Category Archives: medical news

medical news

Planned Parenthood video is grim; agency needs to survive

I’ll admit that the video showing the discussion of fetal tissue removal is grim in the extreme.

The video, shot surreptitiously in Colorado, is now being used to bludgeon Planned Parenthood over its head. Republicans in Congress want to defund the agency and are threatening to shut down the government this fall if a budget comes forward with money to help fund the agency.

Let us hold on a minute … or maybe two or three. I know my views on this subject are going to anger folks.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/01/big-labor-defends-planned-parenthood-calls-attacks-extremist-politically/

Mention the very words “Planned Parenthood” in places such as, say, the Texas Panhandle and individuals go apoplectic.

The agency “murders babies,” people say. Its leadership should be arrested, tried and convicted for crimes against the unborn, they contend.

The video that’s now becoming part of the GOP presidential field talking point agenda shows something that no one wants to see and/or hear; count me as one who dislikes hearing the audio. However, what’s transpiring in the video is legal. It’s also a tiny, infinitesimal part of Planned Parenthood’s larger mission — which is to provide medical counseling and advice for women. The advice covers far more than just terminating pregnancies. It involves screenings to protect against cancer or STDs and counseling for women who are considering an abortion.

None of this matters, though, to those who wish to use the video to make political hay.

Abortion remains — without question, in my view — the single most divisive domestic policy issue in the United States. However, as some prominent politicians have noted in the past, the aim ought to be to keep it legal, but make it as rare as humanly possible.

And do we need to use this video as a cudgel to batter the entire federal government? In my mind, the answer should be a clear-cut “no!”

I wish I’d never seen the video that’s become all the rage — and I mean “rage” in the pejorative sense. People are angry at its contents. I am disturbed by them, too.

However, let’s put this into some context and try to examine whether it represents all of Planned Parenthood’s mission.

medical news, political news

Senate fails — one more time — to repeal Obamacare

2 Comments

When, oh when, are congressional Republicans going to wake up to the fact that the Affordable Care Act is here to stay?

The U.S. Senate tried once again — and failed once again — to repeal the ACA by seeking to tie it to a transportation funding bill. The vote split on party lines, with eight senators not voting.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/obamacare-repeal-vote-fails-in-senate-120638.html?hp=l2_4

Will this failed effort mean the end of future efforts? I am not holding my breath.

As Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., noted, the Senate now has voted 55 times to end the ACA. Fifty-five votes have failed. Meanwhile, she said, 20 million Americans have health insurance who didn’t have it before.

The U.S. Supreme Court — comprising a Republican-appointed conservative majority — has upheld the ACA in two rulings, the second of which brought a suggestion from GOP senators that we ought to make court justices stand for retention, which of course would require a fundamental change in the way the founding fathers established out system of government.

So much for “strict constructionist” views of the judiciary.

No one on either side of the political aisle believes the ACA is perfect. Yes, it has some flaws. Repeal of the law, though, isn’t the answer, particularly when those who want to repeal it keep failing to produce anything approaching a suitable alternative.

So, senators, let’s end the charade. Understand and accept — finally — that the Affordable Care Act is the law. Make it better if you wish. Failing that, then live with it.

medical news, political news

What happened to the Gipper’s 11th commandment?

2 Comments

regean71615

Republicans these days fall all over themselves to wrap themselves in the mantle of the late Ronald Reagan, 40th president of the United States and one of the truly “transformative figures” of 20th century American politics.

OK, so the benefits of the transformation can be debated, and they certainly have been since Jan. 20, 1981, when the Gipper took office after thumping President Jimmy Carter in that historic landslide.

But why have we forgotten one of Reagan’s most cherished mantras? It’s the 11th commandment, in which the president urged his fellow Republicans to “not speak ill of other Republicans.”

Welcome to today’s reality, Mr. President — wherever you are.

One of your political descendants, Donald Trump, has tossed the 11th commandment into the crapper.

He’s trashed Jeb Bush for being a “lightweight,” Lindsey Graham for being an “idiot,” Mitt Romney for being a “loser,” John McCain for not being a real war hero, Rick Perry for wearing glasses in an effort to “make him look smart.”

There will be others who’ll receive verbal grenades from Trump.

And yet …

With all of that embarrassment spewing out of Trump’s mouth, he continues to enjoy relatively high poll ratings among all the GOP candidates running in 2016.

I find it impossible to believe that the Trump supporters actually want to disinherit the legacy that President Reagan left behind. However, by continuing to support this clown, that’s precisely what they’re doing.

Ronald Reagan sought to build a stronger Republican Party, partly by encouraging GOP pols to refrain from tearing down their fellow Republicans. He wanted a positive image to carry them through.

The strategy worked, more or less.

Now comes Donald Trump to rewrite the rules as he sees fit.

It’s a new day, yes?

medical news, military news, national news

Shooter was a drugged-up nut case?

The man who killed those five U.S. servicemen in Chattanooga, Tenn., now appears to have been a disturbed fellow who might have had a drug problem.

Police killed Mohammad Abdulazeez after he gunned down four Marines and a sailor.

CHATTANOOGA SHOOTER: ON ANTIDEPRESSANTS, SLEEPING PILLS, MUSCLE RELAXANTS

He was a Muslim, which of course brought out the usual calls for doing such things as banning all Muslims from entering the United States.

However, the FBI has not yet found a single terrorist link to the young man. What’s been learned instead is that he was a deeply troubled fellow with a history of emotional trauma and drug abuse.

Indeed, his medical condition sounded like it could be anyone capable of doing what he did.

It’s depressing enough that someone would kill five American servicemen in cold blood. It’s made even worse when we start jumping to conclusions that seek to intensify an already-intense worldwide situation involving international terrorists.

Abdulazeez likely wasn’t a terrorist. Yes, he committed a despicable act. However, until we find evidence that he was involved with terrorist organizations, we ought to stop the demagoguery until we collect all the facts.

legal news, medical news

Obamacare upheld … once again

Federal court rulings aren’t supposed to be viewed as bipartisan or partisan, given that federal judges technically aren’t politicians.

They hold these jobs for life and, thus, are able to rule without regard to party affiliation. That’s how it’s supposed to go, if I’m to assume correctly.

However, today’s ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the federal subsidies that were one of the keys to the Affordable Care Act, must be seen as a bipartisan victory for the ACA, aka Obamacare.

The ruling was a 6-3 affirmation of the act, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy joining the court’s liberal wing. Roberts was appointed to the court by President George W. Bush; Kennedy was selected by the late President Reagan, the patron saint of the modern conservative movement.

So, there you have it. The ACA remains intact. The Supreme Court, which the Constitution established as the final ruling on the constitutionality of federal law, has upheld the subsidies.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-upholds-nationwide-health-care-law-subsidies/ar-AAc77eU

It’s a huge victory for President Obama. As The Associated Press reported: “Nationally, 10.2 million people have signed up for health insurance under the Obama health overhaul. That includes the 8.7 million people who are receiving an average subsidy of $272 a month to help pay their insurance premiums.”

Denying the subsidies would have cost millions of Americans their health insurance obtained under the ACA. Roberts wrote in his majority opinion: “Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them.”

It is my sincere hope that we can end this foolish effort to overturn, revoke, discard or otherwise gut what’s now becoming — with each court decision — established law.

Tinker with it? Make it better? Sure. There have been few, if any, landmark laws that have been perfect from the moment they receive the president’s signature.

Enough, already, with these court challenges!

 

legal news, medical news, national news, political news

POTUS vs. SCOTUS over ACA

President Barack Obama has chided the Supreme Court over its decision to hear a case involving the Affordable Care Act.

Some critics, of course, suggest the criticism is out of bounds, that the president is trying to “bully” the nine justices who could strike down a key provision in the ACA. Bully those men and women? I don’t think so.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-congress-fix-health-law-court-rules-against-071508891–politics.html#

Obama says the court was wrong to take up a case in the first place. The case, to be ruled on perhaps in just a matter of days, involves the legality of the federal subsidies used to help pay for Americans’ health care. An estimated 6.4 million Americans’ health insurance policies are at risk if the court strikes down the subsidy.

Now the president has declared the ACA to be a “reality,” it is law and it is part of the American fabric of providing health insurance to those who need it.

Is he right to challenge the court? Of course he is.

Just as critics chide the president for ignoring the separation of powers contained in the Constitution, they ignore the obvious notion that the separation argument goes the other direction. By that I mean that the judiciary, as a co-equal branch of government, isn’t immune from criticism from another branch of government. Indeed, the legislative branch — Congress — hardly is shy about criticizing the executive and the judiciary when either of those branches of government steer in what lawmakers suggest is the “wrong direction.”

Where the president misfired, in my view, in his criticism of the Supreme Court was when he did so during his 2010 State of the Union speech. With several court members sitting in front of him, surrounded by other administration and military officials, not to mention a packed chamber full of lawmakers, the president said the court was wrong in its Citizens United ruling that took the shackles off of campaign contributors. Whatever criticism the court deserved, that was neither the time or the place to deliver it.

So, the fight goes on between Barack Obama the nine men and women who hold the fate of his signature domestic policy achievement in their hands.

 

legal news, medical news, national news

What if Obamacare gets stricken?

You’ve heard it said that one should be careful about they wish for, that they just might get it.

Congressional Republicans have been wishing for an end to the Affordable Care Act. The U.S. Supreme Court might grant them their wish. Then again, the court might uphold the ACA.

But if the court strikes down the subsidies set aside in the law and deprives an estimated 6.5 million Americans their health insurance, who do you suppose is going to feel the heat the most? I’m guessing it’ll be Republicans who will have to come up with a plan of their own to restore the lost health insurance that so many millions of Americans have been able to obtain under Obamacare.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/244369-gop-fears-it-will-win-obamacare-court-battle

The Hill reports that a court victory might be the GOP’s worst nightmare.

And get this, according to The Hill: “The politics of the King vs. Burwell case are extremely treacherous and tricky for Republicans because if the subsidies are thrown out by the court, Republicans are in the position of having to create a fix that would be seen as a problem by their most conservative supporters,” said John Ullyot, a GOP strategist and former senior Senate aide.”

So, key Republicans are going to be whipsawed. Their base doesn’t particularly like federally mandated anything, let alone health insurance. They’ll fight with GOP leaders who want to repair the ACA. Meanwhile, those 6.5 million Americans will see their health insurance evaporate. Many of them live in states that will become key battleground states for senators seeking re-election.

The court will hand its ruling down any day now. President Obama has criticized the court for even agreeing to hear this case; he believes the case doesn’t even merit a court decision, that the law is ironclad, given that the court already has upheld it once already prior to the 2012 presidential election.

Whatever the court decides — and I’m far from willing to concede that it’ll strip out the ACA subsidies — at least one side of the aisle is going to go ape.

Heck, if the court rules in favor of Republicans, we might see both sides of the aisle lapse into catatonic states.

 

 

 

 

medical news, Sports news

End the Jenner gold medal idiocy

Can we please stop, cease, terminate this ridiculously idiotic notion launched by a Fort Worth woman to revoke the gold medal awarded to the winner of the 1976 Olympic decathlon?

Jennifer Bradford has launched an online petition that seeks revocation of the gold medal awarded to Bruce Jenner after he won the decathlon at the Montreal Olympic Games.

Why, you ask?

Bradford said she wants to support the “transgender community” because Bruce Jenner is now Caitlyn Jenner. Bruce the man has become Caitlyn the woman. The petition was posted to a website called change.org and Bradford is asking the International Olympic Committee to revoke the gold medal.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/more-sports/online-petition-wants-ioc-to-revoke-jenners-gold-medal/ar-BBkFJDg

Give me a break. Pardon me while I mince no words.

This is about as stupid a notion as I can imagine.

Bruce Jenner was fully a man when he won the decathlon, becoming the “world’s greatest athlete.”

His transition to womanhood only has occurred with the past year or so — give or take.

The petitioner argues that the only way the petition would be invalid would be if it can be proved “that Bruce Jenner and Caitlyn Jenner are two entirely different people.”

Um, Ms. Bradford? I’ve got news for you. They are.

Now, please return to your anonymity and stop making a spectacle of yourself.

 

medical news, Sports news

Video is funny … and also tragic

This video popped up on YouTube.

The first time I saw it, I laughed out loud.

I’ve seen comedians impersonate Muhammad Ali. Billy Crystal’s perhaps is the most famous. But then I watched this brief snippet, featuring the late Jerry Quarry, a former heavyweight fighter — and a very good one at that.

So help me, I didn’t know Quarry had that kind of wit and charm.

Then my thoughts turned to what happened to Jerry Quarry. He became terribly disabled because of the profession he chose to pursue. Quarry won a lot of fights during his fighting days. He also lost some fights. And in all of them he took a lot of punishment. To the head. The result of that punishment resulted in Quarry’s death.

He suffered complications from something called dementia pugilistica. He was punch drunk. He suffered irreparable brain damage.

Another YouTube video, which is attached to the link shown on this blog, shows Quarry being inducted into the Boxing Hall of Fame. He didn’t understand the event where he was being honored. He needed help from his brother to dress, to feed himself, to do anything.

I once was a huge fan of boxing. I once couldn’t get enough of the Friday Night Fights. I cheered for Jerry Quarry and occasionally against him, such as when he fought Muhammad Ali twice — in 1970 and again in 1972.

The price that these men pay saddens me. Yes, I know they choose to do this for a living.

Seeing this video and knowing how it all ended for the man it features offers a serious lesson to anyone who wants to take up this line of work.

 

medical news, political news

Do as he says, not does, on abortion

Here’s an item that might cause you to rethink your view of the world’s most glaring example of political hypocrisy.

U.S. Rep. Scott DesJarlais, R-Tenn., once was a physician in his hometown of Jasper, Tenn. He was married to a woman who obtained two abortions, reportedly on Dr. DesJarlais’s advice and counsel.

Then the congressman, who’s served in the House since 2011, voted “yes” on a bill that makes it illegal in this country for women to have an abortion after the 20-week period of their pregnancy.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/05/16/congressman-who-advised-ex-wife-to-seek-abortion-votes-for-late-term-abortion-ban/?tid=sm_tw

His staff calls him “100-percent pro-life” and said his congressional voting record reflects that view.

Fine.

The congressman’s spokesman said he’s “always advocated for pro-life values.”

Always? Even when he counseled his wife to obtain an abortion? The spokesman didn’t say whether either abortion occurred after the 20th week of pregnancy.

This dichotomy cuts to the heart of why this particular issue is so troublesome for so many Americans. It’s one thing to pontificate from positions of power — such as from Capitol Hill — about what people should do when faced with these most emotionally charged decisions. It’s quite another when you’re faced with making them yourself or when asked to provide guidance for those with whom you are closest.

The Washington Post story attached to this blog post also notes that divorce papers released during DesJarlais’s re-election campaign in 2012 showed he had multiple affairs with patients, co-workers and drug company representatives while he was practicing medicine. Voters in his House district re-elected him anyway — twice, in fact.

Lawmakers’ lives are open books. They make laws that we all must follow and it’s fair to inquire about the background of those who cast these important votes — even when they reveal the harsh reality that some of them don’t always live by the values they preach to others.