Pertinent limerick

This is a cause for concern for a lot of us:

Dear Obama, your flight to the right
Is making me feel quite uptight.
It’s alarming how fast
You’re forsaking the past
And converting to GOP-lite.

--By Madeleine Begun Kane

Sign that DNR order!

Okay, folks. When you're dying, how do you want the medical people to treat you? Do you want heroic measures taken no matter how painful they are - and how ultimately useless?

Rhonda Steiner sent me a very powerful article called "Can we just print this out, post it on the fridge, and be done with it?" that was written by a nurse. And I really beg you to click through and read the whole thing. Here's how it gets started:

You know it's going to be a bad day when you walk in and somebody immediately calls a code.

Except this one wasn't a code. It was, technically, a "Rapid Response Team" situation, but given that the patient ended up intubated and 100% ventilated, it was a code. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

A lot of families hate the idea of signing a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) on Grandpa or Grandmother. They think that a DNR means "Do Not Treat" or "Ignore" or "Hasten the Death Of" rather than what it actually means.

To wit: Grandpa was not in the best of shape when he came to us X days ago. He'd had two major ischesmic (clotting) strokes and a large, horrible bleed in his brain and was breathing irregularly and gaspingly when he was delivered to us by a relieved ambulance crew. Grandpa hadn't moved on his own or responded to anything short of pretty intense pain for days.

Grandpa was a full-code, or a "Do anything and everything to save this person's life" when he came to us.

Let me be totally clear here: Grandpa was in no way, shape, or form, ever going to get better. The best neurologists and neurosurgeons in the country had already determined that. Okay? Okay. You got it. Grandpa's gonna die; the only question left is how.

So go on over and read the graphic details of exactly what was done to this poor man because the family would not sign a DNR order.

I've signed mine, okay? Did it a long time ago.

How about you?

If I were a terrorist

Hat tip to Grandmère Mimi over at Wounded Bird.

The importance of church-state separation for the religious

This is really so obvious that I don't see why it is not more widely acknowledged:

The much-celebrated freedom that is the ground of the American consensus is, above all, freedom of mind and heart; freedom to think and believe as one chooses; freedom of conscience. Without that, there is no genuine democracy. But, more to our point, without that, there is no genuine religion. The only possible guarantor of such freedom, as the Founders understood, is a magistrate who acts with absolute religious neutrality. Religious people, that is, need the separation of church and state as much as atheists do. That separation, in fact, is why religion thrives in America.

It's a paragraph from an article called "Secular Rule Benefits the Faithful, Too" by James Carroll.

This pretty much sums things up

I want to suggest that you go on over to Alternet and read "AlterNet's Weekly Zeitgeist List -- The 10 Hottest Issues of the Day". The subtitle says this: "A pilot feature of AlterNet on key questions of the day -- is Obama really tacking to the center, and why gas is so damn pricey."

It's short, succinct, and provides links for reading more about each issue.

(Interesting, though, how climate change is not one of them....)

Oh boy this really scares me

The Founding Fathers and today's America

This is really tragic. Take a look at the first part of this CNN article:

How would the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin feel about the way the United States has turned out 232 years after declaring its independence?

Not pleased, a majority of Americans recently polled said.

According to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey, 69 percent of adult Americans who responded to a poll June 26-29 said the signers of the Declaration of Independence would be disappointed by the way the nation has turned out overall.

Goodness. This really breaks my heart. But it doesn't surprise me in the least.

Two visions of America

Today is our national birthday.

For some years now, I have spent this day in quiet reflection - in prayer for our nation, for all her citizens and for all affected by her actions. This year is no exception.

I found the following a few minutes ago and want to share it with you:

There are two visions of America. One precedes our founding fathers and finds its roots in the harshness of our puritan past. It is very suspicious of freedom, uncomfortable with diversity, hostile to science, unfriendly to reason, contemptuous of personal autonomy. It sees America as a religious nation. It views patriotism as allegiance to God. It secretly adores coercion and conformity. Despite our constitution, despite the legacy of the Enlightenment, it appeals to millions of Americans and threatens our freedom.

The other vision finds its roots in the spirit of our founding revolution and in the leaders of this nation who embraced the age of reason. It loves freedom, encourages diversity, embraces science and affirms the dignity and rights of every individual. It sees America as a moral nation, neither completely religious nor completely secular. It defines patriotism as love of country and of the people who make it strong. It defends all citizens against unjust coercion and irrational conformity.

This second vision is our vision. It is the vision of a free society. We must be bold enough to proclaim it and strong enough to defend it against all its enemies.

-- Rabbi Sherwin Wine

May this Fourth of July be a day of both celebration and reflection for you.

And may there truly be liberty and justice for all!

"A strong collectivist vision"

This is great and I completely agree with it:

There are plenty of libertarians among techie geeks and science nerds, but it remains my steadfast belief that a rational, sustainable future society must include a strong collectivist vision. We should strive to use technologies to form communities, to make it easier for people to help the most helpless members of society. A pure free-market ideology only leads to a kind of oblivious cruelty when it comes to social welfare. I don't believe in big government, but I do believe in good government. And I still look forward to the day when capitalism is crushed by a smarter, better system where everyone can be useful and nobody dies on the street of a disease that could have been prevented by a decent socialized health-care system.

-- Annalee Newitz

Quote of the week

From Sojourners, of course:

Property's not worth killing someone over.

- a 911 dispatcher trying to convince Joe Horn, of Pasadena, Texas, not to confront two burglary suspects with his shotgun. This week, a grand jury cleared Horn of all criminal charges after he shot and killed both men, who were undocumented immigrants from Colombia.
~~~
I so agree. If you don't agree, let me ask you this: Do you really think if a buglar were convicted in a court of law that he or she should get the death penalty? If not, then how can you justify killing someone just because that person is stealing your stuff?

Propaganda --- 50s style

My old friend Walter Calahan sent me this comedy video. The audio part is from an actual film for civics classes back during the Cold War.

Remember honor?

Please go read the article entitled "Sense of Honor, French and U.S. Style" by Brian Cloughley. Here's part of what it says:

In France on June 29 a soldier taking part in a demonstration mistakenly fired live rounds instead of blanks. He wounded 17 people who were watching the display. The Chief of Staff of the French Army, General Bruno Cruche, submitted his resignation to President Sarkozy, who accepted it next day. There had been speedy analysis of a horrific incident ; immediate acceptance of responsibility ; then a self-imposed and principled end to a distinguished career by an officer who has set an example in honor and decency for generations of French soldiers. And for any others who care to take note.

Compare this incident with the aftermath of the evil scandal at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, where scores of Iraqis were tortured by US soldiers in the most disgusting circumstances. All the victims of casual violence, which was enjoyed so much by their torturers, as was evident from their happy photographs, were scarred for life, mentally or physically. Some were murdered in the prison; some died later. And we don’t know the half of what went on there. In 2004 US legislators were shown videos and still pictures of even more revolting and degrading atrocities than had been leaked to the public. There are scores of scenes of dreadful torture that the US administration has ordered to be kept forever secret.
...
But did any generals resign over this appalling affair? Nary a one, of course.
...
A few people were court-martialled. But most charges were reduced, dismissed, or dealt with by “non-judicial punishment” – you’ve got to laugh about that particular weasel-wording in spite of all the horror. Then a female one-star officer was reduced in rank. Apart from that : nothing – except that the officer appointed to investigate the sickening mayhem, Major General Taguba, ended his career when he recorded the truth. What a poisoned chalice he was handed : allow a cover-up and advance to three stars ; or permit the truth to be told and be destroyed for what his peculiar superiors would call “disloyalty”.

And this sort of thing has continued. Countless atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan have been denied, ignored or covered up. The conduct of US troops has only too often been horrendous to the point that the phrase “war crimes” is inadequate. The lies told by US army officers of the highest rank concerning the accidental killing of Pat Tillman by his own comrades in Afghanistan are a blot on the army’s reputation. But not one of these reptiles resigned.

I was brought up in the Deep South. Now please don't get me wrong here. I'm not defending the Confederacy as a cause. But the ideal of honor was very strong and certainly continued into the time of my childhood. I learned, for example, of the swords that were engraved with these words: "Draw me not without provocation. Sheathe me not without honor."

I still value that principle. Would that it were still valued by our military officers.