Mart is the top seller of groceries, jewelry and photo processing. It is creating more of its own brands. Some, such as Ol' Roy dog food and Equate vitamins, quickly became the USA's top sellers. It is moving into banking, used car sales, travel and Internet access. It averages 100 million customers a week. That's 88.5 million more people than U.S. airlines fly in a week.

Anyone whose stocks rose in the late 1990s owes Wal-Mart, the world's biggest company. It alone accounted for as much as 25% of the U.S. productivity gains from 1995-99, says consultant McKinsey & Co. Such gains drove corporate profits, thus stock prices. Wages in retailing, one of the biggest sources of new jobs in the '90s and current decade, are also affected by Wal-Mart. With 1.3 million workers, it is the world's largest private employer. It employs one of every 123 U.S. workers and nearly one of every 20 retail employees.

"I joke we're all going to be working for Wal-Mart someday," says economist Mark Zandi of consultant Economy.com.

That may not be too far off.

Although Wal-Mart is hitting speed bumps because of growing labor challenges, employment lawsuits and higher costs, few doubt it will stop besting competitors as it expands. While other retailers such as Home Depot, tech giants such as Microsoft and manufacturers such as General Electric played big parts in the 1990s productivity gains, Wal-Mart, with its massive buying power and technology advantage, played the biggest role, economists say. As it grows, its influence, largely unknown to consumers, will continue to seep into more parts of the USA and the global economies.

"Everyone knows Wal-Mart," says Jim Hoopes, a business history professor at Babson College, "but nobody has a real sense of how big and how powerful it is."

Wal-Mart, responding to criticism over its growing influence, says it creates thousands of jobs a year and pays competitive wages and benefits. Its push for productivity is meant to keep prices low, benefiting its customers, says spokesman Tom Williams. "We're doing good, but we could do better," he says.

Few companies have moved so far so fast. Founded 40 years ago in rural Arkansas by Sam Walton, Wal-Mart has swelled to 4,300 stores in nine countries and annual revenue near $250 billion. Its computer network, a critical part of its success, rivals the Pentagon's.

It is now the biggest customer for many of the world's leading consumer-products companies, including Kraft, Gillette and Procter & Gamble. At P&G, Wal-Mart accounts for 17% of annual revenue, up from 10% just five years ago. That makes those companies more dependent on Wal-Mart's success, more vulnerable should it stumble and more likely to respond to Wal-Mart's requests for lower prices and product changes.

The chain's buying power is so immense that 450 suppliers have opened offices — many in the 1990s — near Wal-Mart headquarters in tiny Bentonville, Ark. As many as 800 more such offices are expected in the next five years. Sales representatives want to be near Wal-Mart buyers to beat the competition, says Rich Davis, a local economic development official. "I've had them sit here and say, 'Look, if we're not here, our competitor will be,' " Davis says.
As such, Wal-Mart is increasingly affecting:

Product choices. P&G is dumping weak brands, such as Crisco and Jif peanut butter, sold to J.M. Smucker last year. It wants to focus on heavy hitters, such as Tide detergent, most desired by Wal-Mart and other big retailers, P&G says. That strategy helped P&G boost fiscal second-quarter net income 14% year-over-year to $1.5 billion, it said Tuesday.

Other companies have likewise tweaked products so that they pass muster with Wal-Mart. Video game maker Planet Moon Studios two years ago wanted an industry group to give its Giants game a teen rating. Why? So it would be carried by Wal-Mart and others. Planet Moon changed the color of blood in the video to green from red, toned down the language and put a bikini on a topless character, says CEO Bob Stevenson. Without those changes, he says, "The risk to sales was too high."

Wal-Mart is also challenging its suppliers by developing more of its own products, called "private labels." It stepped up that effort in the mid-1990s as it expanded into vitamins, batteries and bathroom tissue. Its Great Value grocery line has 1,475 items, from beans to salsa, up from 194 two years ago.

Wal-Mart says it is committed to keeping shelves full of well-known brands such as Kellogg cereals and Tide. But, in general, private-label profits run as high as 30%, vs. 15% on brand-name items, says Burt Flickinger, managing director of consultant Reach Marketing.

Private-label products also promise Wal-Mart more profit as the chain expands abroad, because U.S. brands don't have the same clout there. In Europe and the United Kingdom, where Wal-Mart is battling for Britain's Safeway grocery chain, private-label goods are 50% of its sales vs. 25% in the USA.

Product prices. Big food companies including Kraft, which gets 10% of its revenue from Wal-Mart, have not been able to raise prices as quickly as they once did because of Wal-Mart's demands, says Jonathan Feeney, a consumer products analyst at investment firm SunTrust Robinson Humphrey. Kraft declined to comment.

History has shown that suppliers suffer if they run afoul of Wal-Mart. Rubbermaid raised the prices it charged Wal-Mart in the mid-1990s because of an 80% jump in the cost of a key ingredient in its plastic containers. The retailer responded by giving more shelf space to lower-priced competitors, helping drive Rubbermaid into a 1999 merger with rival Newell, says John Mariotti, a former Rubbermaid executive. "Rubbermaid earned Wal-Mart's wrath by not giving it the best deal," he says.

Employment. Wal-Mart's impact on wages was first felt in rural towns in the South and Midwest where Wal-Mart got its start. Often, it became the biggest employer overnight, setting wage rates for all retailers, experts say.

Now, its impact on retail employment has spread nationwide, contributing to slower wage growth throughout the sector, economist Zandi says.

Pay for retail workers rose 43% from 1990 to 2001, vs. 50% for non-retail workers, according to Bureau of Economic Analysis data. No one knows exactly how big a part Wal-Mart played, Zandi says. But its influence is "undeniable" because it created more jobs in the 1990s than any other company, he says. More retail jobs are on the way. Wal-Mart plans to add 800,000 workers in the next five years. U.S. retailers are expected to add 3.1 million jobs by 2010, the government says.

Manufacturers, which pay more, will add fewer than 600,000 jobs in the same period. Labor unions that represent factory workers are alarmed. They say Wal-Mart, in demanding ever-lower prices from suppliers, has helped drive thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs abroad, where labor costs are lower.

Now they worry about Wal-Mart's push into the unionized supermarket industry. Wal-Mart has no unions. That means its employees earn less than those at competing supermarkets, says the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW).

Wal-Mart's hourly pay averages $7 to $8 an hour, vs. $11 at Kroger, Safeway and other competitors with unions, says UFCW spokesman Greg Denier.

Not true, says Williams, the Wal-Mart spokesman. While he would not disclose wages, which vary by market, he says Wal-Mart pay is close to or equal to union wages.

Productivity. Wal-Mart's key role in the 1995-99 economic boom came partly because of its legendary use of technology to analyze costs and speed delivery of goods from its 30,000 suppliers to dozens of sprawling warehouses, say retail and financial analysts.

Wal-Mart says it has the USA's biggest private satellite communications network, one that links stores to Bentonville by voice, data and video. Suppliers tap directly into Wal-Mart's computers to track sales of everything from soup to nuts, which improves inventory controls and cuts costs.
Other retailers, including Kmart, tried matching Wal-Mart's tech prowess but failed. Kmart filed for bankruptcy-court protection last year and is cutting 67,000 jobs and closing nearly 30% of its stores.

Wal-Mart also teaches manufacturers to be more cost effective so product prices can stay down. For example, Wal-Mart might suggest that a supplier cut its labor costs by shipping toasters in their cartons, rather than packing them in bigger boxes and shrink-wrapping them onto shipping pallets, says James Champy, chairman of Perot Systems' consulting unit, which advises Wal-Mart suppliers.

Such close communication between a retailer and supplier is unusual. But it's being adopted by more companies, including Dell Computer, as U.S. businesses seek more productivity to better compete globally.

"It's where the future of business has to be," Champy says.

That future may also include fewer companies. To achieve economies of scale, more consumer products companies are merging. Wal-Mart's demand for low-cost products partly influenced Kellogg's purchase of Keebler in 2001, and the merger of Kraft and Nabisco in 2000, analyst Feeney says.

Speed bumps ahead?
Meanwhile, Wal-Mart's productivity continues driving its bottom line. The retailer is expected to report nearly $250 billion in annual revenue for the fiscal year ending Friday — a 15% gain from the previous year, despite the so-so holiday shopping period.

Expected earnings of $1.78 a share would be 19.5% higher than fiscal 2002, say analysts surveyed by Thomson First Call.

The chain has 8% of all U.S. retail sales, excluding restaurants and auto dealers. That's up from 6% just five years ago, an "incredibly significant" gain, Zandi says.

Still, that's not big enough to impose unjustified price increases, as some monopolies have done in the past, Zandi says. And Wal-Mart would likely need to be much bigger before it could stifle product innovation, retail analysts say.

If Wal-Mart suddenly imploded like an Enron or WorldCom, no doubt stock markets would react. Consumer confidence would fall. Big Wal-Mart suppliers would be hurt. But other retailers would quickly grab Wal-Mart executives, customers and suppliers. Any disruption to the flow of goods would be temporary, retail experts say.

A more likely scenario is that Wal-Mart's growth could be pinched as it digs deeper into urban areas, where wages are higher, competitors more numerous and scarce land more expensive. That's one reason the chain is rolling out smaller Neighborhood Markets grocery stores that are better suited for urban areas.

Slower Wal-Mart growth could, though, muffle the still-tepid economic recovery. "If only one company is adding 25% of our productivity," Hoopes says, "it means a lot of other companies are not growing fast enough."

Paranoia and Suspcion all around, and yet . . .

BERLIN -
An Audi sedan written off by an elderly German woman as stolen two years ago has resurfaced — in her neighbor's garage beneath a thick layer of dust.

Police said Thursday the 82-year-old from the northern city of Hildesheim took the car in for repairs two years ago and had the mechanics drive it back to her house and park it in her garage.

She got the keys and papers from her mailbox, but when she went to get the car it was nowhere to be found. So she reported it stolen.

Fast forward to Wednesday when her neighbor went to clean up his unused garage so it could be rented. He found the car under "a centimeter-deep coating of dust."

It didn't take police long to piece together that the mechanics had parked it in the wrong garage.

Abe's best speech. short and to the point. I'm a fan.

e.e. cummings' the boys i mean are not refined

What we can learn from Michael Jackson

I know, it's unbelievable that I'd be weighing in on this discussion, but Jamie Lee Curtis' post, below, resonated with me. Read her article from Huffington Post and my posted comment.

Pain is part of the body's defense system, triggering a reflex reaction to retract from a painful stimulus, and helps adjust behavior to increase avoidance of that particular harmful situation in the future. So says Wikipedia. My favorite reference to Pain comes from The Princess Bride by William Goldman (I have quoted it on HuffPo before):

"Life is pain and anyone who tells you different is selling something."
Deepak Chopra explained that MJ asked him for narcotics to ease his pain. He seemed to ask everyone who had a medical license and some who didn't. He seemed to ask for himself and others, Mr. Omar I presume was a fellow junkie without medical insurance...

We're being shown now, in the weeks following Mr. Jackson's death, the supposed headwaters of his river of pain, the accident with Pepsi and the literal head on fire. It is a harrowing image, flames leaping off his head seconds before others came to his rescue.

The explanation is that this moment was the drug start point that eventually took over his life. I don't believe it. The pain he suffered was from his birth, from his being and becoming the commodity that then made him the omnipotent King of the Pop-Goes-The-Weasel-Jacko-In-The-Neverland-Box that destroyed him. Few children, put into the intense focus of their precious youth being marketed for other's pleasure, come out unscathed and with any sense of mental balance. I won't name names but we all know who they are as they have navigated their fame and falls on the covers of magazines and at the top of news hours. Rarely are the parents really held accountable for the fragile, destroyed youths as many of the young people get the F*&^% away as fast as their agents and lawyers get them... but the imprint is there, it cannot be undone without a painful process of self discovery and as we know... pain needs to be killed... not tolerated and examined.

Listen, I can relate. I too found painkillers after a routine cosmetic surgical procedure and I too became addicted, the morphine becomes the warm bath from which to escape painful reality. I was a lucky one. I was able to see that the pain had started long ago and far away and that the finding the narcotic was merely a matter of time. The pain needed numbing. My recovery from drug addiction is the single greatest accomplishment of my life... but it takes work -- hard, painful work -- but the help is there, in every town and career, drug/drink freed members of society, from every single walk and talk of life to help and guide.

I believe Mr. Jackson was in pain. Burns are a horrible injury and excruciating to recover from... but there was a time, when the physical pain ends and the emotional trauma takes over for which he needed the real help, the real treatment, the real focus. Mr. Jackson was an addict. It is coming out. Everywhere. He wanted relief and would get it in any name, place or method he could. It was and is a conspiracy of silence and I'm sure there were attempts to intervene and I'm sure his family and friends tried... but the addict gets what the addict wants, relief from the pain of their life... We all participated. We are all involved. Donations should be donated to drug treatment and prevention, not to his children. They don't need money. They need their father and sadly he is dead. Maybe, his morphing face will be know for not being the King of Pop but the sad mask of trauma and neglect and fear and yes... pain.

MY POSTED COMMENT ON HUFFINGTON 7/22/09:

Your post reminds me of a theme repeated often to my students who are learning emotion-regulation techniques.

Pain is a sign of health. A person’s foot that feels no pain when injured is a diseased limb on a diseased body. Its illogical to wish for a foot that feels no pain Yet Western medicine is hel1bent, to prevent pain in all its forms. While that may be an appropriate role for the AMA, it is not a healthy mind set for human individuals.

Emotional pain is an indication of injury to a healthy self. An unhealthy self does not feel pain. A guilty conscience reveals injury to an honorable self -- not the under-lying roots of a bad or evil person. Even Freud, with all his shortcomings, understood that an over-active conscience was the root of neuroses (in its broadest meaning).

Pain is life's greatest gift when embraced and humankind’s greatest folly when denied. An unhealthy aversion to pain seems to be a Western compulsion. Buddhism teaches us to embrace that which we fear, including death. Much of recent mental health research has focused on resilience, rather than the alleviation of discomfort.

Surely, some of those around Michael, the least of whom Depok, somehow were unable to enlighten Michael. I suppose it was not for lack of love for the man, but the persistent, often fatal, disease syndrome of fame-fortune-greed. A sad tale, but one that needs mature and intelligent discussion.

Talking Heads. This must be the place.

Remember this one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGa52pQ-z4E

Email from Barack

Good Morning,
Yesterday, Judge Sonia Sotomayor made her opening statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee and moved another step closer to taking a seat on the United States Supreme Court. In case you missed it, watch the video of her opening statement here: As President, there are few responsibilities more serious or consequential than the naming of a Supreme Court Justice, so I want to take this opportunity to tell you about the qualifications and character that informed my decision to nominate Judge Sotomayor. Judge Sotomayor's brilliant legal mind is complemented by the practical lessons that can only be learned by applying the law to real world situations. In the coming days, the hearings will cover an incredible body of work from a judge who has more experience on the federal bench than any incoming Supreme Court Justice in the last 100 years. Judge Sotomayor's professional background spans our judicial system — from her time as a big-city prosecutor and a corporate litigator, to her work as a federal trial judge on the U.S. District Court, and an appellate judge on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. And then there is Judge Sotomayor's incredible personal story. She grew up in a housing project in the South Bronx — her parents coming to New York from Puerto Rico during the Second World War. At the age of nine, she lost her father, and her mother worked six days a week just to put food on the table. It takes a certain resilience and determination to rise up out of such circumstances, focus, work hard and achieve the American dream. This character shined through in yesterday's opening statement: Watch the video. In Judge Sotomayor, our nation will have a Justice who will never forget her humble beginnings, will always apply the rule of law, and will be a protector of the Constitution that made her American dream and the dreams of millions of others possible. As she said so clearly yesterday, Judge Sotomayor's decisions on the bench "have been made not to serve the interests of any one litigant, but always to serve the larger interest of impartial justice." In anticipation of today's first round of questioning, I hope you'll share this email widely, because Judge Sotomayor's confirmation is something that affects every American. It's important for these hearings to be about Judge Sotomayor's own record and her capacity for the job — not any political back and forth that some in Washington may use to distract you. What members of the Judiciary Committee, and the American people, will see today is a sharp and fearless jurist who does not let powerful interests bully her into breaking from the rule of law. Thank you, Barack Obama

From my friend Vida: Judge Sotomayor

Dear MoveOn member,

Today, President Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be the next U.S. Supreme Court justice. Of course, the Right is already fighting against her confirmation—so we need to get the facts out about her impressive qualifications and background.Below is a list of 10 key things about Sonia Sotomayor that you might not know. Can you check it out and send it to 10 friends today? If each of us forwards the list, we can start to get the word out about Judge Sotomayor, and help to ensure that she gets a speedy and fair confirmation process.
Ten Things To Know About Judge Sonia Sotomayor
1. Judge Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the bench than any Supreme Court justice in 100 years. Over her three-decade career, she has served in a wide variety of legal roles, including as a prosecutor, litigator, and judge.
2. Judge Sotomayor is a trailblazer. She was the first Latina to serve on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and was the youngest member of the court when appointed to the District Court for the Southern District of New York. If confirmed, she will be the first Hispanic to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court.
3. While on the bench, Judge Sotomayor has consistently protected the rights of working Americans, ruling in favor of health benefits and fair wages for workers in several cases.
4. Judge Sotomayor has shown strong support for First Amendment rights, including in cases of religious expression and the rights to assembly and free speech.
5. Judge Sotomayor has a strong record on civil rights cases, ruling for plaintiffs who had been discriminated against based on disability, sex and race.
6. Judge Sotomayor embodies the American dream. Born to Puerto Rican parents, she grew up in a South Bronx housing project and was raised from age nine by a single mother, excelling in school and working her way to graduate summa cum laude from Princeton University and to become an editor of the Law Journal at Yale Law School.
7. In 1995, Judge Sotomayor "saved baseball" when she stopped the owners from illegally changing their bargaining agreement with the players, thereby ending the longest professional sports walk-out in history.
8. Judge Sotomayor ruled in favor of the environment and against business interests in 2007 in a case of protecting aquatic life in the vicinity of power plants, a decision that was overturned by the Roberts Supreme Court.
9. In 1992, Judge Sotomayor was confirmed by the Senate without opposition after being appointed to the bench by George H.W. Bush.
10. Judge Sotomayor is a widely respected legal figure, having been described as "...an outstanding colleague with a keen legal mind," "highly qualified for any position in which wisdom, intelligence, collegiality and good character would be assets," and "a role model of aspiration, discipline, commitment, intellectual prowess and integrity."

Don't Try This at Home

Richard Simmons as a Jet Ski

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_0GblbqfaY

Sandy Dennis learns Palin quit as Gov

Amazing photo. "Who stole the cheese?"

True Colors

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbZDjnWtK1A

Six Feet Under, powerful finale scene

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el4eUKmLujg