The Political Voices of Women

Until recently I simply could not understand why so many rational, intelligent and, in many instances, well educated Americans could believe that the proposed health care reform legislation would include “death panels” for senior citizens. However after the events of the past week, now I understand.

A recent visit to an emergency room with my mother and her subsequent hospital stay have absolutely convinced me that many of our young health professionals and, in general, the US hospital system view the health care needs of senior citizens with disdain if not outright contempt.

Democrats/Liberals/Progressives, this is what you need to understand. Many senior citizens are simply afraid of our health care system, and rightfully so.

When seeking medical care, all too often, the legitimate complaints of the elderly are dismissed as senile rantings. Even when a family member or caregiver is acting as an advocate for an elderly person, their voice is often ignored. And let’s face it, most caregivers are women. In fact, since women generally outlive men, most senior citizens are probably women. Is a picture emerging?

As I’ve shared bits of my family’s story over the past week, I’ve heard numerous equally horrific examples of disrespect, callous treatment and in some cases probable medical malpractice. It is enough to make you very afraid to grow old.

Briefly here is what we experienced.

My mother was taken via ambulance to the emergency room of a local hospital at 5 pm on Tuesday, February 16, 2010. I advised both the paramedics and the attending in the ER that my mother was diagnosed with NPH (normal pressure hydrocephalus) in 2005 but recently she had been experiencing a drastic decline in mobility. She had also been complaining of pain in her right ankle, knee and wrist which might be the result of a fracture sustained during a recent fall. In addition, and not in any way related to a diagnosis of NPH, a large unknown mass had appeared on her abdomen

At approximately 1 am, Wednesday February 16, 2010, we were still in the emergency room and I had to repeat the same detailed information again to the admitting resident.

Finally, at 3:30 am, after 11 hours in the ER, my mother was taken to a room. Once again, I provided the nurse with a full description of my Mom’s condition.

Later on Wednesday my mother was seen by a neurologist. In fact, I was able to have a wonderful discussion with him when I visited my mother later that afternoon. So far all was going well. I was very troubled that my mother had had very, very little sleep in over 36 hours but I believed that she was receiving the care that she needed.

I won’t bore you with all of the details so I’ll just skip to 11 am Thursday, February 18. While attempting to determine just who in the hospital was coordinating my mother’s care, I was advised that the attending intern/resident in the ER had failed to note anything on her chart about the abdominal mass or my concerns that my mother may have sustained stress fractures during her last fall. In fact, I have good reason to believe that it was not until I brought the non-NPH issues to the attention of the admitting physician on Thursday that X-Rays of her limbs and a MRI of the abdomen had never been ordered. Needless to say, I was not a happy camper. However, at least now everyone was on the same page and all of my mother’s health concerns would be properly addressed. Or so I thought.

Since the hospital was well aware that my mother suffers from NPH, a disease which affects memory and mobility function, I thought certain that they would contact me on Friday morning with her tests results. Unfortunately, not only did the hospital fail to contact me with my mother’s test results, a doctor making his rounds on Friday morning told my mother (not I) that she was being released that day. My mother called me at home at 2pm on Friday and informed me that she was being released. After confirming this with the nurses’ station, I contacted the hospital’s social services office and, in a very forceful manner, asked that they make arrangements to have an ambulance taken out of their establishment asap. Yes, I ranted and now, of course, those rantings are being chalked up to caregiver burnout.

My mother’s discharge papers simply read:

Discharge Diagnosis: Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus
Follow up with your office in one week
Activity: as tolerated:
Diet: regular
Discharge to: Home

There is no mention of any other condition.

Friends, this caregiver may have been tired before last week but if I’m burned out now it’s because the health care system poured the gasoline and lit the match. Sadly, I am learning this this experience is not at all unusual.

Now this Northeastern, college educated, middle aged, liberal understands why it was so easy for the GOP to sell the myth of “death panels” during last summer’s health care reform debate. And I understand why town hall meetings turned into screaming matches.

If the US health care system already treats insured senior citizens so badly, it isn’t a great stretch to believe that someone, somewhere, in the name of saving a dollar, wants to see them dead. It’s not true of course, but …..

originally posted on Pam’s Coffee Conversation

During the past few weeks it seems that events in US politics have been moving at light speed. It’s certainly more than this blogger can keep up with. Fortunately, as I member of the Political Voices of Women Community I can count on my fellow members to keep me up to date. Here are excerpts of a few blog posts from our community. Enjoy,

From “Baker’s Dozen About Obama” by Ellen Keim

Here are thirteen of my “Obamic” impressions, for what they’re worth:

First of all, I hope people can separate what they think of Obama–either his track record or the man himself–from the historical fact of his presidency.

Second, I can’t even imagine how much pressure he feels to be the best for fear that he may ruin the chances for another black candidate.

Third, I never thought he was the “Messiah” as some did, so I never expected him to be super-human. Some people are getting disenchanted because they expected perfection and instant gratification.

Fourth, I don’t think people are giving him enough credit for what he has done, either because they don’t agree with it or because it isn’t their pet project.

Fifth, he hasn’t been President for all that long. Considering the messes he inherited, we should expect fixes to take longer than a year.

Sixth, I don’t think we have seen the positive effects yet of the way he has reached out to the Muslim community around the world.

From Marcia G Yerman, “Thoughts for a New Decade: What I Wish for Women“

As we move into a new decade, I can’t help looking over my shoulder at all the things I would like to leave behind.

VIOLENCE: Number One – Violence perpetrated against the female gender. Whether it is domestic violence behind closed doors in the United States, acid being thrown in the faces of young girls in Afghanistan trying to attend school, or rampant rape as a tool of war…It must end.

DYSFUNCTIONAL HEALTH CARE: I would like to discard health care that doesn’t take into account the needs of women, and policies that don’t speak to the disparities in care for all members of the female community at the local, state, and national levels.

UNEQUAL CHANGE: I would welcome a roll back on the wage disparities between a woman’s paycheck and a man’s, taking into account a gap that is even larger for women of color. Moving forward, I would like more support for women working in the services sector, where wages are lower and benefits are commonly non-existent. More legislated awareness for the work/life balance issues that often drive women to choices based on the need for flexibility, as they seek to mesh family responsibilities with a career agenda, would be helpful.

From Margaret, “Free Speech and Corporations“:

Over the weekend, I posted a link on my Facebook page to a Keith Olbermann commentary on the SCOTUS decision that was issued on January 21, 2010. Now, I’m not a fan of Olbermann as a general rule, but I found what he had to say pretty much nailed what has me concerned about this decision. I don’t often publish anything on Facebook that is politically oriented, but I feel as if this decision has such far-reaching implications that it transcends “politics” and really has the potential to impact my daily life. In short, it scares the living crap out of me.

And from Onedia Hayes Sylvest, “Lifting the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Policy — Those Arguments Against Sound Familiar“:

I am a retired navy commander. I retired in 1994 just after the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy was begun. I thought it was insufficient then and I thought the reasons for taking such a half-baked (read another word there) stand was a little brass short of what it should have been. I also heard lots of reasons (and some of those are being repeated now by such people as John McCain) that sounded remarkably familiar.

When I first entered the Navy women did not have pants in their uniforms, they had to leave the service if pregnant, their husbands could not be claimed as “dependents” without proof that the navy woman provided at least 51% of his monetary support. We did not have top ranks or positions, there were no women with stars on their shoulders and we were denied access to many jobs/skill areas solely because of our gender. Women could not serve on ships or on aircraft and the primary reasons offered sounded almost identical to those I heard in 1993 and that I am hearing now.

I know that I served with gays and lesbians in the navy. Most were talented and dedicate. Some were not or even disruptive. However, neither the talent and dedication nor the poor performance and disruptive behavior were caused by their sexual preferences. The same traits and performance were equally present in both heterosexual and homosexual service people. In those days if you wanted to get someone eyeballed by the chain of command then feed the rumor of homosexuality. In my early days many people even assumed that women in the military were probably lesbians and if not they were either looking for a husband or were not of good moral character. The environment bred, I think deliberately, some level of hostility to any who did not fit the accepted image of what a sailor, CPO or officer should be. In the 70′ the primary targets were women and homosexuals.

This is just a sampling of what women are saying.

Want to read more? Why not join us and make your voice heard.

Is the RADICAL Evangelical Right the American version of the Taliban?

BlogHer contributing editor Mata posted on this today – Is it a joke, or is it hatred disguised in Biblical language?

She quotes Frank Schaeffer who appeared on the Rachel Maddow show last night. Here is a video clip (you need to get about 50 seconds in)…

This is beyond disturbing, it’s down right scary.

I’m interested in knowing what others in this community think about this extreme hatred toward our president. Is it going too far? Let us know what you think in comments.

Before the post begins, I’d like to send wishes: to our readers in the US, Happy Veterans Day; to Canada and Australia, Happy Remembrance Day; and to every one else, Happy Armistice Day.

Now to the post —

Ok readers, you can get up off the floor now.

I haven’t suddenly lost my mind. But you know that I have to call them like I see them, even when it gets me into big trouble. So here goes.

In a recent interview with FoxNews on the topic of the tragedy at Ft. Hood, Ms Malkin stated:

“I don’t think that we have to play games with the rush to judgment anymore. I think that the bigger problem for the American government and their culture post 9/11 is that there are too many people still doing the rush to white-wash.“

She later states: “the red flags were missed and it behooves everyone in Congress and in Washington to figure out who dropped the ball.”

Friends, when Michelle is right, she’s right. Sadly, the rest of her argument misses the point and her statement is a few years too late.

During the rest of the interview, Ms Malkin blames the recent tragedy at Ft. Hood on “the military’s worship of the “false god of diversity” which, in her opinion, was placed before national security.

First of all, that is an insult to the military and all of the servicemen and women whom Michelle Malkin constantly criticizes liberals for not supporting. Shame on her,

Second, I submit that it wasn’t the military’s worship of diversity but rather the Bush administration’s rush to war with an all-volunteer military and a “see no evil” recruitment policy that opened the door to disaster.

In an April, 2008 post, I referenced a December 2006 article in the San Francisco Chronicle which raised very serious questions about the military’s recruitment policy. In his article, “US is recruiting misfits for army: felons, racists, gang members fill in the ranks“, reporter Nick Turse wrote:

“After falling short of its goals last year, military recruiting in 2006 has been marked by upbeat pronouncements from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, claims of success by the White House, and a spate of recent press reports touting the military’s achievement of its woman- and manpower goals.

But the armed forces have met with success only through a fundamental transformation, and not the transformation of the military — that ‘co-evolution of concepts, processes, organizations and technology’ that Rumsfeld is always talking about either.

In 2004, the Pentagon published a ‘Moral Waiver Study,’ whose seemingly benign goal was ‘to better define relationships between pre-Service behaviors and subsequent Service success.’ That turned out to mean opening more recruitment doors to potential enlistees with criminal records.

In February, the Baltimore Sun wrote that there was ‘a significant increase in the number of recruits with what the Army terms ‘serious criminal misconduct’ in their background’ — a category that included ‘aggravated assault, robbery, vehicular manslaughter, receiving stolen property and making terrorist threats.’ From 2004 to 2005, the number of those recruits rose by more than 54 percent, while alcohol and illegal drug waivers, reversing a four-year decline, increased by more than 13 percent.

In June, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that, under pressure to fill the ranks, the Army had been allowing into its ranks increasing numbers of ‘recruits convicted of misdemeanor crimes, according to experts and military records.’ In fact, as the military’s own data indicated, ‘the percentage of recruits entering the Army with waivers for misdemeanors and medical problems has more than doubled since 2001.’

One beneficiary of the Army’s new moral-waiver policies gained a certain prominence this summer. After Steven Green, who served in the 101st Airborne Division, was charged in a rape and quadruple murder in Mahmudiyah, Iraq, it was disclosed that he had been ‘a high-school dropout from a broken home who enlisted to get some direction in his life, yet was sent home early because of an anti-social personality disorder.’ “

In that same post I mentioned, Paula Zahn’s 2007 report on “Gangs in the Military“. If you missed it, here’s an excerpt from the show transcript:

THELMA GUTIERREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (on camera): No one knows for sure just how many gang members are in the military. By some estimations, it’s less than 1 percent of all military personnel, hardly an epidemic, but enough to prompt the FBI to issue this report.

(voice-over): Gang members at military installations from Fort Lewis, Washington, to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, have been involved in drug distribution, robberies, assaults, and murder. According to this 2007 internal FBI document, the report found that gang activity in the U.S. — quote — “is increasing and poses a threat to law enforcement officials and national security.”

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Military men training gangsters on how to use weapons.

GUTIERREZ: An issue law enforcement is taking seriously.

Al Valdez (ph) is a former detective. He trains police around the country on gangs in the military.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It’s not illegal to be a gang member in the United States. And it’s a protected right. In fact, the head of Army Recruitment Command correctly states that. What happens is, they bring that gangster mentality within the military.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When these cats come back from — these gang members come back from Iraq, we are going to have some hell on these streets, because these dudes are coming back with training that’s on another level.

So, if the military was willing to overlook gang members, overt racists and felons, then it wouldn’t come as a surprise to me if they may have overlooked an Islamic jihadist or two. To be clear, I said “IF”.

Of course, Ms. Malkin may not read the San Francisco Chronicle or be a fan of Paula Zahn but there were other signs that the recruitment demands placed on the military by the Bush administration’s rush to the war in Iraq and lack of an exit strategy would have serious consequences. Where was her concern then?

Oh yes, I forgot. Ms. Malkin was busy labeling anyone who expressed a concern about the war as a “traitor”, “a coward” and “an enemy sympathizer.”

Yes, when Michelle Malkin is right, she’s partially right. “The red flags were missed and it behooves everyone in Congress and in Washington to figure out who dropped the ball.“

Related posts:

What Happens When Johnny Comes Marching Home

The Illusion of An All Volunteer Army

originally posted on Pam’s Coffee Conversation

First, let’s get the partisan politics out of the way.

It might have been the Clinton or the Bush (41& 43) administrations that got us in to this economic mess. And the policies of the Obama administration may be: correcting the problem; making things worse; simply applying a band-aid to a knife wound; or, all of the above. Your view of today’s economic news will probably depend on how you’re affected by it and your political affiliation. But one thing is true. Wall Street may be recovering but the average American is still maneuvering on a slippery slope.

Less than two months ago U.S. President Barack Obama stated that all signs indicated that the economy was starting to grow and financial markets were starting to work again. But while sending an encouraging message to Wall Street he did add the caveat that employment statistics did not indicate improvement and, in fact, could get worse over the next couple of months. This was the message that the President reiterated today.

No one should be surprised by today’s announcement that unemployment has reached 10.2 percent.

Columnist Lynn Sweet reported on details provided by the Department of Labor:

“In October, the number of unemployed persons increased by 558,000 to 15.7 
million. The unemployment rate rose by 0.4 percentage point to 10.2 percent, 
the highest rate since April 1983. Since the start of the recession in 
December 2007, the number of unemployed persons has risen by 8.2 million, 
and the unemployment rate has grown by 5.3 percentage points.

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (10.7 per-
cent) and whites (9.5 percent) rose in October. The jobless rates for adult 
women (8.1 percent), teenagers (27.6 percent), blacks (15.7 percent), and
Hispanics (13.1 percent) were little changed over the month. The unemployment 
rate for Asians was 7.5 percent, not seasonally adjusted.

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) was 
little changed over the month at 5.6 million. In October, 35.6 percent of 
unemployed persons were jobless for 27 weeks or more.

The civilian labor force participation rate was little changed over the month 
at 65.1 percent. The employment-population ratio continued to decline in 
October, falling to 58.5 percent.

The number of persons working part time for economic reasons (sometimes refer-
red to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed in October at 9.3 
million. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been 
cut back or because they were unable to find a full-time job.

About 2.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force in October, 
reflecting an increase of 736,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not sea-
sonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and 
were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. 
They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in 
the 4 weeks preceding the survey.

Among the marginally attached, there were 808,000 discouraged workers in October, 
up from 484,000 a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) Dis-
couraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe 
no jobs are available for them. The other 1.6 million persons marginally attached 
to the labor force in October had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding 
the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities.”

Add to these numbers: the millions of workers who lost a job and replaced it with a lower paying one; the millions whose salaries have been frozen for a few years; the millions of retirees who lost a large portion of their retirement savings when the market crashed; the millions who lost a substantial amount of the equity in their homes: and, the Social Security recipients who will not get a cost of living adjustment (COLA) in 2010, and many Americans are still wondering when things will get better for them.

However, while many Americans are holding on by a life preserver the banking industry is preparing to throw them an anchor. Yes, the financial markets are definitely working again and working in the same old way.

Earlier today, Megan Woolhouse of The Boston Globe reported:

“Credit card companies are rushing to increase interest rates to historic highs of more than 30 percent, cut credit limits, and add new fees, even for customers who pay their bills on time.

Lenders are making the moves in advance of tougher federal regulations for credit cards scheduled to take effect on Feb. 22. The new rules will limit how companies can modify credit card agreements, specifically prohibiting them from retroactively raising interest rates and fees on existing balances.

US Representative Barney Frank, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the Financial Services Committee and is a leader in the effort to revamp credit card policies, said banks have ‘abused’’ the nine-month period granted them to re-tool their practices.

‘I didn’t think they would be as blatant as they were about doing this,’ he said. ‘There’s no justification for raising rates retroactively. This is really just a way for them to make more money.’ “

And by the way, have you noticed that gasoline prices are inching up?

Ok, I’m not going to say, “I told you….”

No I’m not going to say it. If you’re reading this blog, I’d just be preaching to the choir.

Related posts:

Bill Moyers’ Interview with Bill Black and How They Got Away With It

Saying “No One Saw This Coming”, Just Doesn’t Ring True.

Why So Many American Want Wall Street & The Banks to Suffer
originally posted on Pam’s Coffee Conversation

While the US may be moving one step closer to health care reform with the passage of the Baucus Bill by the Senate Finance Committee, it is clear that a very important element in the health care discussion is being overlooked. What is making Americans so sick?

Health care costs wouldn’t be so high and there wouldn’t be so much concern about the cost of a public health care plan if so many Americans weren’t so sick.

Right?

On Monday, the New York Times reported on the hundreds of thousands of gallons of toxic waste being dumping into the nation’s water supply by coal-fired power plants. In the article, “Cleansing the Air at the Expense of the Waterways“, Charles Duhigg reported:

“For years, residents here complained about the yellow smoke pouring from the tall chimneys of the nearby coal-fired power plant, which left a film on their cars and pebbles of coal waste in their yards. Five states — including New York and New Jersey — sued the plant’s owner, Allegheny Energy, claiming the air pollution was causing respiratory diseases and acid rain.

So three years ago, when Allegheny Energy decided to install scrubbers to clean the plant’s air emissions, environmentalists were overjoyed. The technology would spray water and chemicals through the plant’s chimneys, trapping more than 150,000 tons of pollutants each year before they escaped into the sky.

But the cleaner air has come at a cost. Each day since the equipment was switched on in June, the company has dumped tens of thousands of gallons of waste water containing chemicals from the scrubbing process into the Monongahela River, which provides drinking water to 350,000 people and flows into Pittsburgh, 40 miles to the north.

‘It’s like they decided to spare us having to breathe in these poisons, but now we have to drink them instead,’ said Philip Coleman, who lives about 15 miles from the plant and has asked a state judge to toughen the facility’s pollution regulations. ‘We can’t escape.’

Even as a growing number of coal-burning power plants around the nation have moved to reduce their air emissions, many of them are creating another problem: water pollution. Power plants are the nation’s biggest producer of toxic waste, surpassing industries like plastic and paint manufacturing and chemical plants, according to a New York Times analysis of Environmental Protection Agency data.”

If the air pollution caused by coal-fired plants has already been linked to chronic asthma and COPD, just imagine the result of ingesting large quantities of the same toxins in your drinking water.

In an article for Care2.com, Melissa Breyer reported on the link between pesticides and Parkinson’s Disease.

A study by eminent oncologists Dr. Leonard Hardell and Dr. Mikael Eriksson of Sweden concludes that there is a link between “the world’s biggest selling herbicide, glyphosate (commonly known as Roundup, marketed by Monsanto), to non-Hodgkins lymphoma, a form of cancer.”

The following video clip is from the documentary “The World According to Monsanto” which took an in-depth look into the bio-chemical companies impact on agriculture, the environment and health.

And while we’re discussing Monsanto we certainly can’t forget their efforts to bury the truth about rBGH (bovine growth hormone) in milk.

There are many, many more instances of links between toxic waste and disease but I think that you get the picture.

Corporations have been dumping toxins in the water, air and food supply with impunity. The American public has grown sicker which has in turn driven up health care costs. Health care insurers are profiting from this illness. And now the corporate lobbyists and insurance industry spin machine are waging a full scale assault on health care reform.

Dear Members of Congress and President Obama,

if you really want to reform health care please take a comprehensive approach to this problem. How can you not pass health care reform with a public option when the government agencies which were supposed to protect the environment, agriculture and public health have failed us so miserably.

The previously cited New York Time article shows that the Riverhead International Coal Plant in Macon GA has been cited for 124 violations, paid $0 in fines and hasn’t been inspected since 1979. 1979 – 30 years ago.

Let the teabaggers and birthers rant, rave and spread lies about “death panels” but don’t give in to the insanity.

Americans can diet, exercise, visit the doctor and take all the pills we want. But if the biochemical and power industries continue to poision the air, water & food, we will grow sicker and sicker. Health care costs will both bankrupt consumers and increase the federal deficit. And in the end, we will die. Those without health care coverage will just die much quicker.

Congress must pass health care with a public option and if you want to reduce costs take on the corporations that have contributed to this crisis. Fine them. Shame them if you have to. Expose them for the greedy, heartless profiteers that they have become.

How dare Wellpoint sue the State of Maine to ensure that it is guaranteed a profit!

Enough is enough.

originally posted on Pam’s Coffee Conversation

During a town hall meeting held at The Carter Center on Tuesday, former President Jimmy Carter called Congressman Joe Wilson’s outburst during President Obama’s address to Congress an act “based on racism.” Carter called Wilson’s comment “dastardly” and a reflection of an “inherent feeling” held by some in this country who feel that a black man should not be president.

Now President Carter’s comments seem to be the new topic of controversy. While many applaud the Nobel Peace Prize winner for pointing out what seems to be obvious, many others think that President Carter’s comments were off-base or should not have been made.

Political Voices of Women Community member Elizabeth Ross stated in her post titled, “President Carter’s Opinion on Obama or When It’s Best Not to State the Truth“:

“This is beyond being politically incorrect. It is stating the obvious when no one needs it to be said. Bringing up the fact that there is still a great deal of racism in America right now is back pedaling. Over the years I have often steered candidates for office away from various battles on the campaign trail. Invariably, it was because the candidate was dead set on fighting a battle that wasn’t worth fighting, or simply couldn’t be won. Carter pointed out one of the latter.

Eradicating racism in America will not happen in my lifetime. We may come close, and my children may see it, but I know I won’t. It isn’t anyone’s fault, and there isn’t a quick solution out there. The bottom line is that our society needs more time to move beyond the attitudes of the past and present. Change rarely happens in quick leaps, and when it does, continued change moves much more slowly. We have already interrupted the natural evolution of our society from one that proclaimed that blacks were subhuman to one that considers blacks as equal to whites more than once. Expecting the people to change more quickly is naive at best.”

So what do you think about former President Carter’s comments?

Was he right or wrong? Should he have commented at all?

If you were raised in the United States, you can probably recall the PSA with the image of an egg frying and the saying, “This is your brain on drugs”. Well the current political climate in America indicates that our collective brain is well on its way to being just as fried.

In an article for Alternet, Tammy Ganeva outlined the, “10 of the Most Obscenely Stupid Right-Wing Conspiracy Theories and Attacks Against the President.”

Janet Shan of The Hinterland Gazette posted a story, “Capt Connie Rhodes Files Lawsuit to Fight Deployment to Afghanistan, Disputes the Legitimacy of Barack Obama’s Presidency.”

Stacy Morrow posted a story for MSNBC informing us that the Arlington Independent School District which passed on showing President Obama’s address to school children plans to bus (yes, bus) some of those children to Texas Stadium on September 21st to hear former President George W. Bush.

What do these stories have in common?

They are all describing the insanity that has gripped this country. A form of mental illness so severe that it prompted Rep. Congressman Joe Wilson (SC) to shout “You Lie” at President Obama during the latter’s address to Congress.

Friends this isn’t Sparta, this is madness

Like an addict hooked on crack, it seems that a large portion of American society is hooked on fear. And now that fear is turning to disrespect, race baiting and worst of all, religious zealotry that twists the gospel of Jesus Christ from a message of love into a sermon of hate.

What bible is this man reading? Certainly not the same one that I am because in my bible Matthew 22:36-40 reads:

³⁶“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” ³⁷Jesus replied: ” ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ ³⁸This is the first and greatest commandment. ³⁹And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ ⁴⁰All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

Pastor Steven Anderson needs to rethink his religion. A lot of people do.

We also need to rethink our political conversation. Yes, the blogosphere has had a lot of fun pointing out the hypocrisy and absurdities coming from both of the major political camps. In fact, some blogs/bloggers have become famous and infamous for their flaming conversations. But is this really who we want to be as a society?

It would be easy to say that this is all the result of the American public having had their fears manipulated for the past 8 years. I’m sure that eight years of: environmentalists being portrayed as kooks; war veterans being portrayed as cowards; twisted stories about weapons of mass destruction; politically timed and motivated terror alerts; anti-war dissent being labeled as of being un-American; the suspension of habeas corpus; mass wire-tapping by the telecoms; et. al. had their effect. But I suspect that the current outpouring of venom is something that has always been hidden in the dark recesses of our national soul like some dormant parasite just waiting to be fed.

In the months ahead, health care reform may or may not pass. The economy may continue to improve or it may worsen. And political candidates may or may not be re-elected. But many of the words of hate spoken over the past months will be remembered for a very long time.

America, this is our brain on fear. Consider this an intervention. Now get help!

Related links:

Tell Congressman Joe WIlson to apologize for disrsepecting the President during his address to Congress.

Sign the Credo mobile petition urging the FBI and Secret Service to do all that they can to protect the President.

crossposted on Pam’s Coffee Conversation

a post by Political Voices of Women Community member Elizabeth Ross

Countdown is on to the release of Michael Moore’s next film, and yet again I’m sitting here trying to decide whether or not I’m going to blow the cash to see it. I don’t tend to agree with him very much, but hate to admit that I like his style.

Simplifying the complexities of government is something I enjoy doing, and Moore tends to do just that with his films. Of course this can be a liability when it comes to dealing with most conservatives (as Screen Daily observes), but Moore probably isn’t too concerned about garnering box office sales from them. At the very least, I know the film will cause at least a wave of self-righteous complaints from the conservative blogosphere.

Unfortunately he is pinning his loyal viewers’ hopes on a system of government that has already been proven to be ineffective. Socialism looks good on paper, but has its own set of nightmares in practice. Instead of trading one set of problems for another, we need to create (and re-create) laws to keep businesses from running purely for the short-term gains, with no concern for the future. Our present problems are directly linked to management and investment practices that had no eye on sustaining our way of life for generations to come. The problem is not capitalism – it is unfettered capitalism.

Here is a guest post from community member Marcia G. Yerman, who also blogs at The Huffington Post.

[If you would like to be a guest blogger on The Political Voices of Women, just join our community, and start posting.]

With First Lady Michelle Obama leading the charge to put the struggle for work/life balance front and center, the issue is finally getting top-level attention. Although both men and women in American society are overstretched (working two weeks longer per year than their Japanese counterparts and several weeks more than Europeans), it is women who bear the greatest burden of trying to be all things to all people. Stress is prevalent as women strive to parcel out portions of time to the spouse, children, aging parents, their communities, and lastly…themselves.

A whopping 87 percent of polled women would like more equilibrium between the competing areas of their lives. Two professionals, at the highest echelon of achievement, have entered the conversation with their new book Womenomics. Co-authors Katty Kay (BBC) and Claire Shipman (Good Morning America) have subtitled their insights, Write your own rules for success; How to stop juggling and struggling and finally start living and working the way you really want.

The writers posit that “womenomics” will benefit the “entire working world,” and that there is a “brewing workplace revolution.” They point to the benefit of flexibility over promotions, the value of time as the “new currency,” and espouse a phrase redefining the old “having it all” as “The New All.” Kay, the Washington correspondent and anchor for BBC World News America, is the mother of four. Shipman, the senior national correspondent for ABC News’ Good Morning America, is the mother of two. The women undertook the book in response to a confluence of factors. It was a reaction to The Harvard Business Review article “Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Keeping Talented Women on the Road to Success” by Sylvia Ann Hewlett and Carolyn Buck Luce, “The Opt Out Revolution” by Lisa Belkin, and their own career conflicts.

The genesis of the book was explained to me when I spoke to Kay by telephone. We discussed if the book’s pointers could be relevant to women who did not have college degrees and were not climbing the “corporate ladder.” Kay maintained that all women are looking for more control over their schedules. For her and Shipman the “New All” took on the meaning of enough professional success balanced by time and freedom.

Most of the statistics in the book reflect the demographic that Kay and Shipman set out to interview and study. Nationally, women hold 57 percent of the Bachelor’s Degrees and 58 percent of all graduate degrees. 46 percent of management is comprised of women. As for the overall workforce, women are approaching the 50 percent mark.

Women stepping up to the plate and asking for what they want, and getting employed on their terms is the ideal. A frequently quoted authority in the book is Dr. Kathleen E. Christensen of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, which funds studies on families and the workplace. Christensen has given the modern women’s role in family life a new nomenclature: “The meaning maker.” She explains, “It’s the women who basically cultivate and sustain the rituals in the family.” This applies to women whether they are climbing a corporate ladder or working in lower paying service jobs. Christensen said, “Employed women increasingly feel more entitled to say, ‘I need and I want to work in a certain way.’” She pointed to the fact that “the one-size-fits-all workplace doesn’t work.”

Some employers are getting the picture. The Continental Airlines reservations department in Houston has allowed 600 agents to work form home. 25 percent of the staff gets an extra day off per week, on a rotating basis. Studies have shown that a majority of flextime workers have improved productivity and greater commitment to the job.

Regardless of a women’s level or field, the commonality lies in how to handle the stress that comes with juggling combined responsibilities. The Mayo Clinic’s article, ”Work-life balance: Ways to restore harmony and reduce stress” includes many of the same pointers outlined in Womenomics. Following are some of the quandaries that Kay and Shipman believe are problematic, and their proposed remedies.

• The inability to say no because of the need to please.
Women should keep a list of top commitments, and let go of saying yes to avoid conflict. Buzz phrases such as, “My schedule won’t let me take that on” or invoking the “family policy” clause (which includes the sanctity of date night, child’s rehearsal, parent birthday) are simple ways to side step unwanted obligations.

• Work Smarter
Recognize that time is a critical commodity. Use it to zone in on top concerns. When you compile a list, it must reflect what is most essential. Focus on the top five, and accept that you can’t get it all done. Set a big picture goal for the month, and even for the year. Make “assume control of your schedule” a mantra.

• The Tyranny of “Professional and Domestic Perfection”
Delegate, and be aware of when what you are achieving is “good enough.” Set limits. That includes tech boundaries as well. Cutting back on constant e-mail perusal and Blackberry usage can free up time for relationships.

During the election, candidate Obama frequently reflected on the strong females in his life. As Kay said to me, “You have a President whose wife gets it.” Since taking up residence in the White House, Michelle Obama has publically advocated for sick leave for parents, flexible work hours, and on-site childcare.

The “womenomics” theory of “writing our own rules for success” and getting past “internal obstacles” can give us a foothold on ratcheting down the pressure. In the meantime, let’s hope the marketplace gets in step with the realization that productivity, loyalty, and retention goes up with family-friendly policies.

This article previously appeared on Empowher.