What Are We Waiting For?

Long before the disastrous George W. Bush administration, I had been waiting for profound, systemic changes in our political system. Perversely, I saw the upside of Bush as motivating more Americans to demand political change. And that happened. But the national yearning for change was co-opted by Ron Paul on the right and Barack Obama on the left while John Edwards with the most authentic populist change message fizzled out early.

It is not enough to want, demand and support change, not when change is more of a campaign slogan than a carefully detailed set of reforms. Critically needed is a firm understanding of what specific changes can restore American democracy and remove the privileged rich plutocrats and corporatists running and ruining our nation.

A huge fraction of Americans have bought into the Obama candidacy because of his polished and effective rhetoric. But Obama does not offer the changes I have been waiting for, or the ones the public needs. A great speaker does not necessarily have the courage or intent to fight for deep political reforms.

Our nation’s Founders did not create the United States of America just with smiles and slick rhetoric; they were bold, risk-taking revolutionaries fighting tyranny. Obama has not defined our domestic tyranny and told us how he will try to abolish it. Obama is no dissident or revolutionary. The change he mostly seeks is moving from senator to president. Not what I have been waiting for.

There is no evidence in Obama’s brief political career that he is a champion for deep political reforms to transfer power from the plutocrats to the people. To the contrary, the more you learn about Obama’s history the more he appears as just another super-ambitious politician making friends, using people and cutting deals to get ahead.

To begin with, I have been waiting for a potential president that speaks out against the over-powerful two-party system that sucks up money from all countless corporate and other special interests. I have never heard a word from Obama to indicate he understands the many harmful effects of the two-party plutocracy and the need to open up our political system to a much wider spectrum of beliefs and strategies. Instead, Obama cleverly talks about bipartisanship just as many other Democrats and Republicans have, because that maintains the two-party status quo.

If Obama believed in opening up the political system he would, for example, advocate opening up televised presidential debates to third party candidates and removing the many obstacles the two parties have built to limit ballot access to third party and independent candidates. He would also openly call for replacing the Electoral College with the popular vote for president.

If Obama truly wanted to get rid of big, corrupting money from corporate and other special interests, then he should be advocating a constitutional amendment that would remove all private money from political campaigns and change the US system to totally publicly financed campaigns. Only a constitutional amendment can accomplish this. Campaign financing reforms by Congress are a distraction and next to useless.

And if Obama really supported universal health care, then he would have concluded as nearly all experts have that the nation needs a single payer insurance system that puts an end to the rape of the public by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

Change? Absolutely. But real systemic, root changes that reform and transform the current system by changing the power structure that both major parties have nourished over many decades. What is so clear to millions of people highly skeptical of the Obama-as-political-messiah fiction is that he has not earned the presidency through diverse political and leadership accomplishments.

Sure, none of the other candidates are any better than Obama - not Hillary Clinton, not John McCain. More worthy candidates based on experience and authenticity succumbed to many bizarre forces and media disinterest. It is too late to enlighten ardent Obamatons, but millions of voters will justify voting for Obama as the lesser evil candidate. That proves how bankrupt our political system really is. Now is the time to reject the two-party plutocracy and vote for third party and independent candidates, such as Ralph Nader. Yes we can! Voters that define themselves as independents should assert their independence by rejecting candidates from both major parties.

With a longer view of history, there really is something worse than John McCain becoming president. It is once again upholding the periodic shift of power between the two major parties that stabilizes their tyranny. Just as the Bush administration has built demand for change so too would a McBush presidency. Maybe then in 2012 a true, trustworthy and proven agent of change would have a shot at the presidency. However, electing Obama will set back things back. He will only disappoint us and drain all the pent up demand for change by delivering, at most, some cosmetic actions. Just like his recent decision to wear a flag lapel pin.

The right question is not whether this African American can win the general election, it is SHOULD he be president?

After a few years as president, millions of people would realize that Obama is not the political salvation people have been waiting for. Of course, he would then focus on getting a second term, with more seductive smiles, empty platitudes and false promises. Why not? It worked the first time.

What Are We Waiting For?

Long before the disastrous George W. Bush administration, I had been waiting for profound, systemic changes in our political system. Perversely, I saw the upside of Bush as motivating more Americans to demand political change. And that happened. But the national yearning for change was co-opted by Ron Paul on the right and Barack Obama on the left while John Edwards with the most authentic populist change message fizzled out early.

It is not enough to want, demand and support change, not when change is more of a campaign slogan than a carefully detailed set of reforms. Critically needed is a firm understanding of what specific changes can restore American democracy and remove the privileged rich plutocrats and corporatists running and ruining our nation.

A huge fraction of Americans have bought into the Obama candidacy because of his polished and effective rhetoric. But Obama does not offer the changes I have been waiting for, or the ones the public needs. A great speaker does not necessarily have the courage or intent to fight for deep political reforms.

Our nation’s Founders did not create the United States of America just with smiles and slick rhetoric; they were bold, risk-taking revolutionaries fighting tyranny. Obama has not defined our domestic tyranny and told us how he will try to abolish it. Obama is no dissident or revolutionary. The change he mostly seeks is moving from senator to president. Not what I have been waiting for.

There is no evidence in Obama’s brief political career that he is a champion for deep political reforms to transfer power from the plutocrats to the people. To the contrary, the more you learn about Obama’s history the more he appears as just another super-ambitious politician making friends, using people and cutting deals to get ahead.

To begin with, I have been waiting for a potential president that speaks out against the over-powerful two-party system that sucks up money from all countless corporate and other special interests. I have never heard a word from Obama to indicate he understands the many harmful effects of the two-party plutocracy and the need to open up our political system to a much wider spectrum of beliefs and strategies. Instead, Obama cleverly talks about bipartisanship just as many other Democrats and Republicans have, because that maintains the two-party status quo.

If Obama believed in opening up the political system he would, for example, advocate opening up televised presidential debates to third party candidates and removing the many obstacles the two parties have built to limit ballot access to third party and independent candidates. He would also openly call for replacing the Electoral College with the popular vote for president.

If Obama truly wanted to get rid of big, corrupting money from corporate and other special interests, then he should be advocating a constitutional amendment that would remove all private money from political campaigns and change the US system to totally publicly financed campaigns. Only a constitutional amendment can accomplish this. Campaign financing reforms by Congress are a distraction and next to useless.

And if Obama really supported universal health care, then he would have concluded as nearly all experts have that the nation needs a single payer insurance system that puts an end to the rape of the public by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

Change? Absolutely. But real systemic, root changes that reform and transform the current system by changing the power structure that both major parties have nourished over many decades. What is so clear to millions of people highly skeptical of the Obama-as-political-messiah fiction is that he has not earned the presidency through diverse political and leadership accomplishments.

Sure, none of the other candidates are any better than Obama - not Hillary Clinton, not John McCain. More worthy candidates based on experience and authenticity succumbed to many bizarre forces and media disinterest. It is too late to enlighten ardent Obamatons, but millions of voters will justify voting for Obama as the lesser evil candidate. That proves how bankrupt our political system really is. Now is the time to reject the two-party plutocracy and vote for third party and independent candidates, such as Ralph Nader. Yes we can! Voters that define themselves as independents should assert their independence by rejecting candidates from both major parties.

With a longer view of history, there really is something worse than John McCain becoming president. It is once again upholding the periodic shift of power between the two major parties that stabilizes their tyranny. Just as the Bush administration has built demand for change so too would a McBush presidency. Maybe then in 2012 a true, trustworthy and proven agent of change would have a shot at the presidency. However, electing Obama will set back things back. He will only disappoint us and drain all the pent up demand for change by delivering, at most, some cosmetic actions. Just like his recent decision to wear a flag lapel pin.

The right question is not whether this African American can win the general election, it is SHOULD he be president?

After a few years as president, millions of people would realize that Obama is not the political salvation people have been waiting for. Of course, he would then focus on getting a second term, with more seductive smiles, empty platitudes and false promises. Why not? It worked the first time.

That’s What Saddam Said

By Anna Badkhen

BAGHDAD—The war is over on Sixth Street, where Sahar al-Jawari’s family lives in a modest brick house. Dust has filled the shrapnel holes in concrete fences, stagnant water has pooled in the crater left by a roadside bomb, and the ash and the few charred chunks of the Iraqi police car that the bomb blew up are barely visible on the sidewalk.

But Jawari, 33, has little faith that her life is about to improve. Every night the wind carries the sounds of gunshots and occasional explosions from other parts of Baghdad, where the war still goes on. Every day is a struggle to get by in a city that gets only four hours of power and running water a day. Jawari is divorced and unemployed, but Iraq’s weak government gives her no financial aid. Nor does it make her deadbeat ex-husband pay her child support to help raise her 12-year-old daughter, Roula.

“We have no money, no electricity, no water, no security, no future, nothing,” Jawari says. “Maybe in 50 years it will get better.”

Many Iraqis in this part of southwestern Baghdad say the same thing. They have little hope for help from a government that has been unable to deliver even the most basic services, and little faith in the Iraqi security forces, tainted by their past association with sectarian militias and infamous for defecting under fire.

And although American forces have effectively established security in the streets here, every time residents go outside, bomb craters, bullet holes and buildings damaged by explosions remind them of the sectarian violence that raged here less than a year ago.

Sahar and Roula live with Sahar’s mother, Salimah, and her two nieces, Basmah, 16, and Thohara, 14. The girls’ mother, Jawari’s sister, died of kidney disease 12 years ago: Because of the United Nations’ sanctions and mismanagement by the dictatorial government of Saddam Hussein, Baghdad’s hospitals did not have the proper medicine to treat her, and the family could not afford to send her abroad for surgery. The girls’ father, an engineer, died last year of a heart attack.

“He could not bear what we are suffering in Iraq,” Jawari says.

On a recent afternoon, the women and girls gathered in the kitchen to listen to Jawari’s aunt, Nuriyah, who lives in Denmark and came to Baghdad to visit her family. Nuriyah immigrated to Denmark 10 years ago.

“Over there, we live in heaven,” Nuriyah told them. “All the people there are good. They help everyone, even Iraqis. They send me a social worker to clean my house once a week. They give me health insurance. And every 14 days a nurse comes and gives me my medicine—for asthma, for high sugar content in my blood, for cholesterol and high blood pressure.”

Jawari shook her head.

“They take care of them as though they were little children,” she said. “I want to go to Denmark, any place, just to leave Iraq. What is here for me?”

“That’s a pretty pessimistic view. Iraq is going to get better,” interjected U.S. Army Lt. Rusty Mason, whose platoon was patrolling Sixth Street that day and who stopped by Jawari’s house.

“People are giving their lives to improve the life here: American soldiers, other soldiers,” said Mason. Four soldiers from his platoon were killed not far from Sixth Street in March when an explosively formed projectile, one of the devices that U.S. forces say are supplied to Iraq’s sectarian militias by Iran, pierced the armor of their Bradley fighting vehicle. “Iraqis are giving their lives.”

“We saw nothing good,” Jawari shot back.

Her family fled the violence that engulfed Sixth Street last summer, when Sunni and Shiite militias battled each other in the streets of this neighborhood, Saidiyah. The women stayed with relatives in another part of Baghdad, and when they returned, they found their door broken and their computer and television missing.

The government said it would give all returning refugees a one-time payment of approximately $900 to help them resettle in their homes. But in Saidiyah, where almost 400 families have returned since February, only 285 have received the money, said Lt. Col. Johnnie Johnson, whose 4-64 armor battalion of the Fourth Brigade, Third Infantry Division, patrols the area. Jawari’s family was not among them.

The family depends on the government-issued ration cards, which all Baghdad residents receive to buy heavily subsidized rice, flour, oil, sugar and chickpeas. To pay for electricity, clothes and the rare treats of meat or fried fish—once every month or two—Jawari and her mother have been selling their jewelry. They also sold a plot of land they had owned in the country. Even on a diet of rice, eggs and pasta, the family spends between $250 and $400 a month.

Mason tried words of encouragement.

“Things will get better,” he said. “The security is already better. Hopefully, soon the power will get better in all of Iraq.”

Jawari shrugged.

“Under Saddam Hussein that’s what they used to tell us, too: This will get better, that will get better, the power will get better. And—nothing,” she showed Mason the empty palms of her hands. Then she added, in English, for emphasis: “Never.”

Low-cost clinic serves about 50 a day since opening

A month after the Amistad Community Health Center opened its doors to those who have trouble finding and paying for medical care, a constant stream of patients -- 50 or so a day -- is showing up looking for help.
The clinic, located at 1533 Brownlee Blvd., had a grand-opening party Thursday to celebrate its mission, which is to serve low-income patients who may not qualify for medical assistance. Patients pay for services on a sliding scale, taking into consideration things such as family size and income. No one is turned away.
The clinic operates with $1.8 million in federal grant money split over three years, along with state and private funding from nonprofit organizations such the Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas.
The clinic is a faith-based, nonprofit organization governed by a board of directors that targets more than 7,300 residents, including 200 homeless people who live in inner-city neighborhoods near the clinic. Both neighborhoods have overwhelmingly Hispanic populations, combined with high poverty levels and low levels of health insurance coverage.
During the past month, two full-time doctors, Dr. Lydia Graham and Dr. Robert Caro, have seen everything from diabetes and high blood pressure cases to pregnant women searching for prenatal care, said Caro, the center's medical director. They get help from two nurse practitioners, a dentist, dental hygienist and an outreach worker, all employed by the clinic.
Expansion plans include a pharmacy, which should be open this fall, and expanded services to include pediatrics and obstetrics and gynecology and additional physicians, executive director Orlando Gomez said.

Child advocates open office in Silver Spring

A gathering to celebrate the opening of a Silver Spring office for the Maryland-based Advocates for Children and Youth was held Monday afternoon, with U.S. Sen. Benjamin L. Cardin (D) speaking on the importance of the organization.

Advocates for Children and Youth was founded in 1987 as a group that worked on research and policy on behalf of the state’s families and children.
Its mission remains the same: to ensure children and families have access to quality education and health care, safe communities, and economic assistance.
Tiffany Knight, director for organizing at the Silver Spring office with the Advocates for Children and Youth, said the new office opened to increase efforts promoting the organization’s three-year ‘‘Maryland Can Do Better For Children” campaign.
‘‘Right now, a lot of people associate us with just Baltimore, but our campaign is for all of Maryland’s children,” Knight said.
Awards were also presented Monday to Vincent DeMarco, president of the Maryland Citizens’ Health Initiative and Del. Heather R. Mizeur (D-Dist. 20) of Silver Spring. State Sen. Ulysses Currie (D-Dist. 25) of Forestville did not attend but was also slated to be honored.
All three worked to expand health care insurance and access for children in Maryland during the 2008 session of the Maryland General Assembly, according to a news release from Cardin’s office.
The Silver Spring office is at 8720 Georgia Ave., Suite 303. Offices also operate out of Baltimore and Annapolis. For more information about Advocates for Children and Youth, visit www.acy.org, or call 301-585-5333.

Acupuncture

Most of us recognize acupuncture as a traditional Chinese approach to medicine that involves inserting tiny needles through the skin around different parts of the body for healing.
But what many may not realize is that there is an additional component: the use of hundreds of herbs many acupuncturists say have been essential in achieving a healthy balance.
“It's like a cleansing,” said acupuncture client Edith Torres. “If you're coming in for your migraine the herbs kind of help you protect your head from getting the headaches and the acupuncture just makes that extra ‘oomph’ for you.”
But while New York State awards degrees and licenses acupuncturists, there is no provision that actually allows them to prescribe herbs, even though it has been part of the practice for centuries.
Acupuncturists say it's a loophole that could potentially threaten their field, possibly leaving them open to malpractice and uncovered for liability insurance. It could also leave some patients vulnerable to practitioners who aren't fully trained.
Now a new bill, introduced by Assemblywoman Ellen Young of Queens is moving through Albany to help change that.
“It's all about keeping people safe and giving the authority to acupuncturists they deserve,” said Young. “That is to make suggestions or write formulas of herb medicine.”

“You can walk into any vitamin, herbal health food store on the planet and someone who has just graduated from high school can give you an opinion about what herbal remedy to take,” said Gina Lepore of the Pacific College of Oriental Medicine. “Our bill does not prevent that from happening. What our bill says is that as acupuncturists who are fully trained that you know we want to have this within our scope of practice.”
At the Pacific College of Oriental Medicine there are over 300 different kinds of herbs that students learn about that have lots of different functions and properties. So you can see why they say it's a vital part of their practice.
“There's endless combinations of these 300-plus herbs that properly arranged according to the formulas, some of which have been around for 4,000 years, there is no limit to what you can do to help restore balance and health to your patients,” said Pacific College faculty member Jeremy Pulsifier.
Young's bill would also include new standards for continued education and certification, which practitioners supporting the bill say can only boost the viability of a field that's never quite been viewed as mainstream.

EYE ON THE PIE: There is no joy in latest county data

Cynthia Cyphon called me for “insights” on the latest county statistics released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. “So what’s doing with these numbers?” she asked. “I see Hamilton County, the state’s wealthiest county, is not anymore.” I went out on the deck with my lapdog and my laptop. This was going to be a long phone conversation. “Cynthia, get your head around this,” I said. “Per-capita personal income is used widely as an indicator of economic wellbeing. That’s why you’re calling.” (I heard a grunt of assent from the other end.) “But we often forget what PCPI is. It’s a fraction where personal income is divided by population. Personal income includes wages and salaries, the income of proprietors, plus employer-provided health insurance, dividends and interest income, Social Security benefits, and other types of income. It reflects income from current production and excludes sales out of last year’s crops, capital gains or cashing in retirement accounts. It is not the same as taxable or disposable income.” “Yeah, yeah,” Cynthia said. “Just give me the headline stuff, not the footnotes.” “OK,” I said. “Boone County has replaced Hamilton as the state leader in PCPI. Where Indiana’s PCPI is 12.1-percent below the national average, Boone’s is almost 27-percent higher than the country’s, and Hamilton’s is right behind at 24-percent above the nation’s. Actually, Hamilton had the worst record in the state for PCPI growth over the past six years. It had an annual average 1.4-percent decrease, adjusted for inflation, compared to statewide growth of 0.6 percent and 1.2 percent for the United States.” “Good stuff,” Cynthia said. “Anytime the leader falls, most folks feel good.”

"Wait,” I said, “all is not as it seems. With an inflation-adjusted 3.8-percent annual growth rate for personal income from 2000 to 2006, Hamilton County was the secondfastest-growing county in the state.

“Boone led, at 4.0 percent. But Hamilton was also the state leader in population growth (5.3 percent). Here, Hendricks held second place at 3.6 percent. “Since PCPI is a fraction with population on the bottom, a fast-rising population will slow PCPI growth, while slow increases or declines in population can make PCPI grow rapidly. Hamilton County ‘suffered’ from a population growth rate that exceeded its personal income growth and thus had that 1.4-percent decline in PCPI. “Tell me more,” she implored. “Well,” I said ponderously, “In 2006, PCPI in Indiana grew 1.7 percent and in the nation 2.6 percent, after adjustment for inflation. Orange, Newton and Daviess counties led the state in growth of PCPI in 2006. Yet, for the five years ending in 2006, Orange County ranked 66th in the state, with no real PCPI growth.” “Fine,” Cynthia said. “Now get to the big finale.” I studied the numbers before saying, “In 2006, 27 Indiana counties had lower PCPI than in 2000. In 2006, seven of Indiana’s 92 counties had PCPI above the national average. In 2000, the number was nine; Bartholomew and Hendricks lost their honored positions. Put another way, 92 percent of Indiana’s counties have PCPI below the national average. On top of that, between 2000 and 2006, 72 Indiana counties lost ground compared to the nation, while only 20 gained on that average.” “So you’re saying?” Cynthia asked. “I’m saying goodbye. The numbers speak for themselves. Now I’ll collect the dog and go back under my rock,” I said, hanging up. She’ll call again, someday. •

What You Need to Know if Your Teen Wants Breast Implants

Is your younger teenage daughter struggling with low self-esteem because her breasts aren’t developing fast enough? Perhaps your older teenager is unhappy with small or asymmetrical breasts and fears they will never change. In today’s society, with so much peer pressure about looks and sexuality, and so many superficial rewards available to the ‘beautiful people’, it’s no surprise that teens are demanding breast augmentation surgery at younger and younger ages.
But experts warn that breast implants may be a permanent solution to a temporary problem, since most teen issues with breast size and shape are resolved as the girl matures. And, whereas most adults choose plastic surgery to stand out among their peers, teenagers ask for these procedures because they want to fit in. It’s important to talk honestly with your teen to find out what they’re really thinking.

According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, cosmetic surgeons performed 3,841 breast augmentation procedures on teenagers in 2003, a 24% jump from 2002. The Society recommends the surgery for females 18 years of age and older and cautions that breast augmentation surgery for teens is not a decision that should be taken lightly.
The downside
• The surgery itself carries risk, especially from the anesthesia• Additional surgery may be necessary within 5-10 years• Some women experience breast pain or hardness and nipple numbness• Breast implants do not last a lifetime• Removal of the implants may cause dimpling, wrinkling or puckering of breast tissue• Health insurance does not cover cosmetic procedures and may not cover corrective surgery post-implant.• Breast implants may interfere with mammography
While breast augmentation may indeed be a viable option for some young women, it is crucial that a reputable cosmetic surgeon takes extra time to meet with and counsel the teenager and her parents. Breasts do continue to develop well into the woman’s early twenties, making it nearly impossible to determine whether the teenager really needs breast augmentation.
Making the best of it
After consulting with a qualified plastic surgeon, you may have decided plastic surgery is right for your teen. How can you benefit the most from the experience?
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons offers these tips for a rewarding outcome:• The teenager must initiate the request. Parental support is important, but the teen's own desire for surgical improvement must be something they truly want and have wanted consistently over a long period of time.• The teenager must have realistic goals, appreciating the benefits and limitations of the surgery, and avoiding the fantasy that her whole life will magically change because of it.• The teenager must demonstrate sufficient maturity. Breast augmentation surgery is painful and there are rules of recovery that must be strictly followed. • Teens who are prone to riding the emotional roller coaster or who abuse drugs and alcohol or are being treated for clinical depression are poor candidates for surgery.
The most important part of choosing to go forward with cosmetic surgery is the surgeon you choose. He or she must be board-certified in plastic surgery and have hospital operating privileges despite the fact that most cosmetic procedures are done in the surgeon’s office.
It’s very important for teens and parents to discuss the procedure itself, the costs, the recovery period and whether insurance will cover any part of it. No matter how unhappy the teen may seem, plastic surgery is surgery, with all its inherent risks and complications, and is not something to be rushed into lightly.Dr. Howard Rosenberg of Mountain View, CA is a trained, board certified plastic surgeon with years of experience assisting women of all ages to achieve the look they want. He would be happy to meet with you and your teen to determine the best course of action. Contact Dr. Rosenberg at (650) 961-2652 to schedule your private consultation.