A Lack of Respect for Discussions and Health

Earlier this week Florida Urologist Dr. Jack Cassell placed this sign on the front door of his medical practice,

IF YOU VOTED FOR OBAMA...

SEEK UROLOGIC CARE

ELSEWHERE

CHANGES TO YOUR HEALTHCARE

BEGIN RIGHT NOW,

NOT IN FOUR YEARS

This sign has obviously resulted in Dr. Cassell losing some patients, but Dr. Cassell expected this result.  The thought of losing patients is not a major concern, and that is very interesting.  Dr. Cassell would prefer to feel correct concerning the present health care debate, and most likely see fewer patients compared to having the same opinions, seeing his current amount of patients, and not posting an unwelcoming sign on his front door.  Dr. Cassell values his right to disrespectfully flaunt his opinion over his ability to improve the lives of others.  By living in a free society we all have the right to be a jerk, but at some point we should see that the right to be a jerk is only one of the many freedoms that a free society allows.  Eventually, people should see the benefit of exercising the freedoms that actually benefit others instead of offend.

However, the problem with this sign should not be simplified by saying that Dr. Cassell is a bad or inconsiderate person.  Instead I think this sign represents a growing lack of respect amongst people in our society.  More and more we hear discussions where neither side is willing to budge on any issue.  The thought of entertaining the idea that your opposition may have aspects of their opinion that brings value to the discussion is quickly disappearing.  Learning from others is quickly being replaced with forming your own opinion and then informing the people that have differing opinions that they are not wanted.  A respect for others and their opinions has quickly been replaced with a respect for your own opinion and the opinions of those who have the same opinion as yourself.  In this society discussions have become pointless because the opinions of others have now become meaningless.  Only your opinion matters, and frankly that is a horrible way to live. 

I would hate to live in an environment where only my opinion mattered, and it became impossible for me to learn from others.  I would digress as a person, and there would be countless aspects of life that I would miss.  I would loath the day when everyone I associated with shared the same opinions.  There would be nothing to gain, but the reassurance of my previously established opinion.  I would quickly become the Emperor in "The Emperor's New Clothes" who needs the guidance of a child to learn that I am parading around in public in the nude.  The simple idea of being respectful to others would have been replaced with being respectful to only those who I approve.  Eventually, the amount of people I would approve would decrease, and now I would inadvertently behave rudely to countless numbers of unsuspecting people while at the same time making a fool of myself.  This is what American society is becoming.

Dr. Cassell, members of the Tea Party, protesters who bring guns to rallies, pundits on Fox News, and people who ram their cars into other cars with Obama bumper stickers show an amazing amount of disrespect for the common good of the people.  They sour discussions by not answering questions, yelling insulting remarks at Congressmen, and giving derogatory names to significant pieces of legislation.  Dr. Cassell in interviews refers to this recent health care bill as Obamacare, and he does not do this as a joke.  He calls it Obamacare because all the people who share his opinion call it this.  I do not think he is trying to be disrespectful, but instead has lost sight of what constitutes respectful.  He feels that it is ok to recommend that people with differing opinions see another physician.  Their care will now be separate, but equal.  He is not denying care, but at some point another individual may.  That person may not be a doctor, but instead a banker, a restaurant owner, or even a school.  I have no idea where actions like Dr. Cassell's might lead, but I do know that if you do not try to respect the views of others your actions are less likely to be positive.

In present day America the value of sharing and discussion viewpoints disappears more and more with each passing day.  As this occurs we inevitably develop drastically different values.  One viewpoint has one set of values and these values cannot interact with other values.  We get caught up in a game of formulating viewpoints and values instead of living a good life.  Eventually, at one point people will start to value viewpoints over the quality of life.  Dr. Cassell's sign represented this sad reality to me.

Below is a clip from the local news coverage of Dr. Cassell's sign.  Interestingly, you will see at the end of the clip a majority of Floridians feel as though Dr. Cassell did the right thing by posting this sign on his door.

For more clips from Dr. Cassell's interview visit My Fox Orlando

The Health of Our Nation

Yesterday, the United States House of Representatives passed the largest health care reforms that this nation has ever witnessed.  Yesterday was a good day.  It was not only good because 30 million Americans will be able to receive affordable health care, or because pre-existing conditions will become a relic of the past, and not even because this bill will save the government billions of dollars.  Yesterday, was great because it showed that the American government has decided to head in the right direction.  The emphasis has quickly shifted from lobbyists, money, and acting on behalf of your re-election campaign to the American people.  The American people should always be the main focus of the government, and it is great to see that this President and this Congress appear to agree.

The path to reform will be a long and hard road, but at least now we have a greater understanding of the direction we are heading.

 Here is what the President had to say.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The President's State of Our Health Address

President Obama today addressed the House of Representatives on the eve of the historic health care vote, and gave a very emotional and inspirational speech.  Watch it below.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Americans for Prosperity vs Health Care Reform

Yesterday, on Hardball Chris Matthews interviewed Tim Phillips, the president of Americans for Prosperity, to find out how Americans for Prosperity intends to improve the health care system for millions of Americans and wanted to get his opinion on a video that shows an AFP supporter heckling a man with Parkinson's disease who supports the government's plan to reform our health care system.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

One thing I continue to not understand is how people view bureaucrats in a much darker light than businessmen.  To me they are both normal people, but if a businessman acts based on the benefits that he will gain from any action then he is simply doing his job.  However, if a bureaucrat acts based on the same principles then he is betraying the public's trust.  They both may act similar, but at least the bureaucrat in principle is supposed to act for the benefit of the people before himself.  I cannot see how people would be worse off with a bureaucrat making the decisions a businessman used to make in a not for profit industry.

President Obama on Fox News

Yesterday President Obama was on Special Report with Bret Baier to discuss the upcoming vote on health care reform, and despite the importance of the discussion the interview was blighted by constant interruptions by Bret Baier.  Frankly, the interruptions did not bother me as much as Bret Baier's reason for the interruptions which he gave at the end of the interview.  Mr. Baier said, "I apologize for interrupting you, sir. I tried to get the most for our buck here."  I appreciated his honesty, but is getting "the most for our buck" synonymous with asking as many questions as possible even if that requires for the questions to interrupt the answers?  I would have preferred longer, more informative answers with fewer questions so that people can get a greater understanding of this bill, but either way the interview is still worth watching despite its flaws.

You can watch the video here.  (I would have posted the video on the site, but Fox News' media player for whatever reason would not work properly.)

The President's Health Care Summit

President Obama's health care summit with both Democrats and Republicans is occurring today between 10AM and 4PM on C-SPAN 3.  I doubt that most will be able to watch the full six hours, but at some point during the day each person at least needs to watch some portion of the summit.  Everyone understands the importance of health care reform in this country and this will be one of the best times to get educated on the issue.  Please take or find the time to watch at least 20 minutes of this health care summit.

If you do not have a TV around you can watch the summit from C-SPAN's website.

Septuagenarians May Ruin America

John Oliver was not referring to these septuagenarians

The Daily Show’s John Oliver gave a very compelling argument concerning the absurdity of certain elderly Senator’s disapproval of overturning “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” in our military.  Despite the desire of the President, high ranking military officials, and the majority of the American public these elderly Senators refuse to reconsider their stance.  If these Senators can stand in the way of the will of the American public on this issue, equal rights for all Americans, based on archaic notions of right and wrong, then they will be more inclined to impede Americans on a wide array of other issues ranging from health care, economic policy, civil liberties, and more.  America may have a new threat that is equally absurd as it is dangerous.

Watch the video below.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
A Few Gay Men & Women
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

A Great Place to Live

Earlier this week a Moroccan man was denied French citizenship for forcing his wife to wear a niqab, a full veil that only allows for her eyes to be seen, due to his behavior being ‘incompatible with French values’.  (The Guardian has the full story.) French Imigration Minister Eric Besson said,

"It emerged during the inquiry and the interview process that this person forced his wife to wear the full veil, deprived her of freedom of movement with her face exposed and rejected the principles of secularism and equality between men and women,"

This outward and distorted display of Islamic principles not only went against the ideals of France’s secular government, but also its basic principle of equality among the sexes.  A man should not be able to so strictly regulate the attire and life of his wife and then be allowed citizenship in a country that opposes these practices.  To make matters even worse he justified these actions by citing his religious beliefs.  France has had a long tradition of secular values that have existed since the French Revolution, and religious expression in government buildings have long been outlawed.  Public schools, courthouses or any government buildings do not display the Ten Commandments, the crucifix, the Star of David, the Koran or any religious imagery.  The French Republic is separate from the church and therefore cannot support any religion.  By not supporting any religion, the French Republic cannot accept justification for actions based solely on religious beliefs.  Actions must be vindicated by reason and logic, and not merely religious dogma.  This is a level of governing that many countries have failed to attain; yet all should aspire for. 

It seems strange to support an individual not obtaining citizenship due to his religious beliefs, but in this situation it is appropriate.  Governments should work towards sustaining and furthering the equality and freedoms of its people, and when an individual acts to diminish this equality and these freedoms he should not be granted the luxury of participating regardless of his justifications.  In the end, we should all hope that this man eventually starts to treat his wife as an equal, and allow her to have all the freedoms that a French person enjoys.  Until, that day happens he truly is not French, and should not be treated as a Frenchmen.

In a completely unrelated story France was voted the best country to live in for the fifth time in a row by International Living’s annual Quality of Life Index.  In evalutating France International Living stated,

"No surprise. Its tiresome bureaucracy and high taxes are outweighed by an unsurpassable quality of life, including the world's best health care."



Institutionalized Corruption = No True Health Care Reform

The Senate passed their health care bill today, and all anyone can talk about is corruption.  Corruption is the topic of the day because this bill was the best that the Senate could do.  The focus of the Senate still remains the lobbyists instead of the people, and this is why it fails to represent most Americans.  On a day that should be historic, corruption reigns supreme.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont this morning gave a very sobering assessment of the Senate and this health care legislation.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Makes me proud to have interned for Sen. Sanders.

Click to read more ...

Keith Olbermann's Health Care Special Comment

Everyone needs to see this.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Solving Cancer

It is the duty of a doctor to prolong life.  It is not his duty to prolong the act of dying.

Lord Thomas Horder, 1936

British scientists just created the first comprehensive genetic maps of human cancer cells.  These maps will allow for scientists to hone in the specific DNA mutation that is found in a patients tumor.  This specificity of the problem will allow for a much more precise treatment process instead of the modern day carpet bombing technique also known as chemotherapy.  In the years to come a doctor will be able to identify the exact cause of the mutation and treat just that area.

“What we see here today is going to transform the way we see cancer.  These catalogues of mutations are telling us about how the cancer has developed, so they will inform us on prevention. They tell us about all the processes which are disrupted in cancer cells, which we can try to influence through our treatments. So this is a really fundamental moment in the history of cancer research."

Professor Mike Stratton of the Cancer Genome Project

It is good to see that doctors are allowed to prolong life.

For more info on the mapping of cancer go HERE.

The Conscience of Trafficking Legal Drugs

Yesterday the Senate voted against a bill form Sen. Byron Dorgan that would allow for the legal reimportation of pharmaceutical drugs from Canada.  Due to pharmaceutical drugs from Canada being cheaper in Canada than they are in the United States despite them being the same drug, this would allow Americans to get prescription drugs for less.  On the face of it this is something that could really help many people.  Americans would have to spend less money to stay healthy, and with the money they save they could afford to stay in their house.  They could save the money, or run up credit card debt.  Maybe they could even go on a vacation.  Either way they would save money, but before you decide that reimportation is great and that we must do it you must look a bit closer.  

Upon looking closer, it no longer becomes something we should do, but instead becomes something we need to do.  There are obvious downsides for the companies that charge Americans more money for prescription drugs, but no one should care about that.  People should have a greater allegiance to people and everyones quality of life than they should have for a giant company.  Companies a good, but all they are supposed to do is make a profit and dish out pay checks.  They are very simple, yet people seem to care more about a company's stability instead of the health and financial stability of millions of Americans.  This logic is backwards, and was on display in the Senate.

However, I will cut the Senate some slack on this one, but not because they did the right thing.  They did the wrong thing, but I will not say that they do not care about Americans.  They however do not seem to understand what corporations or governments are supposed to do.  This is evident from their concern for doughnut holes and PhRMA.  In the Senate doughnut holes are not delicious, and do not come from Dunkin Donuts, but instead represent the gap in time where Medicare recipients must pay full price for prescription drugs.  (Yeah I did not see that coming either).  PhRMA is the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America and they lobby on behalf of the pharmaceutical companies in America.  They for obvious reasons do not want cheaper drugs to come into America.  They will lose money.  Companies do not like losing money.

So the situation is this.  Sen. Dorgan wants Americans to pay less for pharmaceutical drugs, Senators want Americans to pay less for drugs during the doughnut hole gap, and PhRMA wants everything to stay the same.  My thinking would conclude that Sen. Dorgans amendment would pass since it would help during the doughnut hole gap and beyond, but that obviously did not happen.  What did happen was that the amendment was defeated, and now Congress wants to talk to PhRMA about how to close the doughnut hole gap.  This is crazy, and this is why.

"We have had absolutely no discussions with anyone in the Senate or the White House about how they plan to pay for closing the doughnut hole. It's a laudable goal, but we are already committed to providing a huge amount of money to help seniors who hit the coverage gap, and no one has asked us to date to provide any additional funding," said Ken Johnson, senior vice president of PhRMA

PhRMA does not want to pay more money, and this has nothing to do with them being good or bad.  It has everything to do with them being a company, and companies have profit driven goals.  Why would they want to give away more money after their competition, reimportation, was defeated.  That would not make any sense.  That would be literally throwing money away.

We, as Americans, need to stop expecting corporations to have consciences, and instead hope that people have them.  If corporations had consciences then they would not have a focus on profits, and then they would not be a corporation.  Instead they would be a non-profit organization which in essence is what the government is supposed to be.

For more info on Sen. Dorgan's amendment and the lack of perspective or conscience in the Senate go HERE.

Abortion and Sen. Ben Nelson

Sen. Ben Nelson - dangerously misguided (I can see why Sen. Lieberman enjoys his company so much.)

Yesterday, the Senate voted 54-45 against Sen. Ben Nelson's amendment to the proposed health care legislation that would ban the use of federal taxpayer money for abortions.  Sen. Ben Nelson is obviously against abortion, but he also seems to be against the basic structure of our government.  His amendment would essentially make a procedure, regardless of how repugnant it may be, that is already legal illegal.  Not only would he start the process of criminalizing abortion, but he would do so via a sinister method from within the government.  This is dangerous, and it is even more dangerous because I do not feel he is intentionally trying to be sinister.  He is trying to do what he thinks is right.  That is the greatest problem.

Ben Nelson appears to feel that he has a higher or more important obligation than preserving the government even though he is employed by the government and that his job is to preserve the government.  He, and the other 44 Senators who voted for this amendment, need to understand that Congress passes laws and that the Supreme Court can then determine the legality of that law.  That is the system.  Senators should not have the option of attaching amendments into laws that will make pre-existing laws nearly non-existent.  Next thing you know there will be amendments concerning gun control in the middle of an education or medicare bill.  At this juncture the process of regulating laws would become incredibly difficult.  How can the government say that they do not approve of a process that they say is legal?  Then the Supreme Court would have to decide if the agreed upon Health Care Law, assuming it becomes law, is legal.  If it is not then we would have to start the whole process over again, starting with the House proposing and passing a bill.  This concept could truly derail the whole structure of government.  This is that dangerous, and it is all due to Congressmen not understanding their obligations.

Government officials should be able to differentiate their personal beliefs and their government obligations.  If they cannot recognize the importance of this separation then the foundation of our government is at stake.  This rejection of Bill Nelson's amendment I hope indicates that the Senate understands their obligation as Senators instead of their approval of abortion.  Otherwise we are doomed to repeat this lunacy.

For more info on this vote visit the Two Way HERE.

"The Decade of Broken Dreams"

Time Magazine has officially declared the first decade of the 21st Century as "The Decade from Hell".  ("The Decade of Broken Dreams" was a contender, but it didn't make it.)  As for the 2000's here is what Time Magazine had to say.

Bookended by 9/11 at the start and a financial wipeout at the end, the first 10 years of this century will very likely go down as the most dispiriting and disillusioning decade Americans have lived through in the post-World War II era.

We're still weeks away from the end of '09, but it's not too early to pass judgment. Call it the Decade from Hell, or the Reckoning, or the Decade of Broken Dreams, or the Lost Decade. Call it whatever you want -- just give thanks that it is nearly over.

Frankly, I find it hard to disagree with them, and doubt I could find a person that feels the 2000's have been better than the 1990's.

Here is the video Time is putting out to promote this issue.  It is of a crying baby while confetti falls to the ground.

The Senate Can Debate Health Care

Today the Senate voted 60 to 39 to debate the Health Care bill presented by Sen. Harry Reid from earlier this week.  This is good.  The Senate is no longer actively working to prevent the legislative process.  They are saying that debates and discussions are good.  I think it is great that they have decided that doing their jobs is not a bad thing.  Sadly, the entire Republican Party representatives in the Senate universally voted against the opportunity to debate.  I guess that the Democrats will have to debate amongst themselves.

However, I do wonder if voting against the debate should relinquish your opportunity to participate in the debate.  That would make sense to me.

This is a good progression in the legislative process, and I hope it continues.