Part 1 of Dr. Miguel Faria’s analysis of Vladimir Putin (photo, below) and the war in the Middle East, as with all his writings, is well worth reading and pondering deeply as it contains some excellent observations.
The media continuously misunderstand what the people really think because of their elitism and failure to communicate with the people of America, who are the backbone of our country. I experienced this attitude of elitism when I was working at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in the USA.
The BBC reports Europeans are quite alarmed (“a nightmare for Nato’s European countries”) because Donald Trump has stated that if elected president he may withdraw a guarantee of protection to Nato countries that do not “fulfill their obligation” to the US.
Inheritance and estate taxes (collectively referred to as the “death tax”) are the taxes one must pay to the government to be able to inherit property or money following the death of loved ones. With inheritance taxes, the beneficiary pays the tax before taking possession of the money or property. With the estate tax, the tax is levied on the decedent’s assets before the beneficiaries may receive their inheritance.
Six years ago I was asked to address the Western Society of Neurosurgery comparing the candidates for President Barack Obama and John McCain. I was very blunt, but analytical about both, but my comments about Obama were not well received by the liberal audience. Unfortunately, what I said has come true. But people will forget that also. The same has happened with the socio-economic/political paper I wrote. It has all come true.(1)
In the celebrated PBS series by Ken Burns, The Civil War (1990), Southern historian Shelby Foote provides excellent anecdotes that embroider the documentary. In one of these vignettes, Foote mentions a dialogue between a Confederate and a Union soldier, in which the latter asks, "Why do you fight?" The Confederate soldier responds, "Because you are here." Foote adds, "Which is not a bad answer!"
For several decades, American bioethicists have been providing persuasive arguments for rationing medical care via the theory of the necessary "rational allocation of finite health care resources."(2) More recently, assisted by various sectors of organized medicine, they have developed multiple approaches to justify what they see as the necessary curtailment of services and specialized treatments deemed not medically necessary.
A review of Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow (2004)
When I get a chance I read Viewpoints, the busy electronic version of the Macon Telegraph (MT), which frequently has heated discussions. On September 5, a discussion centered on a MT reader who stated that although in good health at age 75, his doctor would not perform a PSA test or a colonoscopy because "it was not needed" and besides "something else would kill me before colon or prostate cancer does [given his age]."
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010), more commonly referred to as ObamaCare, has become one of the most controversial pieces of legislation passed by the Democrat-controlled, 111th U.S. Congress during President Obama’s administration.
It has come to my attention some letter writers in The Telegraph and posters at Macon.com, have taken umbrage with the use of the word “socialism” in describing the worsening state of affairs in our nation today — from exorbitant, crippling regulations and taxation to abuse of the “general welfare” clause of the Constitution.
The Sale of Indulgences
The Founding Fathers of this great nation designed a Republican form of government. By this, they meant a government under the rule of law and not the capricious rule of man, under a written constitution whose main function is to clearly demarcate the limits of authority of the federal government.
The "Right" versus "Left" convenient but capricious political arrangement came from the seating position of delegates to the National Assembly during the French Revolution, but it is at times a confusing concept and too often subject to media and academic bias and even misinformation. I have found it easier to have a political spectrum based on degrees of government control.
In a recent letter to the editor published in my local newspaper, the Macon Telegraph (9/16/11), Jack Bernard, a self-described "Republican,” retired health care executive, was "disconcerted by the ideological free market rigidity” that he observed during a debate by the Republican presidential candidates concerning “the health care reform question.”
From 1876 onward, after the North recovered its fortunes and the South was unburdened by the end of Reconstruction, the nation was ruled by laissez-faire capitalism, and freedom flourished for most (not all) of the nations' citizens. The rapid pace of the Industrial Revolution brought about an exemplary standard of living but also new problems for the rapidly developing nation, and socialistic or progressive "reforms" appeared in this country for the first time.
There was a time until the early 1960s when the terms to describe those of African decent, like me — African-American or Black or Afro-American — were almost unheard of.
I remember a distinct conversation with a friend discussing descriptive terms for ourselves in 1963 or ’64. The term “black” was just coming into vogue and he didn’t like it one bit. “Call me a Negro,” he said, “but don’t call me black.”
This outstanding book by a black American journalist for The Washington Post recounts the emotional and spiritual awakening of the author upon his fateful visit to his ancestral home, Africa. He vividly recounts his adventurers and journalistic travails on the Dark Continent, and finds he belongs happily and unregretfully in America. He thanks Providence for the fact his ancestors were brought to America, even as slaves, so that he could be born a free man in America. One of the most poignant scenes in the book sums it up.
Warning! If you have high blood pressure, consult your physician before reading Medical Warrior. Dr. Miguel Faria writes with such fervor and conviction about the looming dangers of a health-care system dominated by big government, big business, and big labor that people with medical problems may wish to read something far less provocative.
French social critic Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850) once said, “The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended.”(1) During much of the history of our republic, our intellectuals and those who digest these ideas for consumption by the general public, did a poor job of defending the basic foundations of our freedom. Until the sixties, it was taken for granted that private property, absolute moral principles, and free enterprise were desirable.
Written by two reporters, this book contains a wealth of information about the history and inner workings of the American Medical Association since its founding in 1847. It is divided into two parts. The first covers how the AMA is organized, the history of its development, its ongoing battle against compulsory health insurance, a description of its political action committee (AMPAC), and a discussion of its support for the business ethic. The second covers the AMA's response to health issues including alternative medicine, the tobacco problem, abortion, and the AIDS epidemic.
The lessons of history clearly demonstrate to those of us who care to look that whenever science and medicine have come to be under the heavy hand of government, political pressures, or subordinated to the state, the results have been as perverse as they have been disastrous. Towards this end, I would like to share with you an egregious chapter on the perversion of science in the name of politics and ideology that has come down to us from the recent historic record.
In matters of style, swim with the current;
in matters of principle, stand firm like a rock.
The Corporate Practice of Medicine
The physician should be contemptuous of money, interested in his work,
self-controlled, and just. Once he is possessed of these basic virtues,
he will have all others at his command as well.
Can the Medical Profession Survive Flexible Ethics?*
...Its leaders were supposed to save the country
but now they won't pay her no mind.
...Because the people got fat and grew lazy,
now their vote is like a meaningless joke.
You know they talk about law, about order, but it's all just an echo of what they've been told. 'Cause there is a monster on the loose. It's got our heads into the noose,
and it just sits there watching...
*This article is excerpted from the Foreword of Dr. Prioreschi's latest volume (Vol. III --- Roman Medicine) of his A History of Medicine, released this year.(1)
The final word from medical moguls and other pundits is coming out in full force on health care and medical journalism: Americans must be prepared, from the top down, to accept drastic medical and health care rationing. Why? Because "the establishment of the rational allocation of finite resources" (translate: the extensive rationing of medical services) will be desperately needed, if universal coverage, socialized ObamaCare medicine is to have a chance to work in this country.
In Part I of this essay, we discussed the terms Liberty and Equality in accordance with Natural Rights theory and Constitutional governance, and then we summarized the ten planks of Karl Marx's 1948 Communist Manifesto. We showed how our Constitutional Republic has been eroded toward a Social[ist] Democracy by the infiltration of those Marxist planks in our polity.