the role of alcohol vs marijuana re-visited.

The New York Jets announced that it will not be selling beer at its last game of the year and probably the last game at Giants Stadium (why in this economy do we actually need to replace a relatively new stadium-how about low income housing? Sorry another story)
The fear here is that alcohol consumption lowers inhibitions and contributes to s lawless,violent,at risk, dangerous behaviors. There is no evidence that marijuana use contributes to violent behavior. Yet we continue to demonize marijuana and waste incredible resources in the arrest and probition of its use. The real demon is alcohol. The real threat as Jet management has realized that they have to manage the behavior of their customers due to alcohol use. This is once again the absurd influence of money over reason and ultimately public safety. I am glad that Jets managment is putting a small short term economic loss aside for the greater public good.

Madoff and Muslims-there is a connection.

When the scandal of Bernie Madoff came to the surface this year one of the concerns that I had was that the anti-Semites of the would have a field day with this. Here was the stereotypical view of the thieving money hungry Jew. "Yet another Jew playing games with finances. He Jewed me" This perception was there in spite of the fact that many of the people Madoff riped off were other Jews-including Ellie Wiesel. Perception often triumphs over truth.
What this has to do with Muslims-is a similar stereotypical perception based on the news of suicide bombings. It is important to note that most Muslims are not dangerous and are not extremists and that there is nothing in the Koran that perpetuates violence.
Please note as well, that most of the deaths caused by suicide bombers are other Muslims. The uncertainty,fear and threats faced by Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq is shared by non radicalized,non violent Muslims in their own home. It is important for all of us to know that the acts of extremist hurt their own people in many,many ways-murderous and otherwise.

In another political reality...President HIllary Clinton?

I wasn't crazy about Hillary Clinton coming into New York to run in 2000 for Senator Noynihan's seat when he announced his retirement. I was a supporter of Nita Lowey who I felt would have made a great senator and is as native a New Yorker as you can get. But NYS has a history of carpetbaggers-including Robert Kennedy. I was just wondering what history would have been, if Mrs. Clinton had gone back to her home state of Illinois and run for the senate there. If she had, she would have been going after the senate seat of Peter Fitzgerald-a Republican. This was the senate seat that Barack Obama ran for and won in 2004. (Against Alan Keyes? That was a tough battle!) My theory or political irony is, that if Hillary Clinton had gone home to Illinois, instead of New York, there might not have been a Senator Obama to run against for president. Without a senator Obama, there is no President Obama and probably there would be a President Hillary Clinton. Just a though..

As we celebrate the new year let's ring in 1939?

Paul Krugman in today's Times,rightfully calls 2009 "The Big Zero"..where nothing went right,no gains were made financially and no one apparently learned any lessons about bubbles of any kind. It was a year when the curtains were pulled back revealing a corrupt greed filled, delusional financial culture, where people believed in magic. Which brings us to the question, what does this have to do with 1939?
For starters 1939 was the year of The Wizard of Oz (hence pulling the curtain on magic). 1939 brought us probably the best year ever in movies with Gone With The Wind,Good Bye Mr.Chips,The Hunch Back of Notre Dame and Mr.Smith Goes to Washington (In 2009,to quote Howard Ogden, it would be without the happy ending.
1939 was the year in which Batman made his first appearance. It was the year of the World's Fair in New York's Flushing Meadow.La Guguardia Airport was opened. New York saw the completion of The Whitestone Bridge, The Brooklyn Queens Expressway and the Kosciusko Bridge (which New Yorker's pronounce many ways-named for the Polish born military engineer who helped the US during our war for Independence.)Regular television broadcasts started.
So let's bid adieu to 2009 and look forward to the hopes for 1939?

The Church Still Doesn't Get It...

You would figure that after the Crusades,the Inquisition and until Vatican 2 exonerated Jews for the death of Christ (Mel Gibson not withstanding), the Catholic Church would have some sensitivity in its role in the persecuting of Jews throughout history. If you figured this,you would have figured wrong. Of all the Cardinals that could have been chosen as Pope,we have Pope Benedict who was a member (voluntarily or otherwise) of the Hitler youth. A bishop was excommunicated for being a Holocaust denier was ex-excommunicated and seems to be back in the fold. Now Pope Benedict has nominated for sainthood Pope Pius X11-also known as "Hitler's Pope"-as documented by historian John Cornwall in his book "Hitler's Pope"). Pius X11 had a long history of anti-semitism in his works and writings prior to becoming pope. In his role of nuncio in Germany,Pius X11's lack of opposition by the Nazis in the democratic church affairs basically gave the Nazi's free rein in church matters, giving further legitimacy to the Nazi's. During Pius X11's reign the Jews of Rome were rounded up and taken by train to Auschwitz. Pius X11 nomination for sainthood is yet another example of the church still not getting it in its its relationship historically to Jews.

An R rating for "Its Complicated"-another war of distraction

The new Meryl Streep movie "Its Complicated" has been given an R rating. There is no overt sexuality. No nudity. No overt violence of any kind. The movie was given an R rating because there is depiction of marijuana use. For depiction of marijuana use. The fear being if a child sees someone smoking a joint and actually enjoying it, that they might think,"hey good idea-I want to do that too" This is opposed to all the drinking you see in many TV shows at any time,all the scenes in bars or parties where people are drinking; scenes in airports-where people are smiling and drinking (Does the new George Clooney movie have an R rating for drinking? No I don't think so) Would you put an R rating on any O'Neil play? Oops sorry too escoteric an example. Would the movie Days of Wine and Roses get an R rating today?
Its holiday time-bring the champagne, bring the wine, its Miller Time-have fun. Get in the holiday spirit. Everybody smile. Go to the bowl games. Watch the people getting beer in the stands.( I particularly like the shots of men drinking beer and having their shirts of in sub zero temperatures. If that isn't a cultural enhancer...) Sorry Ms.Streep, you smoking a joint is going to corrupt the minds of our young. Especially since we can't cash in on it. This is going to cost your movie millions for no apparent reason but its for the greater good. Sorry, you are yet another innocent victim of our culural wars. Collateral damage for the greater good..our greater good. It is a cultureal war based on fear.
Marijuana is not a drug of empowerment. Alcohol is and its at the root of much violence, of much physical and emotional abuse, let alone its role in auto fatalities. The gallows laughter of alcohol is a far greater danger than someone seen smoking a joint. We have yet again another example of our addictions to distraction enabled by powerful lobbyiest (and rightwing political groups) such as the beer and spirits industry,whose only concern is not for how a child's mind might be corrupted by marijuana., not for the truth,but for their bototm line-especially if it means corrupting a child's mind that will enhance that bottom line.
A final point here is that it not just the influence and money the alcohol industry has, or political groups being afraid of marijuana use, its the influence and money needed by opposing points of view don't have.
Its really isn't complicated. Its once again about money.

An even better reason why we won't win in Afghanistan,,,

Robin Williams had the best explanation why we won't and can't "win" in Afghanistan, If you try to bomb them back to the stone age "it would be an upgrade".

is it really news-if you know the story before...

As you may have guessed by my writings here, I love politics. Yet my love affair is shaky. When I watch news programs especially during the past year, I feel like I know the ending of the story before it even starts. When I see interviews there is usually an attempt to have some sort of balance between both sides of the political spectrum. If you take the view of "balance" its pretty predictable as to what either side is going to say. First you know that there is going to be a lot of shouting. You also know that the participants are not really listening to each other. If you have a role or have the title of say "right wing pundit" and you agree with anything progressive, doesn't that kind of blow your gig? Who would you then be? How can you be adversarial if you agree with your adversary? Wouldn't there be kind of identity crisis?
There is no benefit for agreeing with the other side of the political spectrum or of seeing the value of the greater good. The process seems to distort the details. For example, look at the political fallout when Florida Governor Charlie Crist accepted bailout money and embraced President Obama because doing do was the best thing for his state-not for the Republican Party's needs but for what his state needed. In today's polical climate, this behavior is considerd both enlightened and politically damaging. Its suppose to be about governing not the results of the next election.
I often think of politics as theatre. Imagine that there is a long running show. Basically the actor are playing their parts and reciting their lines over and over. Unless the director tweeks things now and then,the words and the actors feel rote and tired.The essense of good theatre and acting-to see a show if it was happening for the first time) Now imagine if during a familiar scene, one actor decides to play the scene differently and delivers a line not in the script. Imagine what the other actor has to do. The other actor, actually has to listen. The actor has to re-act and not just act.
This would be great political theatre. The scene changes. Conflict which is the essence of any play changes. Now maybe,just maybe-the actors learn more nuanced, complexed roles and things actually get done for the greater good.

definition of addiction

you see a hole in front of you..you know its there..you walk into it anyway-you get angry at the hole...start to get out by digging the hole deeper and you blame the shovel...

How much is enough?

In an incredible book "The Geography of Bliss",Eric Weiner writes about what makes people happy. He reports that in Switzerland the prevailing belief is that envy is the 'enemy of happiness" Weiner notes as well that the more you have the less meaningful the little things you enjoy become. Most intriguingly Weiner reports that materialistic people are less happy than those who are not. This is a great book that covers how a number of countries such as Bhutan(whose king actually has something called "Gross National Happiness" part of the country's economic equation)defines happiness.
My thoughts while reading this book had me focusing on two things. One was the classic George Carlin routine on "stuff" about getting more stuff and having to have a bigger place for more and more of your stuff. The second was on my continued concerns about greed in the US. In a recent edition of Too Much, the authors reported the case of Larry Ellison, the CEO of Oracle. Mr.Ellison is worth $27 billion but he fought a tax appraisal on one of his homes which resulted in a $3 million tax refund. This tax refund cost a local school system the price of three teachers per year. Just how much is enough? Would Mr.Ellison even feel the $3 million. It seems to me that the less you have the more an amount of money you'd feel. Its like having your favorite dish-day after day after day after day. I would think after a while, the meal would loose it appeal.
I keep thinking,is this narcissism? Is this the result of a trauma,where the person suffered a separation that produced an emotional void. I wonder if greed is an addiction-where the addict just needs more and more and more. Where there is this void and needs to be filled because if it isn't,filled there are terrible feelings of abandonment, hurt and pain that the addict doesn't want to feel.There is the impossible quest for perfectionism. Addicts also have a sense of grandiosity. I heard a great expression: an addiction is basically a "G_I" series-with grandiosity masking insecurity. With addiction, the worse it gets the more and more is needed to experience the same high. Too much is not enough.
To paraphrase George Carlin, "if you have most of the stuff, there's not just enough stuff for the rest of us."

I was wrong-there are death squads..

Over the past few months, regarding the debate on health care, there was a lot of mention about 'death squads'. This was noted that grandma would be killed because of health care rationing. I thought that this was crazy, but I was wrong there are death squad-with God as the apparent trigger man. On the floor of the Senate yesterday, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma said that Americans should pray for the death of a US senator which would prevent health care reform from coming to the floor of the senate. Senator Coburn, who is also a doctor,apparently forgetting that he took the hypocratic oath to preserve life and at least do no harm, was referring particularly to wheel chair bound Senator Robert Byrd. Senator Byrd was forced to come to the floor of the senate late at night early morning to make sure that he was the 60th vote to make sure health care reform came to a vote.
What God is Senator Coburn praying to who would harm someone for political reasons? What God is this? Is this the loving God Republicans refer to when they say that all life-including the "yet born"? ( By the way, Senator Coburn is the same senator who acted like Ricky Ricardo while talking with Judge Sotomayor and who made the word "empathy" a pajoritive word. He should not be in the Senate and the AMA should revoke his license for violating his oath)

Steve Witless or is it Steve Wynn-Less? (even more greed)

Steve Wynn of Wynn Resorts recently cut salaries and hours accross the board for all employees of his empire. The savings to the company was between $75-100 million dollars. Wynn's share of a recent dividend payout: $86 million. What is there in the personality of someone who thinks that this is right? In my psychodrama studies there is a term called a role reversal. This is the process of putting yourself in the shoes of the other. The idea is to see what commonalities you have with the other; to develope a sense of empathy and thus reduce conflicts. The lack of the ability to role reverse is a serious matter-meaning no or little empathy.In the worst case scenario the inability to role reverse in a major trait of the sociopath..no empathy-no remorse for the effects one's actions on others. This is also greed and a disturbing sense of entitlement...something Mr.Wynn has much of.,along with his $2.3 billion wealth.

even more greed...

The stock value of health care insurance companies are at a 52 week high. These companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying against health care reform. The reform basically has little cost containment. I hope that I am wrong, but I really don't see much in the health care bill that will keep premiums from increasing. So much for reining in the strength of the insurance companies. I still don't understand why these companies are exempt from anti-trust legislation. Nothing is going to change until we stop the flow of money from lobbying. So much for McCain-Feingold legislation. The wheels of both parties are still greased by millions spend by big busines. This is that gold standard: he who has the gold rules.
Financial institutions have given or planning to give $150 billion in bonuses this year. That is enough money to balance the budgets of all 50 states. This is a totally insane distribution of wealth in the US. States are laying off teachers. police and cutting programs to the bone. In New York, subway lines are being eliminated as well as other route cuts. As noted in my earlier notation, will anyone have the nerve to tax these bonuses?

Why no one is afraid of Obama part 2

Its long over due for President Obama to be come less the intellect and as Anthony Weiner has said "to get his hands dirty". The President has to become more LBJ like and twist a few arms. He needs to call Ben Nelson, Mary Landreau,and Blanche Lincoln into the woodshed (forget Joe "Aetna" Lieberman) and say "look here's the deal. Are you with me on healthcare or not? Are you going to let healthcare come to the floor for a vote? Are you a part of the democratic party or not? If you're not you won't have my support for any projects in your state. When you run for re-election, you will not have my support. I will campaign in your states and show your constituents how you voted against their best interests." That's hardball politics. That's how things get done. Remember medicare passed by only one vote.

politics with a two by 4-Why no one is afraid of President Obama

The other night on his program, Bill Moyer said that "no one is afraid of Obama."
This reminds me of a great old story about a farmer who has a bull sitting in his field and no matter what he does, cannot get the bull to move. He hires the greatest experts on animals, the most renoun veteranrians, anyone who has anything to do with an expertise on bulls. The bull doesn't budge. While all this has been going on, there has been a man on a fence watching this and laughing. The farmer hears the laughter yet now the man says "I can get the bull to move". The farmer utterly (no pun intended) defies the man to get the bull to move. The man picks up a two by four and smacks the bull as hard as he can between his ears. The farmer screems "what are you doing? I thought you were going to get the bull to move" The man answers "yeah I can but I have to get his attention first".
This is what didn't happen the other day when President Obama met with the heads of the banking industry. This is after the President said earlier "I did not run for office to be helping out some fat cat bankers on Wall Street". Some of the bankers didn't make it to the meeting due to travel problems. You'd think a meeting with the President of The United States would instill some sense of urgency.
The president was concerned about the return of business as usual with the banking industry going back to the business as usual giving of bonuses and stock perks of billions of dollars. I don't think that the stern lecture paid off or had much impact. Did the president really think that this meeting would change things at all? How do appeal to the conscience and character of someone who has no moral compass or conscience in the first place? (in the social sciences this is a character trait of someone who has a character disorder)
This is what I would like to have heard the president say "Ok guys here's the deal." We are at war and you are the enemy. Today will not be a discusson. What I am going to propose to the congress is one time 90% tax on bonuses. You will not be rewarded for bad behavior. This is a financial war as much a threat to the American People as a military war. I will visit the districts of any representative who prevents me from protecting the American people.I will challenge the American people to vote for their best interest and not against it. Thanks for coming. Close the door on your way out and check the Amtract schedule for off peak fares so you can save a few bucks>"

If this land is your land, how could it be mine...

When I was a kid my friends sang a take off on This Land Is Your Land..our variation was "this land is your land, this land is my land. If this land is your land how could it be my land? So you better get off or I'll knock your head off. This land was made for me not you". How prophetic and how profound we were without even knowing it.
Over the past few years,whenever I heard a discussion about income distribution it was also noted that the richest 1% of the population has more wealth than the bottom 90% combined. This has not changed if fact it has gotten worse. The bottom is falling out of the bottom. Many pension plans have literally been depleted by the behavior of a greedy few. Previously middle class families are falling into a catagory called "the new poor". This did not happen over night and has been part of a cultural and political war in which corporate taxes, have gotten lower and lower,where tax rates on the top income earners has dropped from a level of 80% in1950 to less than 40% due to the Bush tax cuts which benefited again,disproportionately the top 1% of the country. Lets add on tax havens such as the Cayman Islands and hidden Swiss Bank accounts which until fairly recently the govenment has been pretty passive about pursuing and we see even more and more how the top income 1% of the population.
Estate taxes have dropped since 2002 from 50% with an exemption of $1 million to 45% in 2009 with an exemption of $3.5 million per person. The estate tax,due to congressional inaction will be dropped for the coming year and will be restored at the old 2002 rate. Another part of the inequity is that of Capital Gains taxes (taxes on investment income) now about 15% for most and lower for others. These rates are lower than labor generated income and are thus unfair and contribute to the disparity of the top per cent of the population and the rest of us. This creates more of sense of the disparity in our culture where the US is clearly more of an oligarchy than a democracy.
I will discuss in more detail the consequences of this pattern. For now I will point out just one. As a result of a budget shortfall in the MTA in NYC, students will not be getting metro-cards to go to school. Once again this creates a hardship on the poorest of us. This is not a democracy.

not the great depression but the greatest....

Social security is basically a contract-a contract between workers and their country so that there is some sense of economic safety for many years of work. It is a promise-a trust. What would have happened if that promise was not kept? What if that promise was compromised or totally betrayed? After World War 1, congress promised a bonus to veterans in a manner similar to today's social security based on time served. Due to the political climate at that time of delaying and delaying government benefits,the bonuses were not to be paid for a long time after service. When economic circumstances changed, the beginning of the Great Depression, the former soldiers wanted their bonuses early. Thousands of these veterans assembled in Washingtom hoping for their promise to be kept. This became known as the "Bonus Army". What made this such a horrible chapter in our history was that the present army was sent in to squwash the assembly of former veterans.
Now imagine if the Republicans had been successful in privatising social security along with their policies and beliefs in less and less regulation of the financial institutions that got us into our current economic crisis since the great depression. What would be going on it the streets with only the only safety net of most of the population gone? With the current political climate where people are bringing guns to political rallies and The NRA is supporting fewer and fewer restrictions of gun carrying in even public places-the scenario is unimaginable.
We would be calling today's events "the greatest depression" and worse.

"what if we just pull out?"

This question is not from a recent headline about the United States involvement in Afghanistan or Iraq.. Its from an October 1969 issue of Time magazine regarding the Viet Nam War. Our policy was that of "Vietnamization"- the turning Viet Nam over to the Vietnamese. Vietnamisation was our military and political goal. This was the apparent goal of a failed policy which included the adding of more and more troops to stabilize the region. Too much was never enough.The unfair burden of serving in the war was on the backs of those who were not able to evade the draft like Chaney,Bush and Rumsfeld. Victory was ill defined.(Similar to"Mission Accomplished-as President Bush declared). Talk of 'the light at the end of the tunnel-was spoken about for years-while the light was actually another train comining in the opposite direction. There was a history of corruption in South Viet Nam. Drug trafficking was fairly common as well. Substitute the name Afghanistan and the comparisons are frightening. Substitute "French troops" for US troops in Viet Nam. Substitute Russian troops for US troops in Afghanistan-again the repeat of history is frightening.
How do you stabilize countries that have no history of a central zed government? At some point we are going to have to leave Iraq and Afghanistan. At least I hope so. I hope that President Obama means what he says about withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan fairly soon yet not changing his mind about extending deadlines due to "military conditions on the ground".
How do you withdraw from a country militarily? Just what do you leave behind? How is this done in some kind of orderly manner? How is there anything orderly about war? I remember the chaos of the fall of Saigon and the scenes of desperation of people trying to flee as the North Vietnamese overran the city. I also remember someone asking "how would you like to be the parent of the last soldier who was killed in Viet Nam?" We ask the same question about Iraq and Afghanistan. As noted by the great historian Howard Zinn in war often "people don't give their lives for their country, its taken away". When the question is asked "did the person die in vain?" The answer unfortunately is "yes". What if we just pull out?

some random thoughts

re: release of emails on Valerie Plame-isn't the outing of a CIA operative treason? So how come no one has been charged?
re: the white house gate crashers: how come they haven't been arrested? Guess this is an unreality show
re: Liz Chaney and her call to war..if she is so gun ho about the war in Afghanistran, enlist. Seems like she is following in the footsteps of her chickenhawk father who had three draft deferrals..the last one being due to the birth of (guess who?) Liz Chaney. Love it when people who didn't serve in the miliary like Bush,Rumsfeld and Chaney so easily send other people's children to war. Guess the Bush twins were too busy doing other things. Would Bush see the humor or make jokes during the White House Press Corp dinner a few years ago about looking for WMD's under his podium if his children were at risk?
If I could turn the political clock back to one recent day in recent history it would be during the last Bush-Kerry debate. Instead of defending the charges about Swiftboating-I would've loved to have Kerry ask Bush:" ok, let's put aside the Swiftboat charge. Let's not debate that. There is no doubt that I was there correct? Ok then. Here's my question. Where were you?" Wonder how different history might be.
President Obama's meeting with the heads of the banking industry. Here's one idea. Any company that got any government bailout money, should not be able to lobby or make any political contributions. Wouldn't that be like giving matches to the guy who burned down your house?

Just a few thoughts here..

War on drugs..part 2

In wars of any kind, there is always the issue of collateral damage and its costs. In the war on drugs, whose costs were noted previously, the collateral damage is the effects on children and families. Children of drug offenders are often likely to end up in foster care especially if the parent is the mother. As per reports from the Drug Policy Alliance an increasing number of first time non violent drug offenders are women of which "7 out of 10 have a child under the age of 18." The disproportionate arrest of minorities for drug offenses is yet another issue relating to the the unfairness of drug arrests.

Research has also shown the at risk factor of parental incarceration on the prospect of a child being involved in criminal activity. 80% of people incarcerated for vionent crime passed through the child welfare system. Add the issues of the effects of US drug policy on non violent first time offenders on children, the traumas they experience, the mental health risks and the educational at risk factors and we see even further the stagering cost of this failed policy.
The United States congress response to this issue: hearings on steroid use in sports. The media's focus of this issue: the parading and shaming of athletes who use marijuana. There is a story about a man who loses his car keys and he is searching for the keys by a street light. A crowd gathers to help him. They asked where he lost his keys. He points to another area away from where he is looking. "why are you looking here?" The man is asked. The answer "because the light is better". This is the absurdity and failure of our drug policy.

Schools, Hospitals or Prison..The United States Other Failed War..Part 1

The United States in addicted to its addiction. Regarding our failed war on drugs (which is actually a war on people)is acting in the same way as an addict would. Addicts often deny the facts of their addiction and are often in denial. In 1973,President Nixon ignored the Schafer Report (The National Commission On Marijuana and Drug Abuse) that basically said that "neither the marijuana user nor the drug itself can be said to constitute a danger to the public." In 1976 President Carter promised to decriminalize marijuana. Both instances show how a closed family system, the addict and its enablers-won't allow for new information that goes against ingrained beliefs. The addiction is perpetuated politically and culturally in the same way families do. Alcohol and cigarettes have a most devastating effects on people. Alcohol due to its ingrained enmeshment (like in the addicts family where boundaries are blurred) political influence(spelled lobbying and political contributions are woven into the fabric of our culture. Alcohol use is culturally enabled in spite of its documented role in child abuse, spousal abuse,assaults, auto accidents and fatalities, and homicides.
Addicts often put their families at risk in a number of ways. They spend limited family resources on their addiction-affecting the health,education,safety of their families again denying the effects and consequences of their addiction for yet another fix. US drug policy costs all levels of government about $44 billion a year in enforcement. $280 billion a year is spend on policing and prisons. Our streets are often like war zones where concerns for turf wars due the profits of substance abuse put innocent people often fatally at risk. These figures don't even begin to quantify the effects on children growing up in a family where one parent is incarcerated for a substance abuse arrest.(Part 2 upcoming)
Take the money we spend on the risky behavior of our addiction to our failed drug policy,put those funds back into the budget see how it re frames the current health care debate and the failure of education in the US.
Addicts and their enablers have problems with recovery..a loss of the ability to make life affirming choices. With addicts the decision making process is often "all or nothing'" Those choices are often the flip side of the same coin. Drink-act out or don't. They are the same sides of the same coin. There is an inability to see that there are often more than the two choices.
This is whee the enablers come in-

Tiger Woods..2 " We admtted to ourselves that we were powerless..."

These are the first few words of the first step of the 12 step program of sex addicts anonymous. We admitted that we were powerless over our addictive sexual behavior-that our lives had become unmangable". Putting our marriage and our health at risk. Compulsive sexual behavior. The leading of a double life. Humiliating yourself. Risky behavior that could lead to legal problems.These are just few of the characteristics of a sex addict. In recovery addicts are taught to assess what their bottomline behaviors are. These are the behaviors that are the compulsive sexual behaviors that each person are trying to abstain from. These include: sex outside of your marriage, prostitution, pornography, cruising and anonymous sex,.
The play and movie Days of Wine and Roses and the works of Eugene O'Neil have shown us dramatically the devistating progressive damage of alcoholism on so many of us. We are seeing similar dramas being played out on the public stage..the drama and pain just as devistating.
Tiger Woods, has been leading a double life and has put his marriage, children, health and the health of his wife at risk. It is astounding and yet another indication of the incideous role of greed and money in our culture, that the main focus is on spin control and the trickle down effects on the economy and the golf world in particular. Is there a dollar price to personal struggle and putting your family at risk? What Tiger Woods and people like Mark Sanford need is not spin control but a 12 step program and the support of other members of the "fellowship", of people who have "been there" and struggling with a basic change in their compulsive behavior.
Dr. Patrick Carnes seminal book on sexual addiction is titled "Out of The Shadows" Taking the issue of sexual addiction out of the shadows, not sensationalizing it, not marketing it, not shaming it, would be the greatest good, the great cost benefit in term of emotional,personal as well as financial capital if others suffering in similar ways,see themselves in Tiger Woods and seek help for their sexually addictive behaviors. We are all different-we are all the same.

Mother Teresa and Tiger Woods. Part 1

As you are reading this, I hope you are asking yourself 'what could these two people possibly have in common?" Here's the connection. In 1997 when both Mother Teresa and Princess Dianah died, the majority of the news coverage went to Princess Dianah. The three major news networks sent their top anchors to cover the events surrounding Princes Dianah. Princess Dianah's life took precedent over someone who has subsequently considered for sainthood for her work with the poorest of the poor.

Ok back to Tiger Woods. In today's local New York newspapers: The Daily News,The New York Post and Newsday have Tiger Woods picture on the front page. On the front page. We are engaged in two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq where the physical and emotional live of soldiers and their family are taking a deadly toll. We are talking about Tiger Woods. We see the results of horrible health care system that is being blathered about by congress when people literally die each day for a lack of health insurance. WE are taking about Tiger Woods.
This week is also the one year anniversary of the Bernie Madoff scandal that ruined the lives of many investors. People are losing their homes each day due to foreclosures. More and more children are falling into poverty. The US has 5 times the amount of people in jail than most countries and we are focused on Tiger Woods.
Barbara Ehrenreich has said that "America id addicted to wars of distraction". Bernard Shaw said that "there is a catagory of journalists who are unable to distinguish between a bicycle accident and the collapse of a civilisation." Is it any wonder that we have an electorate who often vote against their own best interests.It is any wonder that many have lost their ability to critically think? Is it any wonder that "intellect" has become a pejoritive term? We have an electorate who believes in death squads. We have an electorate, who may believe that we have a president who is not an American. We have over 10% unemployment in the US and page one is of Tiger Woods. We have a country where where a small mostly right wing males are trying to turn back the clock on a woman's right to chose-and we are focused on Tiger Woods.
How does he repair his image? How will this effect the economics of golf? How will this effect Tiger's legacy? If anything should come out of this is a closer look on sexual addiction. (Tiger Woods-and sexual addictino Part 2 the subject of this next posting)

With No Apologies..

This was the title of Barry Goldwater's biography. Goldwater is considered the Father of modern conservatism. The question I have is would Goldwater even be part of the convervative party or the right of the Republican Party today.. While Goldwater was no angel (he voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 he was pretty clear on a few basic points about government. Including a balanced budget. Yet his heir to the title of the head of convervatism Ronald Reagan had the national debt quadruple under his watch."Liberal" Bill Clinton balanced the budget, left office with a budget surplus and shrank the level of government to 1960's level. (Clinton also added 100,000 police to the streets under his watch-so much for conversatives claim that the have been the "law and order" party.
Goldwater was a true conversative in hid belief of the protection of natural resources knowing that once a resource is lost, its lost and off your ledger of economic assets. Yet his inheritors Reagen again said that trees caused more pollution than cars. God help as, Sarah Pallin's environmental credential are "drill baby drill" Hardly a Goldwater view of the environment. Goldwater was for a limited role of government beliving that was goes on in your bedroom and your doctor's office was no one's business. As late as 1994 Goldwater said of today's conservatives "they think I've turned liberal because I believe that a woman has a right to an abortion. That's a decision that's up to the pregnant woman and not up to the pope or some do-gooder on the right. Its not a conservative issue at all."
Goldwater was also an advocate for Gay rights. In the 1990's Barry Goldwater was in favor of Gays in the military. During this time, Goldwater also worked to end job discrimination against Gays in Phoenix-believing that access to equal employment was a constitutional right. Hardly a position that today's conservatives would embrace. In today's political climate,there would be no room for the father in his family. Talk about being dysfunctional.

the quality of our connections

The genious developer of psychodrama,JL Moreno wrote a pivital book "Who Shall Survive?" which noted that the quality of our connections determined the quality of our lives. Where were our loyalties to: family, friends, religion, schools,community,government. Where are our loyalties? Where do we fit? Who do we reject and who are we attracted to? What social structures define us? No where have these questions needed asking and been ignored than in the US involvement in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Our military goals have totally ignored centuries of connections and culture in both of these countries. We are trying to reshape sociometry-the connections of a people for a centralized government when their primary loyalties are to their individual tribes-not to a centralized government. We cannot shape a country into a mold they we think is best for them. This is total arrogance on our part. We still struggle with the role of states rights vs those of a contralized government and we expect Afghanistan who defeated the Russians to reinvent themselves. This is a sociologically impossible task. Militarily its even more so. Setting a goal of stability is impossible to achieve. You can't ignor centuries of culture.

People are not numbers on a ledger sheet

As a social worker I have dealt with the micro-end of social policy-the actual delivery end of policies enacted by law and legislation. I often thought of how incredible it must be to be a part of the macro side-those making the policy decisions and how many people's lives I could effect.
Then I started to read numbers One out of every three women in the US will have an abortion by age 45. 13 million children in the US (and rising) live below the poverty line. The price of soda has dropped by 33% while the price of fruits and vegetables have increased by 40%. Insurance premiums were 1.5% of GNP in 1970 but in 2007 was 5.5% of GNP.
These numbers seem pretty cold and have a sense of statistical attachment to them. They don't mean anything they are just numbers. The further away you get from the delivery end of a service the less the impact is felt. The disconnect is there when you see how little a sense of urgency there is by elected officials. There is nothing at stake for them personally so for purely political and regional issues, obstruction becomes how the game is played-but the game leave blood on the hand of politicians and policy makers because of their inaction.

All of these number represent someone. Not one group. Not one religion not one myopic area of the country. Yet we have people like Ben Nelson, Mitch McConnel (the great intellect who once called President Clinton a douche bag), Max Baucus, whose total state populations are less than Brooklyn, making sweeping decisions with utter detachment that is not felt until it hits someone they love. (At least I hope) Working on the policy end is still a dream of mine. I just think its a great idea for those who are enacting policies, spend some time on the front lines-see the consequence of your actions and inactions. Get a senseof the micro first. Talk to the woman in the family planning clinic. Talk to the parent of the diabetic child. Talk to the family of the man jailed for a non violent drug offense. Talk to the family of the person who died for lack of health insurance. Once again to paraphrase something from another era, "ladies and gentlemen have you lost all sense of decency?"

cigarettes and soda..

Strange combination? What could the two have in common? Actually quite a bit. We knew for years the lethal effects of smoking cigarettes. For years tobacco companies lobbyed congress actually denying the effects of cigarette smoking. for years the tobacco companies spent millions of dollars both lobbying their political enablers of death products and what was worse spending millions on advertising geared towards recruiting new smoker-children. The US actually subsized tocabbo growers. It wasn't until the counrty and lawmakers grewup/woke up and started to tax cigarettes which had the greatest impact on healthcare in the US.
Now the soda part. For over thirty years I have worked with children. I would watch in office/school waiting rooms while children drank soda and fruit drinks that actually had only 10% actual fruit. The alternative to these drinks were also cheaper-which in poor areas makes a big difference. We know the effects of diet on childrens's school performance. With utter frustration I would try to inform the parents that anything with"ose" on the labels was a form of sugar During that time children obesity levels as well as levels of childhood diabetes have skyrocketed. The contributions of sugar to the activity of children is also a costly concern here. The average can of soda has at least ten teespoons of sugar in the form of high fructose corn syrup. By the way, the US subsidizes corn that becomes high fructose corn syrup. Much of the advertising for soda is directed at...yes children. "[People get fat from other things' I knew someone who smoked for 20 years and didn't get cancer. Haven't we gone down this road before?
A brave attempt by New York Governor Patterson to have a sugar tax placed on sugary drinks, never made it to the floor of the state legislature. (The dysfunctional nature of this body is the subject of another post here). The arugments were the same as with cigarettes. The bottle industry and members on both sides of the political isle framed the the proposal as yet another tax on people-especially poor. "Just what we need yet another tax" and like with the health problems for cigarettes the lobbyiests and their political enablers took a short sighted approach to a long term health problem. Emotions and vs noting the saving of lives framed and won the debate. The long term individual and government savings in health care costs were not even considered. "Yet another tax"..it is not a tax, not even a regressive tax if people have cheeper and more nutricious alternatives. Once again the argument is being framed, not for the concern of children, and their families.not for the reduction of preventable health care costs for everyone. . but for the short term financial concerns of businesses and politicians. Cigarettes and soda? Awful combination.

greed and the shaping of the message.

Command of the vehicle of the message defines just what the message is. It shapes what the population thinks is important and shapes the debate regardless of the truth of the message. Frank Lutz the rightwing commentator and selfstyled media linguist is very good at shaping language to fit the benefits of a particular ideology. (In his case a far right one). The problem with Mr.Lutz's great skill, is that he doesn't care about the truth or the consequences of his work and who might get hurt. The book "What's Wrong With Kansas?" by Thomas Frank shows perfectly how the right by shaping the message on apparent social/morality issues have gotten people to vote against their own economic interests. Command of the media defines what is intellectual and who is not. Bill Kristol is described as a great political intellect...by who? By whose definition? He is credible only because those who control the airwaves-the communications elite such as Ruppert Murdock says he is. The Glenn Becks of the world are given air time, not because they are journalists. not because of any great intellect, but because he sells. This is not about a political disagreement, this is about acting out-like a group therapy session where there is no therapist to set limits-its about selling without concerns for the content. I think Dick Cavett once said that people will keep selling crap as long as there is a market for it. Mr.Beck by the way, has no journalistic credentials and is also a recovering alcoholic-who is probably a dry drunk..he is still acting out. Mr.Beck has no boundaries-knows no interpersonal limits, with no regard for accuracy-which Fox executives know, but don't care because the message-regardless of the potential to incite..sells. This is not about truth, about politics, about the rights of an informed electorate, its about greed and almost sociopathic disregard for the consequences of the product being sold.

greed and health care

Insurance companies are spending about a million dollars a day to prevent any health care reform in the US. What makes this process so totally insane is that by law health insurance companies are one of only two organizations exempt from anti trust laws. The other is major league baseball. We know that no one really dies from major league baseball but we do know that thousands of people die each year from the lack of medical coverage. The role of insurance companies today is similar to tobacco company executives who knew for years that their products caused millions of death per year. They knew that the way you used their products caused death while profit and greed and sociopathy to the concerns of the lives of others were their prime motivators. They just didn't care.The insurance companies, their lobbyists, and elected officials who take their money, just don't care and are enablers to the cause of deaths of thousands of people per year. What is the cost benefit analysis of the preventable death of one person? Of your child? Your parent? This is not health care, this is not capitalism, this is not about what a democracy is. Its about a society that has lost its concern for the common good. Its a society that has lost all sense of balance between the role of money and the importance of the preventable suffering of even one person. Its about a country where the word empathy has become a politically pejoritive word. This is not what I thought my country is about.