Confessions of a News Junkie

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/newshour_index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/24/world/americas/24ottawa.html?hp
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/308/index.html

I long ago gave up on the US and now my only wish is to leave as soon as it can be arranged. But, here are a few issues for people who still care and are willing to persevere through the decadence and frivolity that this country has fallen into.

The first link directs one to a page for last night's Newshour on PBS. If you go to the bottom of the page there is video of a story about how a gap in wealth correlates to a gap in life expectancy (it starts with some stupid and spurious story about how winning the Oscar relates to life expectancy). Of course, the gap in income in the US has widened greatly in the last 30-40 yrs...I don't think I am saying anything controversial. Most Americans still think they have a chance to explode into the top 1%, nearly all of them are wrong, but delusional optimism is part of the American ethos. This segment discusses how the effect of low-income living in limiting one's real choices and social involvement tends to create a high stress lifestyle that shortens lives. The study was repeated in England where there is a (terrible) national health plan, so it is controlled to an extent for the disparities in health care. Even with relatively uniform health care, the gap in income still produces a gap in life expectancy. The opposite case, picked by the show and not me, was Sweden where there is a high standard of living across the board, relatively equal wealth distribution and correspondingly long life-expectancies throughout the population. Just for the record, the Swedes are also among the healthiest people in the world.

The second article is about the recent decision in the Canadian high court, which strikes down indefinite detention of foreign nationals without due process. Following on the heels of the DC Circuit Court denying the latest round of appeals from Guantanamo detainees and a Brooklyn District Court refusing to hear a class action suit for money damages resulting from wrongful detention of now-released Guantanamo detainees. The District Court held that the issue was "nonjusticiable" because it was peculiarly within the purview of the Executive branch...a "political question." Better left to our cowardly and broken democracy I guess to continue not considering. Leaving aside that the federal courts hear cases on procedural due process all the time where the executive branch prosecutes and imprisons people...still a function of the executive, still reviewable...in fact, this is exactly the kind of case we can agree that courts should consider. Damages for constitutional violations flow by statute...I can't remember which...its well-known though. The 5th amendment, and not the 14th, covers violations of "due process" by the federal government, and it says that "no person" shall be deprived of liberty without due process. Americans on balance would construe "person" narrowly so as not to include women, foreigners, minorities...but would include, say, corporations and fetuses...god bless America. Unfortunately though for the bigoted heart of the nation, "persons" includes foreign nationals. In any case, we don't do many "human rights" very well, and the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms is much more contemporary and, arguably, more effective...BUT we do protect procedural legal liberties well in this country. So whats up? Who knows...I am no fan of Canada, the flags on the backpacks and the inferiority complex drives me nuts drive me nuts, but its nice to see a common law country protecting what Burke called "the rights of Englishman."

The last refers to the PBS program NOW, which ran a story on the new vaccine for HPV...an STD, that is a pre-cursor to nearly 70% of all cervical cancer. Some states are starting to consider or put into legislation vaccination schedules with the new drug...of course, this has the Jesus nuts and their cadre up in arms. Nothing scare religious idiots like a sexually active woman. In this case even a hypothetically sexually active woman. The argument is that the new drug will encourage promiscuity in young girls (geez...wish it came out when I was 14!!). Hmm, are we actually willing to enlist venereal disease and cancer in the "culture wars?" What a ridiculous argument...girls, who in this case are too young to really know what HPV is because the same small minds that want to leave them vulnerable to it also oppose teaching them what it is or how to avoid it through contraception, will have the spectre of cervical cancer hanging over them when they consider becoming sexually active (why is "hellfire and damnation" not enough in this case?) A friend suggested to me that it was no big deal because its a "very small but very loud group of people" that are promoting views like this...that may be true, though I have had the great displeasure to live in Texas and I would disagree, but this "very small" group has been loud enough to elect governments, block funding for medical research, now attempt to block funding for vaccinations, force hearings on whether or not we should teach that Noah had Dinosaurs on the ark in history classes...thats either bigger than "very small" or very very loud.

I will stop now because I can go on all day about how much disdain I have for this country and the direction its going...but its like a drop of rain in the sea really...these stories were on PBS, which nobody watches, or in the newspaper and Americans are at least functionally illiterate...but Britney Spears shaved her head, Anna Nicole Smith died and the Oscars...don't forget the Oscars...