After watching the three presidential and one VP debates, I am struck with the "Aw Shucks" tone of one of the particpants, in particular. No names, but this one loves the "Joe Sixpack" epitaph. It got me to thinking; how do we choose professions in this country?

If you want to cut hair, repair teeth, drive a car, practice law, or even own a pet, you need to obtain proof of following a certain series of prescribed functions. These could include trade school, followed by a test, or law school, followed by the bar exam. In other words, we want a show of competancy.

If I owned a NASCAR racing team, I wouldn't find a fellow at a bar and give him my million dollar car to drive. Nor would I drop by the local bowling alley to find my heart surgeon. In this manner, I really want a smarter, more informed person than I running the country. I may want to hang out at the bowling place with Joe Sixpack or Joe the Plumber, but would not vote for them for President (or, especially, VP)

The obsession with the "unwashed masses" is a little much. The crowd with pitchforks and torches outside Baron Frankenstein's flat was likely not professionals. Don't repeat the Adlei Stevenson debacle and vote for the older guy, just because he wore a uniform. (Deja vu all over again?)

After carefully following the 2008 campaign, I am finally getting what is meant by "Small Town Values." Apparently, they include homophobia, xenophobia, and lots and lots of guns. It appears that killing and eating a moose is more important for a VP candidate than knowing where a country sits.

Most of the people who only watch Fox News (which I affectionaltely call Pravda) still think Suddam Husain was the cause of the 9/11 plane crashes. Watching exit polls where people say things like, "I can't vote for Obama; he's a Muslim" or "I can't bring myself to vote for one of those people," I am less sanguine about the future...after all, Jefferson did say the we would get the government "we deserve!" Not what's best for us, but what we deserve.

I don't think this is what he had in mind when he asked for a "classless society."

Had to do a double-take when I noticed that Ranbaxy Labs has hired former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani to help defend it against allegations of quality problems with drugs sold in the U.S (click here for more).

Ironically, perhaps, to some, Giuliani's last gig with pharma involved ranting against foreign threats and the insecurity of the U.S. pharma supply. 

Here's the news directly from the source:

Gurgaon, India, September 18, 2008 -- Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., today announced that they have retained the services of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Giuliani Partners to provide advice and review compliance issues related to the recent United States Food and Drug Administration letters and Import Advisory.

In announcing the addition of Mayor Giuliani, Ranbaxy reiterated its commitment to work cooperatively with the FDA to address the Import Advisory and put into place measures which will allow its products identified on the Advisory to be released into the US marketplace.

As the FDA stated, all drugs manufactured by Ranbaxy have repeatedly tested safe and effective with no adverse incidents reported. Ranbaxy is committed to a swift resolution to address these issues and to continuing to supply the global marketplace with safe and effective pharmaceuticals.

Ranbaxy is one of the world’s largest manufacturers of generic drugs, with production facilities in the United States and India.

Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited, India's largest pharmaceutical company, is an integrated, research based, international pharmaceutical company producing a wide range of quality, affordable generic medicines, trusted by healthcare professionals and patients across geographies. Ranbaxy’s continued focus on R&D has resulted in several approvals in developed markets and significant progress in New Drug Discovery Research. The Company’s foray into Novel Drug Delivery Systems has led to proprietary "platform technologies," resulting in a number of products under development. The Company is serving its customers in over 125 countries and has an expanding international portfolio of affiliates, joint ventures and alliances, ground operations in 49 countries and manufacturing operations in 11 countries

What Pres. Lincoln should have said was, "You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, and that's good enough to win an election." Neither candidate for the highest office in the land has mentioned who would be on their respective cabinets, who would play for all the swell programs they are promising, or how soon we would see "change." Rather we have "deuling lipstick" comments! I try to keep a stiff upper lip on my European trips, but it is getting harder and harder to explain what we are doing over here.

Once upon a time, you could remake your image and get away with it. Now, we have everything on tape and can replay it at a moment's notice. Unfortunately, we are not only lazy, but ignorant. [Why else would all those emails from "former Finance Ministers of Nigeria" and the such scam us?] The other night Jon Stewart (Daily Show) played the acceptance speeches of Mr. Bush at the 2000 GOP convention and Sen. McCain's this year. If some of the contestants on "America's Got Talent" could be that synched, they could win. But, like a lot of seniors, what America's Got is not talent, but short-term memory. If we actually took the time to watch earlier speeches by politicians, we would see thay all pretty much "flip-flop." It's just that the first to shout "flip-flopper" wins the propaganda war.

While Congress has  a 14% approival rating, over 90% of the incumbants will be re-elected. Telling the truth will get you ousted. Remember Jimmy Carter saying we have an energy crisis and we're addicted to oil? Threw the bum out, didn't we? How do you like $4/gal gas, hmmmm? If any of the people in Congress actually laid out the problems, we'd throw them out, too. We don't want to hear that we're pampered (give up our SUVs or air conditioning just to save the world...hah!) or use too many resources (why fix something when you can throw it out and get a new one?). Since people are voting against their financial interests, there must be a reason. Maybe fear has something to do with it.

Obama made the mistake of exposing the GOP plan: raise tensions so the masses will cling to their religion and guns! When we are convinced that the "bad guys" are coming to kill us, we attend church (or synagogue or whatever) and stockpile arms. [Within minutes of John Kerry announcing his VP candidate, Homeland Security raised the color warning. No reason other than to re-focus the public on being afraid, I fear.] I seem to remember that the safest place to be was in Red Square in Moscow during the Cold War. You would never be bothered by a petty thief or mugger. All freedoms were taken away for absolute security...the KGB would protect you for that little price. So now, the Homeland Security bill allows wiretapping without warrent, the gov. can ask what books you read, hold you forever "on suspicion", etc. All in the name of security, we have our freedoms taken away. Why? So we can protect our freedoms, of course!

Try putting lipstick on that pig!

In the 1960s and 1970s, I was quite vocal about women's rights: equal pay, advancement opportunities, etc. What I found, in a large number of settings, was that the males agreed with me (mostly). Where I was amazed was the responses of a large number of women. Many made comments like, "that's a man's job" or "a woman's place is in the home." I was hoping that women were no longer their own worst enemies...then Denver happened.

Now, when a woman was made a vice-presidential candidate, her policies or experience didn't seem to matter to many people. Polls show a major swing in "white women" to the Republican ticket. I am especially warmed by the fact that the long-standing values of non-violence (gun control, especially) can be forgotten for a rifle-toting, moose hunter... as long as the person has two X-chromosomes.

Worse yet, her "home life" is out of bounds. However, I wonder what the "well-known" churchmen on the far right (silent on the matter) would make of Obama's daughter being pregnant and unmarried. I'm sure they would point out that it was the logical consequence of the promiscuous liberal ideals she has. [These would be the same people who claimed the flooding in New Orleans four years ago was retribution by God for the sinful lifestyles of the locals. Funny: I didn't hear anything of the sort this year when Iowa and several other WHITE, CHRISTIAN states (all who voted "correctly" in the last election) were flooded.] I know we all have faults, I just like to think we accept and work with others, not condemn them because they are different.

In any case, I would expect in the 21st century, that voters look beyond race and gender and actually read something about the accomplishments of each candidate. What a concept! While I'm not about to break into John Lennon's Imagine, I would like to see a little more kindness and openmindedness in our relationships.

Can we actually THINK for ourselves once in a while and not follow the pack over the cliff?

Watching the Olympics is amazing...even when Bob Costas interviewed our Commander-in-Chief. However, when Bob asked, "How can you seriously address the Russia-Georgia issue with so many problems at home?" I waited for a reasoned response. Silly me...after 7 1/2 years? When "W" answered, "What problems? We have no problems." I remembered a neat bumper sticker I saw the other day:

 January 20, 2009: the end of an error

Live long and prosper, y'all. GO, Team USA!!! What a great bunch of young people, no? Makes a future seem possible.

I have a neat idea: why don't we flood Beijing with fake tickets to the Olympics? Give them a taste of counterfeiting, eh? Maybe a blast of overbooking of seats will show the government our displeasure at them not doing a whole bunch to stop phoney drugs from being made and distributed to the world.

My idea is a prank, but a seriously ill person taking a placebo or, worse yet, a toxic chemical isn't very funny. It is difficult to put any pressure on a country from whom we are borrowing billions a day, I would guess. What would we threaten: that we will repay it faster?

Maybe it's time for a "food tester," such as royalty used in the Middle Ages. We ask the vendors to take the drug, eat the dog food, or brush with the toothpaste before we buy it. We could always employ "Dog, the Bounty Hunter" to go after the counterfeiters, but he might not easily move about in China.

Or, we could remember, if a deal sounds too good to be real...it isn't (real, that is...duh).

Most of us use fillers when we speak: uh, um, you know, clearly, like, and that's what I'm talkin' about. The latest insult to our collective mind is "It is what it is." (Duh!) I can only imagine Glog's mate complaining about how damp and wet the cave is...and his reply? "It is what it is!" That is not the attitude that gave us central heat, electricity in our homes, medicines that save our lives, and reality TV. [Three out of four ain't bad.]

The @#$%-ed saying is a "cop-out' (from my generation) for not bothering to try to improve the human condition. Crooked politics? "It is what it is." Higher and higher enegy? "I.I.W.I.I" Thanks to Pres. RR, we have the trickle down effect in play. Garbage can full? IIWII!

 Could we make an effort to stop with "like, um, er, IIWII, and you know?" PLEASE!?! I was just watching Brian Williams give the news; it was succinct, gramatically correct, without hesitation or fillers. It was beautiful (not the news, itself, but the presentation). I just had to say, "Now,that's what I'm talkin' about!"

A few years ago the American Cancer Society used vanity to help women stop smoking. Apparently, cancer, stroke, and heart disease weren't convincing them to quit, so the ACS used vanity: it disclosed that nicotine caused capillaries to constrict. Now, that didn't matter when it came to lung disease, but it caused crow's feet, too! In other words derath wasn't as scarey as looking older.

Now, last night, I saw a commercial for ED. Plenty of those around, you would say. However, this one was pushing a cholesterol lowering product. Seems that when your arteries clog (forget heart attacks and stroke), a certain organ doesn't get enough blood. Seems that men care more about sex than health. So, vanity is not the property of women...both genders seem to care more about appearances than their health. (Ask any body-builder about his steroid use and see what I measn.)

 Good thing Proscar grows hair, too, otherwise we'd all have enlarged prostates!

Are health costs too high? Yes! Are the pharmaceutical industry-types to blame? Not so much. The "cost" of health care that includes drugs is only a small fraction of what we spend. The far greatest cost, from knowing a number of doictors, is the "cost of doing business."

The reason we are losing OBY-GYNs in this country is that, no matter how much a pregnant mother smokes, drinks, uses drugs, and makes other unhealthy life choices, whan her child is born with any type of infirmity, there is a lawsuit against the doctor who delivered the baby. Insurance is so high, trauma  to the doctors' families so bad, most either opt out of the practice or forego entering it, in the first place.

In so many cases, when a patient dies during an operation, there are "ambulance-chasers" there to sue the anethesiologist. Insurance for anethesiologists was over $100,000 a year in 2000. Lord knows what it is up to now.

To avoid lawsuits or be given cover in the inevitable ones, doctors order many, many more tests than are warrented for all patients. The appearance that "we did all we could" needs to be maintained...for the inevitable court appearance.

Do doctors, nurses (underpaid and understaffed), and pharmacists make mistakes? Of course. Last time I looked they were still human. Part of the problem is that hospitals are overcrowded because the "Emergency Rooms" are the only place many millions of (uninsured) people can get any type of care. The result? Crowded hospitals, stretched personnel, pressure on facilities and equipment. The end result? And mistakes by harried health care personnel.

We don't seem to care that the massive American embassy in Iraq will cost $2+ billion a year to maintain or that the war has cost (directly) $400 Billion (so far... plus the rehab costs for Vets in the future and replacement of all the equipment left behind), why should we fight so hard not to spend a few hundred million to insure all Americans? If all people had access to yearly exams and preventative medical care, there would be fewer "emergencies." If we get dental check-ups and fillings, there would be fewer emergency extractions with resultant complications.

Remember the old commercial: "Pay me now or pay me later"? 

The "whipping boy" in the title is the pharmaceutical industry. They make a profit, so they are bad! Hey! Could we start with "Big Oil" who is, after all, merely "passing along costs" and scraping by with $40 billion/quarter profits? Whatever the faults of Big Pharma, they are still saving millions of lives. Or, have we forgotten Malaria, Small Pox, Polio, etc. already?