CANADIANS LOVE OBAMA!!!

President Obama is welcomed to Canada by Governor General Michaelle Jean and a contingent of Royal Canadian Mounted Police. (White House/Pete Souza)

Dear Readers, it warmed the cockles of my heart to see those photographs of our president visiting the land of my birth -- Canada. And when I saw the photo of the Royal Canadian Mounties saluting President Obama and Governor General Michaelle Jean -- and they looked genuinely happy to meet and talk with each other -- it did bring tears to these 59-year old eyes.

Here’s an excerpt from an article in the Toronto Star:

OTTAWA – The first black president of the United States and Canada's first black Governor General knew theirs was a historic encounter – and they appeared to revel in it from the moment they met Thursday.

Gov. Gen. Michaelle Jean was the first of a handful of Canadian dignitaries to greet Barack Obama as he stepped off Air Force One onto Canadian soil for the first time as U.S. president.

"You would never have imagined that you and I could both be here like today, coming from African descent," Jean was quoted as telling the president as they began what insiders described as "soft and warm" exchange.

A Jean aide said the poignancy of the moment was not lost on either of them and may have given the pair "a form of added connection."

The two held an animated conversation on the tarmac that went beyond the formal dictates of protocol before the president was introduced to the other dignitaries, including Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon and Canada's ambassador to the United States, Michael Wilson.

An Obama quip had Jean leaning back, laughing and throwing an arm around the president's back as they strode side-by-side into the reception centre for a private chat.

Jean's spokeswoman Marthe Blouin said "at that moment she was telling him that she felt it was like a love affair between him and Canadians."

"He said to her that he knew that, that he'd been informed that he was very popular in Canada. Then he joked and he added, 'Well, it's good to know because if things do not go well for me in the States, I know I can come to Canada.'

Vive la différence!!!

Was there such warmth during Bush’s visits?

Ah ... you forget too soon:

A top aide to Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien resigned on Tuesday after nearly a week of political tension over a remark she reportedly made about the president of the United States being a "moron".

Françoise Ducros, my hero.

Back a year ago, Ms. Manitoba wrote in this here blog about why she supported Obama and what she thought would happen if he got elected:

• this may be one of the most important things ... his election will say something very important to the rest of the world - “We want change and did not agree with the policies that came before. We did not agree with the arrogant attitudes that came before. We want to be a true citizen of the world and not a bully.”
  

'nuff said.

Here are some more photos ...

U.S President Barack Obama (left) and Canadian Governor General Michaelle Jean walk across the tarmac following his arrival in Ottawa, Thursday Feb. 19, 2009. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

4 year-old Benjamin Faulkner holds a sign as the U.S President Barack Obama drives past a goup waiting to catch a glimpse of his limo on Colonel By Drive in Ottawa on the Rideau Canal Thursday morning in preparation of U.S President Barack Obama visit to talk with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper Feb 19, 2009 in Ottawa. (ANDRE FORGET / SUN MEDIA)

Supporters of U.S. President Barack Obama wave as his motorcade arrives Parliament Hill, in Ottawa, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2009, to meet with Prime Minister Stephen Harper on his first foreign trip as president. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graham Hughes

Supporters of U.S. President Barack Obama stand next to a snowman on Parliament Hill, in Ottawa, Thursday, Feb., 19, 2009. President Barack Obama will meet with Prime Minister Stephen Harper in his first foreign trip as President. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graham Hughes

Merlin Cain, from Toronto, awaits the arrival of U.S. President Barack Obama, on Parliament Hill, in Ottawa, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2009. President Barack Obama will meet with Prime Minister Stephen Harper in his first foreign trip as President. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graham Hughes

Stumble It!

Global Warming - Bush At The Climate Change Conference

No one could have put it better than the Guardian, doing a great job, as usual, of reporting the news. On the recent climate change conference convened by the Naked Emperor Wannabe, the Guardian reports :

George Bush was castigated by European diplomats and found himself isolated yesterday after a special conference on climate change ended without any progress.

Wow, someone actually called the Naked Twit on his lack of clothing. Not that you'd know it if you were reading the American media.

The conference, attended by more than 20 countries, including China, India, Britain, France and Germany, broke up with the US isolated, according to non-Americans attending. One of those present said even China and India, two of the biggest polluters, accepted that the voluntary approach proposed by the US was untenable and favoured binding measures, even though they disagreed with the Europeans over how this would be achieved.

A senior European diplomat attending the conference, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the meeting confirmed European suspicions that it had been intended by Mr Bush as a spoiler for a major UN conference on climate change in Bali in December.

"It was a total charade and has been exposed as a charade," the diplomat said. "I have never heard a more humiliating speech by a major leader. He [Mr Bush] was trying to present himself as a leader while showing no sign of leadership. It was a total failure."

Meanwhile, our good neighbour Canada referred to the fiasco as "The Skunk at His Own Garden Party." The report by Stephen Leahy, from IPSnews, stated:

BROOKLIN, Canada, Sep 29 (IPS) - After years of denial, the U.S. White House-sponsored summit on climate change ended Friday with President George W. Bush admitting that global warming was real and humans were responsible and asking for heads of state to join him at yet another summit next year (when his presidency ends).

It's doubtful if anyone of consequence will attend that future gab-fest since President Bush continues to push voluntary cuts to greenhouse gas emissions when the rest of the world, including much of the business sector, has already said that approach simply doesn't work.

"President Bush has so little credibility on climate change," said Chris Flavin, president of the Worldwatch Institute, a U.S.-based environmental group.

Only mid-level officials from 16 countries, the European Union and the United Nations participated in the meeting Thursday and Friday.

It makes me cringe to think that this buffoon is representing this great nation in all fora. Everywhere, all over the world, people undoubtedly look at their tvs or computers or listen to their radios or read their papers and wonder why someone with the cunning of a rat and the intelligence of a planarium is in charge of a world that is killing itself slowly. Why does the American media continue to gloss over his failures? He is, without a doubt, the most boorish, unpleasant, savage little bully the world has ever seen.

Stumble It!

Health Care Roulette

Photo by K Smokey Cormier

About a month ago I went to see SiCKO and came away thinking that healthcare is such an important issue and that’s where I want to focus some of my energy and activism. It’s such an important issue and affects all of us ... the poor and working class probably most. But it’s an issue that has the potential of uniting most of us ... everyone but the richest in the U.S. And maybe a few of them would join us too.

And I feel like I need to get more educated about it. Then, a while ago Terry Gross, the moderator of the NPR show Fresh Air, talked with Jonathan Oberlander, Associate Professor of Social Medicine and Health Policy and Administrator at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. I took notes from that conversation and that’s what this post is. Oberlander is also the author of Political Life of Medicare which I’d like to read soon to continue my education.
If you want to listen to the conversation yourself, click here.

So, here are my notes ...

Terry and Oberlander talk mostly about the various healthcare systems in other countries: England, Canada, Germany, and Australia.


Oberland says he’s most familiar with Canada’s system so they start by talking about it.

Canada’s system is a single payer system. Canadians pay for their healthcare system via taxes. It’s a very equitable system. Everyone must enter a “first come, first serve” queue... even the rich. Yes, the rich have the option of going over the border and paying for special services in the U.S. But, in Canada, they have to wait like everyone else for their turn. Now, we’re talking about special services. A visit to a doctor for your annual checkup is not a big deal. You make your appointment like in the U.S.

Canadian’s have this philosophy that healthcare is a right for everyone. We in U.S. don’t recognize that it’s a right. So that’s a difference between USers and Canadians.

By and large, Canadians are happy with their system. However, there are problems:
There is a budget imposed each year and they have to work within the budget. What this means is that the administrators decide what they will pay doctors and hospitals. There is a limit on equipment. For example, in the Canadian system there aren’t as many MRI machines which creates queues or wait lists.

There are wait lists for some surgeries like hip replacements. But, let’s not fool ourselves. There is a form of rationing in the U.S. too via insurance. If you don’t have insurance, you can’t get certain surgeries. If the HMO or your insurance won’t okay your surgery, you can’t have it paid for.

Queues have gotten longer. The complaints about this have increased in recent years.

Ms. Manitoba’s cousin pointed out another potential problem: if the system is paid by taxpayers, what happens when the number of taxpayers decreases significantly as is beginning to happen now as Baby Boomers are retiring and there are less young workers paying taxes?

According to Oberlander, the Canadian kind of single payer system is almost impossible to convert to here in the U.S. because insurance companies and pharmaceuticals make so much money and have so much power with our legislators. This kind of system is a tough fit for the U.S. Oberlander points out that the way we finance elections also influences how we reform the healthcare system. Our legislators are influenced by these powerful interests. If there were a successful reform of campaign financing ... who knows? [So, we need to reform the healthcare system AND campaign financing. -- ms. manitoba]

Is the AMA (American Medical Association) still a problem? Historically, they too opposed single payer systems. At one time, they were the most organized group against “socialized medicine”. They organized and fought against pre-natal care and national health insurance. However, the AMA doesn’t really speak for the majority of doctors anymore. It’s more involved in fights about malpractice and what medicare is paying doctors. They are certainly not fighting for the wellbeing of people who are uninsured -- if they were, it would really help.

Is there a system used by another country that could work? Well, every country has come up with their own system. If Michael Moore were going to make a sequel to SiCKO, I’d send him to Germany and Australia to take a look at their systems. These countries use private health insurance; however, Germany’s health insurance companies are not for profit. They are heavily regulated by the government and must charge fairly. Even though they are regulated by the government, they are employer based. Employers pay for the insurance. And all insurance companies must play by one set of rules. What if you’ve lost your job or are underemployed? If you are unemployed, part-time, or self-employed, the government pays for your insurance.

And, everyone is covered. An insurance company cannot reject you because you are too sick or whatever.

What happens here in the U.S. ... you know, when you lose your job, you lose your insurance -- that is uniquely American.

A mixture of using public funds and private insurance -- that’s a much more feasible solution for the U.S. This is much more likely to happen than a single payer system.

In Australia too, it is a hybrid system: public and private insurance. If they have enough money, they can buy private insurance which can get them a better room. If the government program is a good one and everyone gets treated well, then Oberland says “I don’t have a problem with some people being able to buy their own private insurance.”

In England people do complain a lot about queueing for treatment.

In these systems in these other countries, administration costs are much lower than here in the U.S. The for-profit health insurance system has very high costs for marketing and medical underwriting. Underwriting is the process they go through to figure out:
-- how sick a patient is
-- if a they should pay for a particular treatment or not
-- how much a particular treatment should cost
-- whether a certain person should be allowed to have insurance or not

That process is costly. And, on top of that, patients often fight about the decisions and resolving these disputes are also costly.

If we had a multipayer system like Germany’s where it’s regulated, everyone plays by the same rules and insurance companies have to accept people no matter how sick they are. Administrative costs would be much lower.

The McKinsey Institute, a high-powered corporation that studied healthcare, investigated why the U.S. system is so costly. It’s not because we have higher quality care. They found that it was because we have very high administration costs and we pay our providers more for treatments.

HMOs started out as a liberal idea in the 1930’s & 40’s. Coverage was prepaid, there was an emphasis on prevention and there was better integrated care. Later, in the 70’s they were reinvented as a cost control system. They changed. Most of them were not for profit. Then for-profit ones started getting established and problems started.

But the problems are not just with the HMOs. Enrollment in HMOs has actually flatlined since the 80’s. Now, more people are in managed care programs called PPOs. But these programs don’t really manage anything. There’s no coordination of treatment, no prevention. All PPOs do is coordinate a discounted rate with doctors and hospitals.

Meanwhile, the employer-based system is unraveling. Employers are finding it very expensive to pay for insurance. They’re either reducing benefits, shifting the costs to the employees, laying people off and hiring contractors and freelancers who don’t get insurance.

Oberland said that the thing that surprised him about SiCKO was the lack of employers’ perspectives. Not long ago, 69% of employers provided insurance. Now it’s 60%. Oberland says he wishes that Michael Moore had talked more about it being an economic issue.

As a result of the economics of the healthcare system, some interesting coalitions are forming. Last year Lee Scott, head of WalMart and Andy Stern, President of the Service Employees International Union, met and announced that they were going to form a coalition to advocate for health care reform.

You might hear of a new movement afoot: “consumer-driven health care.” It’s badly named because it is not consumer driven. It is a program that offers high-deductible insurance policies paired with tax-deferred accounts. Deductibles are $2,000 or $3,000. It’s supposed to be the future of health care. A successor to managed care (PPO). And it’s much worse than managed care. This system is trying to shift the costs more and more to the employees. If you have an ongoing health problem or serious illness, you can be really hurt by this system. If you use a lot of health care, you’ll always use up the amount in your tax-deferred account. Which means that you’ll have to pay the deductible. And, if this is a chronic illness, you’ll be doing this year after year. So, we’re shifting the costs to those who are chronically ill. Some employers who have bought into this think that they will save money. But this new system is already stalling. Satisfaction is down. Enrollment is down. The question is ... what’s next?

Bush is proposing that we change the tax system. The reason is this ... currently the employer-based system is heavily subsidized by the government. Employees get these health benefits and pay no taxes on these benefits. No payroll taxes. The government forgoes about $200 billion/year in taxes that they could be collecting. Bush wants to get rid of this and give everyone a standard deduction for health insurance. $15,000 for a family; $7,500 for an individual. [But what if your health care is more than $7,500/yr? -- ms. manitoba]

Why did the Clinton plan fail? It was too ambitious. They wanted to control costs, wanted universal coverage, employers would have been mandated, they tried to change the delivery system. They alienated people who were already insured: “I don’t want to change doctors.” And ... “I don’t want an HMO.” They threatened the income of the insurance companies and the providers.

Oberland sees real movement at the state level, especially Massachusetts and California. He sees Republicans and Democrats in those states coming together.

Massachusetts is very interesting. They tried it before. This time the reform is a combination that builds on the existing system. It expands Medicaid and provides insurance through a pool. People who can afford it have to buy it. It’s been created by a bipartisan team. It won’t give the citizens of Massachusetts universal coverage though.
---- end of notes ---

So, what to do? I'm still not convinced that single payer can't happen in the U.S. .... gotta learn more.

Stumble It!

Long Time Comin'

By Rogelio Solis, AP

It’s been in the news yesterday and today: James Ford Seale, a Ku Klux Klansmen, was sentenced [finally!] in Mississippi for his role in kidnapping, torturing, and murdering two young African American men in 1964. The FBI investigated this at the time and arrested several men including Seale but the local authorities never prosecuted the case.

One of Seale’s cohorts ratted him out in recent years and was granted immunity. [I feel so conflicted about granting immunity. This other criminal walks!] Seale and his fellow gangsters kidnapped these young men, tied them to trees, and beat them. Then tied weights around their bodies and dumped them in the Mississippi River while they were still alive!!

Yes, yes ... another example of “Home of the brave”.

“This may be one of the most horrific crimes in my 31 years as a prosecutor, throwing these young men into the river while they were still alive," said U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton of Jackson.

The slain youths were Henry Hezekiah Dee and Charles Eddie Moore. Only 19 years old! The hero of all this is Moore’s brother, Thomas, who has pushed for justice in his brother's case since 1998.

The case was reopened in 2005 after Thomas Moore, a retired 30-year Army veteran and the brother of Charles Moore (one of the 1964 victims), returned to Mississippi with filmmaker David Ridgen of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation on a search for justice in the case. There they met up with Donna Ladd and photographer Kate Medley from the Jackson Free Press, an alternative newsweekly in Jackson, Miss. During several days of reporting, the CBC and the Free Press discovered simultaneously from locals that Seale had not died, as had been reported to gullible press by Seale's family members. The discovery helped to re-energize interest in the case after Moore and Ridgen visited U.S. Attorney Dunn Lampton on the same trip, and Lampton pledged to re-open the case.

There's that "gullible press" again. Gullible with an agenda.

To read the entry in Wikipedia, click here.

Seale got three life terms in prison.

Judge Wingate said that he took into account Seale’s advanced age and poor health, but added, “Then I had to take a look at the crime itself, the horror, the ghastliness of it.” Seale will serve his sentence at a medical facility.

Some folks might think this is cruel to send a 72-year old man to life in prison. Not me. Not for this guy. Did he take one moment to think that he was robbing those young men of their entire lives?

Throw him in the clink.

Stumble It!

The Last Igloo (Northwest Passage, part 2)

The American Free Press reports on the last igloo in Canada ... this is an excerpt:

Canada's last igloo to be flattened amid Arctic boom

by Michel Comte Fri Aug 17, 3:47 AM ET

IQALUIT, Canada (AFP) - The last igloo in Canada's far north, which housed a family restaurant for 27 years, is set to be demolished to make room for offices, amid a flurry of economic activity in the remote Arctic.

Purchased in May by an Edmonton-based hotel operator, the Kamotiq Inn restaurant is to be replaced in the coming months by a 4,645 square-meter (50,000 square-foot) office building.

The eatery at the main "Four Corners" intersection of Iqaluit, just 200 kilometers (120 miles) south of the Arctic Circle, is the only extant example of modern igloo architecture, inspired by the igloo shape and popularized in the 1950s and 1960s, in the North.

It was actually built in 1980 by two schoolteachers with the help of local townsfolk out of normal building materials. The couple was fascinated by the "igloo shape," said Suzie Michael, a former student who pitched in, hammering nails and painting the exterior.

"When I was growing up, I lived in (snow) igloos and it reminds me of that life," said her father, Inuit elder Simonie Michael, savoring Arctic char for lunch.

He has eaten here almost every day since it opened, enjoying "the warm hospitality, the food and the beer," and would like it to remain, he said.

But restaurant manager Brian Czar, who will soon be out of a job, told AFP: "Times are changing. The North is opening up, the city is growing and there's a growing demand for real estate in Iqaluit."

Indeed, an international rivalry has heated up as global warming opens up the vast Arctic to economic activity.

Scientists predict the famed Northwest Passage could be ice-free for shipping year-round by mid-century, cutting sea travel from London to Tokyo by 5,000 kilometers (3,100 miles).

...

Oil and mining companies, meanwhile, are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on Arctic exploration.

Soon, forestry companies are expected to follow the Boreal Forest creeping north.

Cruise ships are multiplying, allowing tourists to see polar bears and the spectacular break-up of Arctic ice each spring.

As well, the establishment of Canada's Nunavut territory in April 1999, splitting lands from the Northwest Territories to settle an aboriginal land claim, created thousands of government jobs in its new capital, Iqaluit, doubling its population to 7,000.

For the first time, the North's population has topped 100,000, according to the latest census in 2006.

Outside the Kamotiq Inn, newer Suzuki Vitaras, Ford F150s and Honda Civics zip along pot-hole peppered roads.

Cars are relatively new to Iqaluit. A decade ago, there were only a handful of taxi cabs here, ferrying visitors.

But the influx of people has driven new vehicle sales, to replace dog sleds and snowmobiles.

Now, for five minutes every morning and evening, gridlock slows traffic on the only two paved roads in town, and dozens of gravel lanes, as workers drive from home to work and back.

The town council is considering erecting the first traffic lights in Nunvavut, at the "Four Corners" intersection to ease drivers' rage.

On the outskirts, meanwhile, tents have been erected to house newcomers in summer, amid a housing shortage.

New home construction has been unable to keep up with demand because there are too few sealifts to bring in building materials in warmer months, when Frobisher Bay is clear of ice.

I must go and do something now to perk up my spirits. My spirits right now are very mad and sad. :-(

Stumble It!

Your Northwest Passage is on top of my oil!

Have you seen the news item about Canada getting more aggressive about claiming the Arctic and, most especially, the Northwest Passage? The conservative and Conservative Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, went up there recently to establish a military base in the Arctic. This move is to assert Canada’s rights over the region. It’s just a coincidence that Russia recently sent a submarine to drop a Russian flag at the bottom of the ocean. Oh, but wait ... there are more countries involved. U.S., Norway, and Denmark are all competing for subsurface rights. Why?

O-I-L ... lots and lots of O-I-L.

Now, how did your Northwest Passage get on top of my oil? -- G. Bush

This just in:

"The U.S. military has begun handing out decks of cards with pictures of the most wanted men in Stephen Harper's regime. There are 55 cards and they're handing them out so people can identify them.”

From CNN:

Last month, Harper announced that six to eight new patrol ships will be built to guard the Northwest Passage sea route in the Arctic, which the United States insists does not belong to Canada.

U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins has criticized Harper's promise to defend the Arctic, calling the Northwest Passage "neutral waters."

However, it's not that Switzerland kinda neutral ... if ya know what I mean.

If you want to read the entire article, click here.

I find much about this interesting ... for example, Stephen Harper is a conservative and he’s bucking Bush on this one. A nice surprise. At least for Ms. Manitoba. (Never underestimate how much Bush pisses off all kinds of people in the whole wide world.)

And, of course, no one has mentioned those folks who are truly the rightful “owners” ... the First Nation peoples of the Northwest Territories.

Stumble It!