I am struggling with the upcoming inauguration in Washington, D.C., and I
know there are others going through similar misgivings. I wonder how many. And
of those who do have misgivings, I wonder how many actually feel, like I do,
that this inauguration is illegitimate, a sham, and an affront to American
democracy. It comes as the dramatic finale to a flawed election, the results of
which I cannot accept. A bad case of sour grapes or just a stubborn diehard? I’m
not sure exactly where I fit, but I don’t feel all that sour, just disappointed
and wanting to make damn sure that not another election goes by in this country
that feels as corrupted as the last two. In that case, I guess I am just a
diehard American who believes in democracy.
There is a part of me that was surprised by the result of the 2004 elections
and another part of me that was not. The massive turnouts during the Democratic
primaries pointed, at least in my mind, to the fact that those who voted for
Gore in 2000 were being joined by an even larger majority to ensure that George
W. and his cohorts would not, once again, seize power and lead us down a steep,
more dangerous slope for another four years.
Waking up on Nov. 3 I wondered if my miscalculations were just a sign that I
was just another idealistic liberal out of touch with the mainstream.
Reluctantly, I have tried to accept that based on what appears to most as the
certifiable vote count that over 50 percent of the American people wanted to
“stay the course� with George W. and his administration. I am not convinced of
this, though, just as many who are more in the know than I are not. Regardless
of the numbers, however, I am not sure that those who voted to have this
administration back in knew for whom or what they were voting.
I had hoped that there were more thinking, reasonable people in the U.S. who
would be able to discern between fact and fiction; who would be willing to
support some of the hard decisions that need to be acted upon for the U.S. to
join the rest of the world in providing the security and conservation and
allocation of resources necessary to elevate the standard of education and
living of all people — the most intelligent road to eliminating the need for
terrorism and war. But John Kerry’s message of taking responsibility in the
world was far too complicated and drowned out by the endless
Republican-dominated media’s benign “stand by me� message of an evangelical
would-be president. I say “would-be� because I don’t think George W. is the 43rd
president. The 43rd president is Al Gore. Daniel Shore of NPR had called the
election of 2000 a coup d’état. I subscribe to this way of thinking, and thus
don’t see George W. as president. Nor is he the rightful president of 2004.
In 2000 it was clear that Al Gore won the popular vote, but lost in the
Electoral College based on the fraudulent election results of Florida. In 2004,
it “looked� like George W. took the popular vote. There are some problems with
this fact, though, namely that the owner of the company who makes many of the
new voting machines is a major contributor to the Republican party and a
supporter of George W.
How can an election be legitimate when this man and his company are unwilling
to create a verifiable means of determining whether his machines are counting
accurately or being tampered with?
A reputable source tells me that, based on estimates of the number crunchers
on which he relies, John Kerry won the popular vote by 4 to 5 million. Greg
Palast, the reporter who revealed the corruption in Florida in 2000, agrees with
this figure.
Add to this issue the results of Ohio, which were so blatantly tainted that
mainstream media could not cope with the plain truth of it all. Beyond the sheer
inaccuracy of the voting machines themselves, how can the results in this
contested state be considered legitimate when Ohio’s Secretary of State was the
head of George W. reelection campaign, scrambled access to machines, and refused
to allow but a small sample of the votes to be recounted?
For a portion of the American electorate swayed by the man with a boyish,
confused-looking grin and plain and misspoken words, it did not matter that
George W. had made false assertions about 9/11 and the war in Iraq, or pledged
economic prosperity to all when only the wealthy would benefit, or promised that
“no child [would be] left behind.�
The fact is George W. wasn’t going to complicate our lives with thinking. He
didn’t want us to think too much. He didn’t want us to take responsibility in
the world, like the other guy kept telling us we had to do. And besides, he
claimed to have a frequent word with and a direct line to “the man upstairs … .�
No thinking, no need for responsibility, and a man well connected — in Heaven
and on Earth; an irresistible combination.
This I must accept about the country in which I live. I know that several of
my neighbors voted for George W., and I really like them. So, I really want to
learn to listen better and communicate more — to understand and be more
understood. Our founding fathers believed that education and information were
the essential ingredients to growing America into a powerful, compassionate
democracy. It is especially true in a time when it seems that America is
polarized and split right down the middle.
So, this is a problem that resolves itself over time in the face of truth —
so long as truth has the opportunity to be expressed and be heard. I must
confess, however, that I am concerned as to whether or not our freedoms and
freedom of the press and information as we have enjoyed them thus far in this
country are for much longer.
After our election, when major leaders in the Republican Party were screaming
foul play in the Ukraine, all I could think of was the line in Hamlet —
“Methinks thou protesteth too much!� And weeks later, when presented with the
evidence of election fraud here in the U.S., these same men joined by their
cohorts in Congress turned a blind eye, certifying a vote that many do not
trust.
And so, on Thursday, Jan. 20, in a sterilized bubble free of protesters,
George W. and powers who created this abomination to democracy will stand in the
most hallowed center of America, swearing before God and country that they have
a mandate to do unto America what they deem fit in accordance with their
self-serving purposes. And there are many who will goose-step to their tune.
But many will not. Many do not accept the legitimacy of this man called
president. In our hearts and minds, John Kerry is the 44th president. Maybe it
is simpler for someone like George W. who believes he has a mandate and claims
to have never made a mistake to be at the helm of a country divided. For it
certainly would not be in the character of John Kerry to claim a mandate where
there is none. He would tread lightly. Would this be a sign of weakness to
others in the world? Or would a gentler, more thoughtful America invoke a
gentler response — even from our would-be enemies?
On Jan. 20, in my heart and mind, I reaffirm my belief in America. I turn my
back on an event that claims to be an inauguration. We shall not be witnessing
the swearing-in of a president, but a man who wishes he were and an
administration steered by hubris and their own warped sense of Manifest Destiny.
Such illegitimate events mean a lot to America. We must remember them. We
must make sure that never again do we as Americans stand against one another,
not trusting. And as our democracy and how it moves forward to meet the
challenges of the world rests on the legitimacy of our electoral process, never
again must we be timid or lax in ensuring that each and every vote counts and is
counted.
Robert Sachs is an author, educator, and counselor who lives in San Luis
Obispo. He can be reached at andrsachs@earthlink.net.
The seduction of American medicine
Exercise, nutrition, and weight management remain the most effective ways
to control the chronic health conditions that plague Americans
Every day Americans are subjected to a barrage of advertising by the
pharmaceutical industry. These drug pitches usually feature beautiful people
enjoying themselves in the great outdoors. Health, happiness, and lots of great
sex can be yours thanks to the innovation and research of Big Pharma. These ads
are extremely effective, and Big Pharma is spending huge sums to get them to
you. Why? Because you must “talk to your doctor� and ask for that newest,
latest, most advertised drug, and very often you will get it —needed or not.
“There is no doubt in my mind that direct-to-consumer (DTC) ads mislead
consumers far more than they inform them, and they pressure doctors to prescribe
new, expensive, and often marginally helpful drugs, even when a more
conservative option (including no drug) might be better and safer … that is why
DTC ads are prohibited in every other developed country (except New Zealand),�
says Marcia Angell, M.D., former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of
Medicine. She rips the self-congratulatory marketing campaign built around Big
Pharma in “The Truth About the Drug Companies, How They Deceive Us and What To
Do About It.�
Pharmaceutical ads are often designed to convince us that the latest “medical
breakthroughs� are all that is needed to keep us healthy. They need us to
believe that Big Pharma saves lives. As a friend dying from metastatic colon
cancer told me recently, “They’re coming out with new treatments every month.� I
resisted the temptation to tell him that the death rate from all cancers has not
improved; in fact, it has gotten slightly worse over the last 50 years. Big
Pharma’s problem is that real innovation is just not profitable enough. But the
perception of innovation is extremely important, because it sells, and selling
drugs makes a lot of money. In fact, the sicker America gets, the more money
drug companies stand to rake in!
| As a friend dying from metastatic colon cancer told me recently, ‘They’re coming out with new treatments every month.’ I resisted the temptation to tell him that the death rate from all cancers has not improved; in fact, it has gotten slightly worse over the last 50 years. |
“Millions of us are popping prescription pills for innocuous ills, when
simple lifestyle changes of diet and exercise are more effective and a lot
cheaper,� according to Forbes magazine in the Nov. 29, 2004 cover story. “The
results are devastating: billions of dollars in ever-higher drug costs; millions
of people enduring sometimes highly toxic side effects; and close to 2 million
cases each year of drug complications that result in 180,000 deaths or
life-threatening illnesses in the elderly.� Serious and even deadly side effects
have become the cost of doing business. Many of the seniors of a drugged America
have become “collateral damage.�
The price we have paid for prescription drugs cannot be counted in dollars,
or even lives. We have been sold a new deadly deceptive philosophy. Americans
have been led to believe that synthetic, patented, potentially fatal chemicals
are necessary for health. Dr. John Abramson, Harvard Medical School professor
and author of “Overdosed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine,�
writes, “We have this exaggerated belief in biomedicine, in the same way that
primitive society believed in folk cures.� Abramson’s theme has a tsunami-like
destructive potential for Big Pharma: “Our drugs do not cure our diseases.�
Synthetic drugs may allow the body to temporarily recover or provide transient
relief, but health is not optimized, nor disease reversed.
Exercise, nutrition, and weight management remain the most effective ways to
control the chronic health conditions that plague Americans. Everybody has heard
of the scandal-ridden anti-inflammatory medication Vioxx, but few have heard of
the role diet plays in inflammation and joint pain. For example, it is well
documented that arthritis was once rare to nonexistent in rural populations of
Asia and Africa. As recently as 1957, no case of rheumatoid arthritis could be
found in Africa. There was a time when people in Africa followed native diets
based on grains and vegetables but have since been abandoned in favor of
inflammation-causing foods such as meat, dairy products, and highly processed
carbohydrates. And although unknown in Africa before 1960, African-Americans
lead in the incidence of lupus in the U.S.
In a classic experiment with a group of 13 Tarahumara Indians — a native
people known to have virtually no coronary heart disease — an “affluent�
high-fat, high-cholesterol, inflammation-creating diet was substituted for five
weeks for the traditional near-vegetarian diet. Cholesterol levels increased by
31 percent. If they had continued to eat this way they would soon have had heart
disease, like their genetic relatives, the Pima Indians, living in Arizona on
the Western diet.
On March 14, 2002, the New England Journal of Medicine published a study
showing that increased exercise capacity was one of the strongest predictors of
a decreased risk of death. They studied 6,213 men referred for a treadmill
stress test and found that their exercise capacity was a stronger predictor of
death than other established risk factors like high blood pressure, diabetes,
smoking, and changes in EKGs during exercise. Exercise is better than any
drug.
These are not just a few isolated examples. The evidence is overwhelming in
the use of simple remedies for chronic disease.
Physician researchers such as Barnard, Ornish, Fleming, and McDougall treat
their patients with successful, health-restoring programs that are innovative
and low-cost. More doctors and their patients would participate in similar
reforms if the financial incentives were in place. A template for just such a
change already exists. Financial incentives that promote health can be found in
the life insurance industry, where something as simple as stopping smoking saves
money spent on premiums and lives. It’s a radical concept — giving a motive to
get off the drugs and on the track. It’s the prescription for what ails
Americans.
Stephen Mulder is past president of SLO County Medical Society for 2003 and
former chief of medical staff at Twin Cities Community Hospital for 2001. He has
practiced medicine in Templeton since 1985 and worked in health and nutritional
education for the last 10 years. He can be reached at smulder54@hotmail.com.
This article appears in Jan 20-27, 2005.
