Global, Permanent War?

On approaching the Big 75, I cannot say it is something I achieved. It happens. Because I have lived my life as a citizen of the United States, I know how fortunate I have been. I am lucky never to have been detained, questioned, arrested or tried anywhere outside of this country. Growing up as a U.S. career military officer's daughter, I was a privileged child. Granted, family life in the military is never simple, nor free from pitfalls. All else aside, even in harm's way, I was part of a peculiarly consistent, if regimented, life.

I was raised to be absolutely loyal to my Country, have always been proud of my Country. Once Russia launched Sputnik; the National Defense Education Act was signed into law. A Foreign Language major, I was eligible to compete for educational funding through the Act. Once again my country gave me an invaluable gift.  In what seemed months, rather than years, however, I was teaching high school students, who went off to war. The death toll prompted me to join in the protest movement early. The televised horrors of war crept into our homes and lives relentlessly. In our minds it was a vile, dirty, business. A family of  right wing Texans, moved in next door, the family cadillac, plastered with American flags and stickers. Put off by the flag-waving neighbors, I had only begun to recognize the implications of turning a blind eye to injustice at home and abroad.

Today I watched in renewed horror, as we played  a documentary film, "Dirty Wars." I am a year late in viewing the film, and in reading the book by Jeremy Scahill, which preceded the documentary. Both are extremely revealing,  even if you believe you have been reasonably well informed. First images of a Yemeni family and friends, slaughtered, right down to pregnant women and infants, assault the senses. Next is the realization that we are not at war with Yemen. We massacred 46 civilian family and friends for gathering to celebrate a wedding. If all this were not enough, we see a Yemeni journalist detained upon the direct orders of President Obama. (This, rather than permit him to disclose the details of the botched operation in his country.) It gets worse.

http://dirtywars.org/the-film

Something horrifying has emerged in the US permanent war: death and assassinations for which there is no due process nor accountability, and all too often no "within the margin of error" justification except that the government and military are able to get away with their actions. There are no public checks and balances. Whistleblowers are prosecuted and jailed at a faster rate under the Obama administrations than under the George W. Bush administrations. ~Mark Karlin, "Truthout"

What have we been telling ourselves to justify unbridled presidential powers and the emergence of JSOC, the Joint Special Operations Command? The implications of JSOC's powers and its actions, combined with those of President Obama and the CIA, are staggering. The War on Terror is global and ongoing. The U. S. is engaging in covert operations whenever and wherever. Whether you believe it or not, we have entered an era of zero accountability to the People of the United States, and it is not merely driven by the ownership of the government by the wealthy. 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/31/dirty-wars-terrorism-victims

Forgiveness and Reconciliation

Siblings!

Long ago I read "The Five Wishes" booklet, cover to cover. I'd read the critics' remarks, but not the booklet. For anyone who does not know, it is a booklet intended to provide a living will for people who would like to use it, and who live in one of forty-two states in the U.S. that accept it as a legal instrument. For many people, it is a helpful guide, particularly, for end-of-life issues. One of the questions it touches upon is forgiveness, but I don't believe the author(s) were addressing forgiveness in the context of religion. Rather it was in the context of reconciliation. You be the judge:

http://www.fivewishes.org. 

It seems to me there is generally a spiritual component to death, even sudden death, and dying. Regardless ... there are choices to be made.

Reconciliation with family members (and of family members) brings peace to many people facing death. For the living forgiveness is an everyday challenge, one we handle with varying degrees of success. Let's be clear. We are daily confronted with evil, with acts we do not consider worthy of forgiveness. What is your personal threshold for forgiving? Is it divorced from condemning certain behaviors, from forgetting?

Knowing can be a curse on a person's life. I'd traded in a pack of lies for a pack of truth, and I didn't know which one was heavier. Which one took the most strength to carry around? It was a ridiculous question, though, because once you know the truth, you can't ever go back and pick up your suitcase of lies. Heavier or not, the truth is yours now.  -Sue Monk Kidd, The Secret Life of Bees 


Withholding forgiveness can also be a curse on a person's life; it so often goes hand in hand with selective memory. As a parent my adult children's grudge matches overwhelm me with sorrow and a sense of helplessness. One thing I know, however, just as self-care comes before caregiving, forgiving oneself is key to forgiving another. 

With no siblings, living the military life, I knew how to adapt to nearly any environment, as well as how to handle bullies. One thing about moving constantly; it obviates the need to forgive classmates, friends or mean neighbor kids. For me, that left family, to provide role models. That was not to happen. Family did not speak to family. In speaking of other family members, there was plenty of judgment, but people tended not to reconcile.  If Christ's admonition of forgiving one's brother seven times seven hundred, does not speak to us, we can, at least, heal ourselves. "I forgive myself, not to say I am unaware of my faults, nor of misjudgments and consequent errors. Nor must I forget what I have learned from others."

Clinically depressed, I began mindful meditation in mid-life, as a single parent. Nothing else had helped, including crisis intervention and three years of psychoanalysis. Part of my meditation practice was to forgive, starting with myself. It proved to be a game changer, albeit subtle and gradual. I had been estranged from my mother for several years, when she died of a massive stroke. I had married two dysfunctional men, staying in the second marriage overlong. In the same timeframe I relinquished my profession. To say I was "on the ropes," would have been to understate. Part of my journey has been rebuilding, again and again, from ashes.

We have, in the life of Nelson Mandela, a model for forgiveness and reconciliation. His autobiography, Long Walk To Freedom, is a journey worth taking. It speaks to evil and to forgiving what seems unforgivable. Now, when I err, the first question is what to take away, along with whom and what to leave behind. Meanwhile I work on forgiving constantly; it is not a sometime practice.

U Is For Underestimated

A little Medication With That?

"Underestimated, under-identified, under-diagnosed and under-treated" are the terms the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence (NCADD) has used to describe the substance abuse epidemic among older Americans. An estimated 4 out of 5 elders currently being treated for the abuse of prescription drugs have been identified as alcohol dependent. The same agency estimates nearly half the residents of nursing homes are alcoholics. Of these, four in five abuse other substances. The agency projects opioid abuse will double to 3.5 million by 2020. As they reach retirement age, Baby Boomers are expected to represent a tsunami of substance abusers, due in part, to more permissive attitudes toward substance use.   

     "Overprescribed," by the way, was not among the terms NCADD used, nor did the Centers For Medicare And Medicaid Services (CMS.) The agency refers to prescription drug "over-utilization," and has proposed new protocols: "to protect Medicare beneficiaries and the Medicare Trust fund from the harm and damaging effects associated with prescription drug abuse." I would go much farther, and say, "use." 

What fascinates me about addiction and obsessive behavior is that people would choose an altered state of consciousness that's toxic and ostensibly destroys most aspects of your normal life, because for a brief moment you feel okay. -Moby

     In any case CMS wants Part D beneficiaries with "potential opioid or acetaminophen overuse, identified (presumably by medical providers.) Next would be to implement "appropriate controls" on these drugs for identified beneficiaries." -This seems to me punishing patients for using medications their physicians are eager to prescribe. It utterly circumvents the question of responsibility in marketing pharmaceuticals, both to medical professionals and the public. 
     The agency says it will employ data analysis to identify prescribers and pharmacies that may be engaged in fraudulent or abusive activities. Hmmmm, this would be a monumental task, considering how widespread the exploitive tactics are. CMS wants to use its data to guide its anti-fraud efforts, share results with Part D plan sponsors, law enforcement agencies, pharmacy and physician licensing boards, alluding to joint efforts to combat fraud and abuse.A key provision of the proposed rules would require Part D prescribers to enroll in Medicare. CMS believes this will ensure Part D drugs are prescribed only by qualified individuals ... fine, in theory. Additionally CMS seeks authority to revoke a physician's or eligible professional's Medicare enrollment if:

• The agency determines he or she has a pattern of prescribing Part D drugs that is abusive (i.e., it represents a threat to the health and safety of Medicare beneficiaries or otherwise fails to meet Medicare requirements.) 
• The DEA has revoked or suspended a physician's DEA Certificate of Registration.
• The licensing or administrative body for any state has curtailed a physician's or professional practice's ability to prescribe drugs.

Yet another proposed rule would provide CMS, its antifraud contractors, and other oversight agencies the ability to request and collect information directly from pharmacy benefit managers, pharmacies, and other downstream entities that contract or subcontract with Part D sponsors to administer the Medicare prescription drug benefit. The provision is designed to improve the investigative process, according to CMS.
Approximately a year ago CMS implemented the OMS (Overutilization Monitoring System) to combat Part D fraud and abuse. The agency reports a substantial reduction in the number of acetaminophen and opioid overutilizers in Medicare Part D."  We're waiting, but breathing all the while, for outcomes. Patient-oriented solutions ... that's another topic altogether. 

There is some hope that less expensive rehabilitation is becoming available. A drug in the form of a patch shows promise -- it is a Naltrexone patch. Naltrexone is already in use to treat alcohol addiction. In pill or injectable form, and under a number of brand names, it acts to prevent recidivism. It is also, interestingly, an opiate receptor antagonist, in other words, an individual who uses opiates will not become euphoric. It helps people addicted to opiates rapidly detoxify.

Be mindful my friend, of accountability, as it relates to choice. Preventing a problem is so much better than solving a problem through the backdoor.

Dances With Dogs

Cookie

      We have a family acquaintance, who has two Old English Mastiffs, a male and a female. Not to worry. The lady has the land and the financial means to support and protect her animals. Someday she would like to breed the pair. All good. Here is what I want to say to her. To breed mastiffs any sane owner would retire from his/her career. The government will not give FMLA leave, which would be the only other alternative. Next, once your female has produced a litter or two of fine puppies, have her spayed. Have your female spayed with as little delay as humanly possible.  
     Please pay attention to my story, because it is a cautionary tale. Not all of us have pedigreed dogs. I have a creeping feeling those who have dogs free of inbreeding, are the more fortunate among us. Your mutt is probably rocket scientist material, by comparison to many purebreds. My gorgeous, pedigreed, Irish setter, Mike, was a good example. Outside of field work, where his intelligence was nothing short of phenomenal, he was sweet, but goofy. When I lost Mike, my entire world collapsed. I wanted nothing to do with dogs for decades, outside of rescuing a young Labrador from a downtown planter box. I could not keep him, but he eventually went to an excellent home.
     More decades passed without pets in my life. Eventually, though, I bought a tiny puppy. The breeder, my neighbor, was in the end stage of HIV/AIDS. Unprepared though I was, my little foundling  taught me all I needed to know about terriers. I named her Cookie, after my temperamental Irish mother. I adored my little dog, but found that part of the territory was genetic defect, in Cookie's case,  a collapsing trachea. Nor had she been spayed, when I bought her, because she was a show quality bitch. 
     Spay surgery seemed a poor choice, given Cookie's choking episodes. I was worried, however, about disease. We went from one vet to another. A particular doctor seemed an excellent choice. She specialized in toy breeds, and owned a Yorkshire terrier female.  In her opinion Pyometra would be something worrisome, as would breast cancer. However, she  feels  Pyometra is an uncommon canine killer. She is not alone in that assessment. Also called Stump Pyometra, even veterinary colleges don't seem to agree about how common it is. So the good lady advised me to simply be a responsible owner (i.e., to breed only by intention.) No problem -- my silky did not like other dogs, particularly males. She did not care for strangers or their children, unless they had really good manners. She was not above teaching people how to behave. My question was how one would manage to breed silky terriers, intentionally or otherwise!
     At 13 years, Cookie was a fierce beauty and in glowing health. What an engaging little creature, smart and sassy! A famous lady in her own right, people everywhere in Denver recognized her, many of whom could not recall my name! Not long after the photo above was taken, I came home from a meeting, to find Cookie quite ill. It was not alarming, but she was having a digestive issue, and seemed uneasy. It was late, so I waited for morning to call the veterinarian's office. Dr. Smith was unavailable. I began to panic, ultimately reaching a vet who would make a house call. By the time he arrived, tiny Cookie was overwhelmed by infection, due to Pyometra. Her organs were shutting down. 
     Dr. Larry Magnuson had to euthanize Cookie, a tranquil, if untimely, death. I have never recovered ... not really. Dr. Manuson made a memorial contribution in Cookie's name to Pyometra research. I've made donations to rescues in her name. Meanwhile everything I have read on the subject of spaying and Pyometra contradicts what my "favorite" veterinarian told me. It is not so uncommon, as a bitch ages. Nor does it matter whether she has or has not produced litters. Don't take the chance. This is a painful, overwhelming disease. It does not matter the breed or size of the bitch. Do not delay. Spay your animal, because, if she dies of this condition, you will be heartbroken.
      Spaying and neutering are absolutely necessary for the health of pets. That said, I encounter so many owners who don't take care of this. I find myself wanting to say, "Come on, you know you aren't going to show or breed this animal!" I stay silent most of the time, because it is not my decision ... none of my business. 
     If you do not have the stomach for having the surgery (albeit routine and very safe) performed, adopt. Adopt anyway! Never think you cannot adopt a pedigreed companion, if that is what you desire. I helped a friend find an apricot poodle from an online source. She insisted it was the only breed she had ever owned, or wanted to own. She is ecstatic, and the poodle, thriving. A huge bonus of adoption is that the pet will have been ( or will be ) neutered or spayed, as a condition of ownership. Buying a dog, from a breeder you don't know personally, is not a good idea, but buying from a store is a horrible idea. As a consumer, a prospective pet owner, you play a vital role in preventing animal cruelty. 

-Me? I'm still dancing with terriers. My dog is a toy fox terrier, surprisingly calm and generous by nature.    

That Was Then ...

   

Signing Social Security Act

     Unlike a certain Supreme Court Justice, before discussing the pros and cons of any legislation, I like to read it. I want to know, not only the verbiage, but the spirit of the legislation. It is always a good idea to know the opposition's arguments ... so here goes. I'll revisit Social Security and the Roosevelt Administration's intentions, to begin yet another discussion about "fixing" Social Security.
     What could Franklin Delano Roosevelt have been thinking? To say he was a fiscal conservative does not go quite far enough. Roosevelt was a complicated man; as the Nation's President in 1935, he was faced with a hornet's nest of socio-economic issues. The citizenry was still recovering from the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl years, with millions of Americans dispossessed and/or unemployed. Anyone running for the highest office in the land would have to offer creative solutions for the immediate present and for the future. Here is a partial quote from President Roosevelt, upon signing the Social Security Act:

...This social security measure gives at least some protection to thirty millions of our citizens who will reap direct benefits through unemployment compensation, through old-age pensions and through increased services for the protection of children and the prevention of ill health.
   We can never insure one hundred percent of the population against one hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life, but we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age.

     In looking at the numbered photo of those present at the signing of the Act, it is important to note that some of these legislators were fiscal conservatives, who had voiced opposition to the legislation. They stepped up and did the right thing; they compromised. I believe they showed the courage of their convictions (and of FDR's conviction,) something exceedingly rare in today's political climate. (See the Social Security Administration's history site, to see who was who at the signing: http://www.ssa.gov/history/)
     While the vicissitudes of life remain unchanged, the landscape has changed, as has the legislation. To suggest Social Security cannot or should not change again, is to deny history and avoid reality. One reality check came to millions of Americans in the form of what I call the Big Lies; 1) the Social Security Trust is backed by worthless securities and 2) the Trust is broke. The Social Security Trust is funded by United States Treasury Bonds; the bonds are not liquefiable, true; however, they are, by no means, worthless. The reason for funding the trust with treasury bonds is the same as the reason many Americans choose to invest in them. Interest on the bonds has remained reliable. More myths abound in the political rhetoric concerning Social Security, never mind generalities that do nothing to accurately spell out the issues. However one problem looms large on the horizon. It pertains to disabled Social Security beneficiaries (SSI recipients,) as discussed in the 2014 Social Security Trustees' Report: "Social Security’s Disability Insurance (DI) program satisfies neither the Trustees’ long-range test of close actuarial balance nor their short-range test of financial adequacy and faces the most immediate financing shortfall of any of the separate trust funds." Should you feel the need for a translation, the effect will be reductions in benefits to SSI beneficiaries and prospective beneficiaries by 2016. May I say that again? Substantial cuts in disability benefits will take effect in 2016, failing action on the part of Congress and the Senate. THE CLOCK IS TICKING. Am I screaming?
     What can be done to "fix" Social Security, if we have legislators who will act on behalf of both beneficiaries taxpayers? (Keep in mind, a certain amount of courage and a number of compromises will be required. Neither the courage of conviction to do what is right, nor the ability to compromise and garner bipartisan support is easily found in Washington D.C. these days.) Here is some of the change experts recommend:

• Incorporate all of Social Security into the disability insurance (SSI.) That would combine the funds, changing the window of insolvency for SSI to 2033 (per the 2013 Trustees.) This would ensure benefits for something over eleven million disabled workers.
• Lift or eliminate the payroll tax cap, now fixed at $117,000. This change packs a large dollar wallop for the fund.
• Increase the payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, incorporating contributions of employees with those of employers and a modest (approximately) 3 percent for most taxpayers.
• Raise the retirement age for collecting full Social Security benefits. The retirement age is currently set at 67 for Americans born in 1960 and beyond. 
• Means test Social Security. This would reduce or eliminate Social Security benefits for people who have other incomes above a certain amount. 

Meanwhile it is important to know other measures actually have worked in certain parts of the country. I'll try to tackle this topic in subsequent posts.

Hysteria Over Ebola

Rainforest Development

The world of worriers has a new face. It is the face of the Ebola virus, and, yes, Ebola evolved long ago into an airborne disease, right here in the U.S. Certain primates in a federal lab and holding facility in Reston, Virginia, died of what was found to be Ebola. Workers in the facility became infected, but with a less deadly form of Ebola. Researchers believed the virus was spread to the workers by means of the building's ventilation system, but had mutated into a flu-like illness, Ebola Reston. The discovery of Ebola Reston dates back a quarter century. 

      There are five known strains of Ebola, including Reston, and outbreaks of the more serious strains have historically been confined to rainforest areas of Africa. The original host species is the fruit bat. Imagine, for a moment, the numbers of African fruit bats!  In it's deadlier forms Ebola is greatly to be feared, because, aside from nasty, painful, symptoms and 90% fatality,  Ebola has a long incubation period (21 days.) 

     Fear, as opposed to outright hysteria, is a natural reaction. Does anyone else, though, find it remarkable that people worldwide have been so rapid to spread hysteria regarding a potential Ebola outbreak on American soil?  On the other hand, we have been less than slow to react to the effects of Earth's load of toxic waste caused by overpopulation (not to mention obscene levels of  consumption in the developed world.)                                

     Understanding viral disease may help to dispel, if not the fear of Ebola, some of the nonsense we hear promulgated by ignorant politicians and in various media. Viruses are the natural world's supreme opportunists, so, yes, a virus infects rapidly, reproducing in overwhelming numbers; this allows a viral disease to skip from one species and one victim to the next with ferocious efficiency. We know the spread of Ebola to humans in West Africa has been assisted by the development of roads and places of human habitation; workers in remote areas were exposed by animal species, such as primates. Human to human transmission was exacerbated by traditional African burial and by lack of knowledge and consequent lack of precautions in medical facilities.

Here is link to Ebola facts from WHO (the World Health Organization:)

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/

      
...the chief cause for the impending collapse of the world - the cause sufficient in and by itself - is the enormous growth of the human population: the human flood. The worst enemy of life is too much life: the excess of human life. ― Pentti Linkola,  Can Life Prevail - A Radical Approach to the Environmental Crisis     
  

     As to whether Ebola was originally developed as a biological weapon by the United States, or is now part of our weapons arsenal, I'd be hesitant to speculate. More likely I would be very concerned about the CDC, which undoubtedly  possesses sample strains of deadly Ebola. The fear is whether the CDC is worthy of implicit trust, given recent discoveries of neglected Anthrax samples, to mention just one messy incident.

      Preventing Ebola from entering the United States is a non-issue. The possibility of global pandemic is more to be feared. Among other aspects of the problem is International air travel. Travelers are not screened for viral diseases. I have to wonder whether it would even be possible, to do so. In any event, it would be preposterous to suggest a country might seal itself off from emerging infectious disease ... even an exceedingly virulent disease with high mortality. 

      What is there to take away from all this? In discussing a potential pandemic we are discussing human overpopulation and the exploitation of remote, wild places. Immigrants entering the U.S. by means of the southern border aren't likely to bring us Ebola (not unless they are bringing African monkeys in tow.) 

      This is really an issue of an immutable rule of nature; life will find a way. Humans, my friends, are a very badly behaved species, spreading like cancer. The concept that mankind can and, possibly, will be sloughed off the planet, like so many bad cells, offends the sensibilities. After all so many religions proclaim the supremacy of humankind. Believe me, religion aside, the issues are  worthy of humility of thought and a factual, not to say, mindful, approach.

Not Because I Am A Conservative

The Junior League Ball

     The oldest argument in the world promulgates the notion that "the poor will always be among us," and the poor, somehow, deserve poverty. It is a singularly American view, one that issues from our protestant roots. As Mother would say, "What did you do to deserve this?" As for the offspring of impoverished people, they inherit a legacy of misery ... an unfortunate, but immutable reality. The argument goes on to characterize the poor as incapable of self-sufficiency, mature judgment and accountability (i.e., they are not adults.) In a post yesterday by a conservative rag, a well-heeled woman pronounces herself fiscally responsible. I'll call her Ms. Right. She should provide, she declares, her own necessities, including contraceptives. It is not because she is a conservative, she proclaims. Rather it is because she is an adult. In other words, vulnerable populations are to be treated as children; however, deserve neither public assistance, nor  empowerment.
     Looking closely at her portrait, Ms. Right is neither very young, nor middle-aged. Ms. Right is a marketable employment commodity (translation: youngish, attractive, presentable, white, skilled, manageable ... in somewhat this order.) She is either married or marriageable. If she is married and a mother, Ms. Right is confident she will always have the means to provide for the kiddies. I can say this stuff, because I am white, educated, from an upper middle class military officer's family. There are one or two differences, however. Ms. Right may or may not have traveled to third world countries, but has certainly never ventured outside her (at least) 4 star hotel compound. She's definitely never soiled her pristine attire in a refugee center or camp. She volunteers alright, but I guarantee she's never touched a crack baby or mopped up after an AIDS patient.

"But then it is easy, too easy, to sermonize about the dangers of paternalism and the need to take responsibility for our own lives, from the comfort of our couch in our safe and sanitary home. Aren't we, those who live in the rich world, the constant beneficiaries of a paternalism now so thoroughly embedded into the system that we hardly notice it?"―Abhijit V. Banerjee, Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty  
 
     Here at home Ms. Right chooses to ignore the suffering of other women and their children, although their plight is right under her nose. She does not see herself exhausted on a daily basis, holding two or three jobs. After all she has made judicious choices, and cannot envision being abandoned by a husband. Ms. right does not anticipate ever paying a hefty mortgage and bills, while feeding hungry children. In her wildest imagination she would never have to run from an abuser or a mentally ill relative, especially not with her little ones in tow. Equally myopic concerning the future, she cannot conceive of retirement without Mr. Right's earnings, living on Social Security benefits. 
     Here's the thing. It would take a lifetime to fill the gaps in Ms. Right's understanding. She may never awaken to her first thought, until it is too late. There is no hatred or judgment in me, especially not for Ms. Right. Hell, I lived next-door to her, belonged to Junior League with her, volunteered to be her charity's publicity chair. We did not chat over the back fence, don't get me wrong. But, we were civil, even, cordial. That is what we were raised to be. 
     Never mind that Mr. Right may suddenly, one day, become bored with marriage, may need to explore his sexuality, although we would have thought he'd already done so. He is equally unlikely, in her mind, to suddenly drop dead, leaving insufficient arrangements for his wife and children. Like Scarlet O'Hara, we shall worry about that another day. In any case, had I remained married and living in the suburbs of Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A., we'd be peers.
     At this point in my life, having been abused, abandoned, displaced, poor and distressed for myself and my children, I see Ms. Right as merely a dupe. Why on earth would Mrs. Right not stay invested in her comfortable life? Why would she not wish to protect her privileged status and that of her peers. Happy life, happy wife, isn't that the expression? 
     All I ask is an end to Ms. Right permitting the use of her image and words, to hold women like herself above women whose realities they cannot begin to grasp. Ah, but, perhaps you will think me childish in this naive quest.