It’s a crazy day here in the CatBox. WWWendy did not co to Crater Lake, because between the wildfires and Trump* virus, virtually everything there is closed. She arrived late, because the visibility is terrible. She cut my hair and is now gooping, while I write. This is my only article today. Have a great weekend.
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today’s took me 3:05 (average 4:57). To do it, click here. How did you do?
US Cases:6,639,386 US Deaths: 197,473 Plus thousands of Trump’s* GOP murder victims Republicans are hiding from us
Short Takes:
From NY Times: Well before his move to the Department of Homeland Security, Brian Murphy had become known as an ambitious counterterrorism investigator at the F.B.I., determined and relentless. At times, though, colleagues chafed at what some saw as an overzealous disregard for bureaucratic rules.
All of those traits may have been at play this week when Mr. Murphy, a career law enforcement officer, became a whistle-blower.
The Department of Homeland Security was built after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, 19 years ago Friday, to keep federal, state and local governments coordinated on national security threats. But in his whistle-blower complaint, Mr. Murphy, the department’s former intelligence chief, said its senior leaders directed him to do the opposite: play down the primary national security threats of white supremacy and Russian election interference, thus distorting intelligence to mirror President Trump’s messaging.
The allegations, coming less than two months before Election Day, add to the growing evidence that Mr. Trump has prioritized his own political goals over the word of his intelligence officials, and that the Homeland Security Department has become an instrument of his personal will. Mr. Murphy’s complaint reflects the current turmoil at homeland security and is another front in Mr. Trump’s battle with the government’s intelligence agencies.
Barrf strikes again! That is far worse than acting as Trump’s* personal lawyer! RESIST!!
From YouTube (MSNBC Channel): Sen. Merkley On West Coast Wildfires: It ‘Puts On Exclamation Point’ On Climate Catastrophe
Criminal Fuhrer Trump* is happy to help kill Oregonians with his storm troopers, the GOP Gestapo, and he loves it when wildfires or Trump* virus kills Oregonians. Could that be because Oregon leads the way? RESIST!!
From YouTube (a blast of past protest): JOAN BAEZ ~ What Have They Done To The Rain ~
Monologue – With a live audience, no less. A lot about smoke and fires. A nod to 9/11. Ad an accurate analysis of what Trump* has in common with FDR.
Peter Strzok – I could tell him that Democrats are never going to cozy up to authoritarians, regardless of left-right or red-blue. I think that Strzok is correct that Trump* was/is not a mastermind. If he doesn’t think that Putin was/is, however, I would disagree. Not to promote Trump*, no. But to create and maintain division among Americans, yes.
New Rule – OK, this is a new rule I can really get on board with. I just hope this “new-found respect” translates into votes when school bonds are on the ballot. (Also, I hope Bill realizes – but I’ll bet he doesn’t – that the concept that parents should be siding with the teacher is not necessarily applicable unless the family is lily white. Or that screaming, demanding maniacs are not suffereng from too much self esteem. In fact, Bill probably doesn’t know what self esteem is. Just a thought) (And don’t ask me why this one has CC and the other two don’t.)
Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”
I feel the need to share this because, although unrelated to current events, it is profoundly accurate – and it is something I never expected to see, hear, read, in my lifetime. It is jaw-dropping.
================================================================
A doctor’s open apology to those fighting overweight and obesity
Doctors have told people who are overweight to exercise more and eat less, when in fact their overweight may be due to genetic or other factors that exercise won’t change. UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity, CC BY-SA
Obesity has emerged as a significant risk factor for poor outcomes in patients infected with COVID-19. Based on how doctors and others in health care have previously treated patients with obesity or overweight conditions, my guess is that many will respond by declaring: “Well, it’s their own fault for being overweight!”
In the spirit of recognizing that people who struggle with weight loss include our family and friends, let me propose a different sentiment.
To those who we have shamed for having excess body weight and/or failing diets: “You were right, and we are sorry. After giving you undoable tasks, we ridiculed you. When you tried to tell us, we labeled you as weak and crazy. Because we didn’t understand what you were experiencing, we looked down on you. We had never felt it ourselves. We did not know. And for that, we apologize.”
This is just one version of the apology we owe our fellow human beings whom we told to lose weight using diet and exercise. Then, when it didn’t work, we blamed them for our treatment plan failures and smothered their feedback with prejudice and persecution.
As a physician and researcher, I have worked in this space for many years. I have witnessed firsthand the life-altering power of preexisting ideas, judgments and stereotypes. I have seen how unfounded, negative ideas are woven through virtually every interaction that those struggling with weight loss endure when seeking help.
And there are tens of millions of them. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention classifies more than 70% of U.S. adults as overweight, and more than 40% as obese. Those numbers continue to climb, and even when some manage to lose weight, they almost always gain it back over time.
Rash judgments
To illustrate, imagine that I am your doctor. You have a body rash (which represents the condition of being overweight or obese), and you make an appointment with me to discuss a treatment plan.
During your visit, my office staff uses stigmatizing language and nonverbal signals that make it clear we are annoyed at the idea of dealing with another rash person. We invoke a set of assumptions that dictate the tone of our relationship, including the notions that you are lazy or ignorant or both. You will sense my disgust, which will make you uncomfortable.
Unfortunately, health care providers commonly treat patients who struggle with weight loss by assigning stereotypes, snap judgments and ingrained negative attributes – including laziness, noncompliance, weakness and dishonesty.
After this uncomfortable exchange, I will prescribe a treatment program for your rash and explain that it’s quite straightforward and easy to use. I will point you to several resources with pictures of smiling people with beautiful skin who never had a rash to emphasize how wonderful your outcome will be. “It’s just a matter of sticking to it,” I will say.
Back at home, you are excited to start treatment. However, you quickly realize that putting on the cream is unbearable. It burns; your arms and legs feel like they’re on fire shortly after you apply the treatment. You shower and wash off the cream.
A dismal conversation
After a few days, you try again. Same result. Your body will not accept the cream without intolerable burning and itching. You return to my office, and we have the following conversation:
You: Doctor, I cannot stick to this plan. My body cannot tolerate the cream.
Me: This is exactly why doctors do not want to deal with rash people. I’m giving you the treatment and you won’t stick to it. I put the cream on myself every morning without an issue.
You: But you don’t have a rash! Putting this cream on when you have a rash is different than putting it on clear skin. I do want to get rid of my rash, but I cannot tolerate this cream.
Me: If you don’t want to follow the treatment, that’s up to you. But it’s not the cream that needs changing. It is your attitude toward sticking with it.
This exchange illustrates prejudical behavior, bias and a disconnect between a provider’s perceptions and a patient’s experience.
For someone who wants to lose weight, the experience of a diet and exercise prescription is not the same as for a lean person on the same program. Perceiving another person’s experience as the same as one’s own when circumstances are different fuels prejudice and bias.
That night, though, you can’t help but wonder: “Is something wrong with me? Maybe my genes or thyroid or something? The cream seems so fun and easy for everyone else.”
At this point, the blame unconscionably lands on the patient. Despite an undeniable explosion of this rash, and abysmal treatment adherence rates while we have been touting the cream, we stubbornly maintain it works. If the rash is expanding, and hundreds of millions of people are failing treatment or relapsing every day, well – it’s their own fault!
As time goes on, you feel increasingly discouraged and depressed because of this untenable situation. Frustration wears on your sense of optimism and chips away at your happy moments. You have this rash and you can’t tolerate the treatment plan, but no one believes you. They judge you, and say you choose not to use the cream because you lack willpower and resolve. You overhear their conversations: “It’s her own fault,” they say. “If that were me, I would just use the d#$% cream.”
This is the very definition of prejudice: an opinion, often negative, directed toward someone and related to something that the individual does not control. Although it has been extensively demonstrated that the causes for overweight and obesity are multifactorial, the myth that it’s the patient’s fault is still widely accepted. This perception of controllability leads to the assignment of derogatory stigma.
A setup for failure
That evening you sit alone. You think there’s not a single person on the planet who believes your body won’t tolerate this treatment. Society believes you brought this on yourself to begin with; there doesn’t seem to be a way out.
We have driven those with overweight and obesity conditions to this place far too many times. We have set them up to take the fall for our failed treatment approaches. When they came to us with the truth about tolerability, we loudly discredited them and said they were mentally weak, noncompliant or lazy.
So where do we go from here? If we agree to stop stigmatizing, stereotyping and blaming patients for our treatment failures, and we accept that our current nonsurgical paradigm is ineffective – what takes its place?
For starters, we need a new approach, founded on respect and dignity for patients. A fresh lens of acceptance and suspended judgment will allow us to shift our focus toward treatments for the body, rather than “mind over matter,” which is a concept we use for no other medical condition. A perspective based in objectivity and equality will allow caregivers to escape the antiquated blaming approach and perceive those with overweight or obese conditions in the same light as those with other diseases. Only then will we finally shift the paradigm.
================================================================ Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, I point out that The Conversation operates on a Creative Commons license (material is free to share, with attribution), and I hope everyone will feel free to share this. I wish someone would share it with Bill Maher (and then we would see how actually committed he is to science over prejudices, wouldn’t we.) You ladies can spread it too. Thanks.
Early this evening I came across some low-hanging fruit for a post, so I decided to transform into a “Friday Fun” post.
For those of you who didn’t watch last night’s opening NFL game pitting my Super Bowl KC Chiefs Champs against the Houston Texans, you most likely missed that Chief’s Head Coach Andy Reid fogged up Face Shield was the most talked about aspect of the game.
It was like a Carl Sandburg tribute:
The fog comes
on little cat feet.
It sits looking
over harbor and city
on silent haunches
and then moves on.
Naturally, the Twitterverse decided to create a Meme of that …
The Lincoln Project. Breaking a tradition of suspending political advertising on 9/11 out of respect for the dead … because this ad pays that respect.
Meidas Touch also includes paying respects in their ad.
VoteVets has made a lovely ad for Doug Jones
This is for everyone who is condemning Bob Woodward for not revealing the tapes at the time that he made them. Journalists do know a little something about people – at least the good ones do.
I often see remarks in comments and even in articles to the tue of “Democrats need to act more like Republicans,” and I invariably cringe. Republicans are so corrupt! But they use their corruption to run right over us, and that does need to stop. This is not a new problem (only the names “Democrat” and “Republican” are new, and, though this will come as a surprise to many if not most people, there is a textbook to teach nice people how to prevail against the corrupt while staying as nice as possible and with a minimum of corruption. That textbook is “The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli. Yes, I know, you’ve been trained to think of him as pure evil and his advice as pure corruption. Two groups have a vested interest in keeping you believing that: purity freaks, and Republicans. I know when I first read it I was astonished at how free from malice it was. Here’s a better explanation than I can give.
This is a repetition of the editorials I published in 2011, 2014, 2017, 2018 and 2019 with alterations to bring it up to date. Nineteen years ago this morning, the first airliner hit the tower, as I was about to leave for work. When I arrived, I learned about the second hit. My duties that day were to contact top executives of Fortune 500 companies headquartered in New York on behalf of our client, a major developer of computer operating systems, to arrange site visits and one-on-one executive interviews for our client’s research team. What timing! I felt uncomfortable calling, but the account exec’s assistant, an airhead and a Republican, ordered me to go to work. Many of my executive contacts were in the Twin Towers. I got on the telephone. Nobody was answering, and many of the lines were out of order. I did get through and spoke to a man in one of the towers above the fire, who knew he would not survive. He said he couldn’t dial out and gave me his home number. He asked me to call his wife and tell her he loved her. I did. She was hysterical. Who could blame her. That shook me up so much that I went to the account executive’s office, and told him I was done calling New York for the day. He asked me what idiot had told me to call into New York under these circumstances. His assistant changed the subject. Because of that experience, I cannot think of 9/11 without my heart going out to the people who lost loved ones that tragic day, and I consider it imperative to do whatever we can, within reason, to prevent a reoccurrence. One failing, in that regard, is that we often ask who and how, but all too seldom, ask why. So as we remember the events of 9/11/2001, perhaps it may help if we consider the other 9/11s, 9/11/1973 and 9/11/2020.Twenty eight years earlier, the roles were reversed. Instead of being attacked, the US had arranged and was assisting an attack to overthrow the democratically elected government of Chile, and the installation of one of the most infamous dictators of the twentieth century, Augusto Pinochet. An article by Peter Kornblug from August 2003 describes and explains those events.
On September 14, 1970, a deputy to then-National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger wrote him a memo, classified SECRET/SENSITIVE, arguing against covert operations to block the duly elected Chilean socialist Salvador Allende from assuming the presidency. “What we propose is patently a violation of our own principles and policy tenets,” noted Viron Vaky. “If these principles have any meaning, we normally depart from them only to meet the gravest threat to us., e.g. to our survival. Is Allende a mortal threat to the U.S.?” Vaky asked. “It is hard to argue this.” Kissinger ignored this advice. The next day he participated in a now-famous meeting where President Nixon instructed CIA Director Richard Helms to “save Chile” by secretly fomenting a coup to prevent Allende’s inauguration. When those covert operations failed, Kissinger goaded Nixon into instructing the entire national security bureaucracy “on opposing Allende” and destabilizing his government. “Election of Allende as president of Chile poses one of [the] most serious challenges ever faced in this hemisphere,” says a newly declassified briefing paper Kissinger gave to Nixon two days after Allende’s inauguration. “Your decision as to what to do may be most historic and difficult foreign affairs decision you will have to make this year…. If all concerned do not understand that you want Allende opposed as strongly as we can, result will be steady draft toward modus vivendi approach.” Had Washington adopted a “modus vivendi approach,” it is possible that Chileans, indeed citizens around the world, would not be solemnly commemorating the thirtieth anniversary of the coup that brought Gen. Augusto Pinochet to power. In the United States, the meaning of this anniversary is, understandably, overshadowed by the shock and tragedy of our own 9/11. But Chile reminds us that the topics of debate on US foreign policy today–pre-emptive strikes, regime change, the arrogance of unilateral intervention, unchecked covert action and secrecy and dishonesty in government–are not new. From the thousands of formerly classified US documents released over the past several years, the picture that emerges strikes some haunting parallels with the news of the day. Chile, it must be recalled, constitutes a classic example of a pre-emptive strike–a set of operations launched well before Salvador Allende set foot in office. Nixon ordered the CIA on September 15, 1970, to “make the economy scream” and to foment a military move to block Allende from being inaugurated six weeks later, in November; the Chilean leader had yet to formulate or authorize a single policy detrimental to US interests. “What happens over [the] next 6-10 months will have ramifications far beyond US-Ch[ilean] relations,” Kissinger predicted in a dire warning to Nixon only forty-eight hours after Allende actually took office. “Will have effect on what happens in rest of LA and developing world; our future position in hemisphere; on larger world picture…even effect our own conception of what our role in the world is.” As in the distorted threat assessment on Iraq, this was sheer speculation–unsupported, indeed contradicted, by US intelligence. In August 1970 CIA, State and Defense Department analysts had determined that “the US has no vital national interests within Chile,” and that the world “military balance of power would not be significantly altered” if Allende came to power… [emphasis added]
For many years, the United States has treated the rest of the world, particularly third world nations, as the private reserve of an American economic empire, repeatedly using force, usually covertly, any time a nation had the audacity to suggest that their resources should benefit their own people, not US corporations. Neither party is blameless, but the vast majority and most heinous of such actions occurred during Republican administrations. In the twentieth century, the United States overthrew more democratically elected governments and installed more dictators than any other nation ever has. No nation can stand toe-to-toe against the US on the battlefield, so guerilla tactics are the only option available to nations who would oppose us.We should also remember that there would be no such thing as Al Qaeda, had not Republicans under Reagan financed it’s formation to perform terrorist attacks against the USSR.I do not hate this country. I love the USA enough to insist that we actually practice the principles we claim to profess. These are the lessons we need to learn to prevent future terrorists attacks against the US. If we practice oppression, we guarantee resistance. If we practice partnership, we will get cooperation. We need to stop trying to control other countries by force, To forestall terrorism, we must stop participating in and supporting terrorism ourselves. We will be seen as hypocrites if we oppose ethnic cleansing by ISIL, another Republican creation, but continue to support ethnic cleansing by Zionists.For the last lesson, let’s return to the story with which I began. Shortly after the account executive agreed that I was done for the day, the company shut down for the rest of the day too. Several of us gathered around the TV in the lunch room. Knowing that I am politically involved, coworkers asked me what I thought was going to happen. I told them that I thought Bush would use the attack as an excuse to do two things: to invade Iraq and to curtail civil liberties guaranteed under our Constitution. The last lesson is this. If we adopt the tactics of evil to oppose evil, Republican tactics, we become no different than the evil we oppose.Even if we do all that, we must still be vigilant. Sadly there are forces in pseudo-Islam that pursue hatred against America, just as there are forces in pseudo-Christianity that pursue hatred against all who fail to obey their dogma, both for their own respective right-wing political agendas. The latter are the far more dangerous, both at home and abroad.
Now they have Trump skyrocketing their hatred to unprecedented extremes, and the last other 9/11 is today. Criminal Fuhrer Trump*, rabid talibangelical pseudo-Christian Vice Fuhrer Pence, and the rest of the Republican Reich are the terrorists attacking the United States in an attempt to replace our government with a permanent Fifth Reich that is National Socialist and plutocratic. If they succeed, the US that we love will be gone forever. What are YOU going to do about it?
Osama bin Laden murdered over 6,000 Americans on 9/11/2001. Barack Obama sent Seal Team Six to track him down. They killed him. What do we do with Donald Trump*, who has murdered over 196,000 Americans? I am not advocating killing Trump*. I cannot condone capital punishment, even though no American has deserved it more. However, life imprisonment with no possibility of parole is the minimum acceptable end for Trump*!
It’s a busy day, here in the CatBox. Debora just called and she’ll be here in a few minutes. She just left, and for a dead man, I’m in good shape. I’m still very tired, and my back hasn’t recovered from Wednesday. However, I’m in the saddle today, because my 9/11 article is too important not to publish. Tomorrow, WWWendy is coming very early so she go to Crater Lake in the Cascades. Therefore, please expect no more than a late Personal Update. JD, if Bill Maher publishes tonight, would you please cover it? TGIF!
Jig Zone Puzzle:
Today’s took me 3:15 (average 4:30). To do it, click here. How did you do?
This is about 18 miles from me. Here it isn’t quite that bad. RESIST!!
From YouTube (CNN Channel): How Fox News covered the Woodward recordings of President Trump
Trump has argued that he did not want to cause panic. That’s like yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre. That’s a lie, because the primary tactic of Trump’s* campaign creating panic. Furthermore, when the crowded theatre really was on fire, Trump* yelled, “The fire is a hoax! Stay in your seats!” Now the Republican Reichsministry of Propaganda, Faux Noise, and the Republican Reich are piling on the BS. RESIST!!
From YouTube (a blast of past protest): Eric Burdon & The Animals Sky Pilot
Yesterday I tripped over the cat and took a tumble ending w/ a face plant.
My right knee was quite painful getting up, but I cleaned up my facial abrasions first. Then my sweatpants rubbing against my right knee became so painful I took a look. My R knee was HUGE. So I immediately began RICE treatment (Rest, Ice, Compression & Elevations).
I had my scheduled PT appointment this morning, so I had Rashad take a look. He’s concerned that there might be a Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PCL) injury, and asked me to contact my PCP.
I took pictures of my knee and abrasions, and sent them along w/ a detailed history of the injury to my PCP via the Portal. (I LOVE having portals!)
Haven’t heard back from her, but needing to keep my leg elevated has really cramped any computer work. So I’ll be skipping this week.
If I come across a brief/short humorous piece, I’ll share it. But I’m going to be scarce for a few days.
Had Washington adopted a “modus vivendi approach,” it is possible that Chileans, indeed citizens around the world, would not be solemnly commemorating the thirtieth anniversary of the coup that brought Gen. Augusto Pinochet to power. In the United States, the meaning of this anniversary is, understandably, overshadowed by the shock and tragedy of our own 9/11. But Chile reminds us that the topics of debate on US foreign policy today–pre-emptive strikes, regime change, the arrogance of unilateral intervention, unchecked covert action and secrecy and dishonesty in government–are not new. From the thousands of formerly classified US documents released over the past several years, the picture that emerges strikes some haunting parallels with the news of the day. Chile, it must be recalled, constitutes a classic example of a pre-emptive strike–a set of operations launched well before Salvador Allende set foot in office. Nixon ordered the CIA on September 15, 1970, to “make the economy scream” and to foment a military move to block Allende from being inaugurated six weeks later, in November; the Chilean leader had yet to formulate or authorize a single policy detrimental to US interests. “What happens over [the] next 6-10 months will have ramifications far beyond US-Ch[ilean] relations,” Kissinger predicted in a dire warning to Nixon only forty-eight hours after Allende actually took office. “Will have effect on what happens in rest of LA and developing world; our future position in hemisphere; on larger world picture…even effect our own conception of what our role in the world is.” As in the distorted threat assessment on Iraq, this was sheer speculation–unsupported, indeed contradicted, by US intelligence. In August 1970 CIA, State and Defense Department analysts had determined that “the US has no vital national interests within Chile,” and that the world “military balance of power would not be significantly altered” if Allende came to power… [emphasis added]
