The Melting Pot, a Positive or Negative?

I wanted to expand a little regarding what I finished with last post. There is no doubt that the decrease in religious participation has coincided with a deterioration of cultural values worldwide and in the US in particular. Let me just explain that I am not a fanatically religious person. Yet I do believe that participation in a faith based community is important and especially so for the population of the US as compared to other countries. I will explain why.

Last post I discussed the culture of gluttony and overconsumption we now have. If we humans are simply a bunch of carbon atoms amassed into molecules, cells, and organs. If we are basically glorified gorillas which have evolved larger brains and walk on two feet then I can understand why we overconsume. It is a matter of Darwinian survival, every man for themselves. I will overspend, overeat, and overconsume because there is no incentive to care about my neighbor as he is just a competitor in survival. If we are to survive as a group we must find ways to interconnect.

This is where religion plays a critical role. It connects people to each other in a way that secular institutions cannot. It connects people to each other within their church, within their community, and within their faith both nationally and internationally. It also connects people to each other through the belief that we are all products of god's creation resulting in connections between religions. Being part of a faith based institution is not only about faith but more importantly about establishing connections between people.

In any other country where there is uniformity and everybody is Icelandic or Swiss or Russian there is an inherent connection between all its citizens. People would be less likely to overconsume at the expense of their neighbor. On the contrary, this country is formed by numerous disconnected groups. This diversity provides great advantages but also results in a disparate and fragmented society. In the US people overconsume without guilt because they are disconnected from their neighbor who may be negatively effected by their overindulgence. They do not see and do not care about their neighbor only about there own sense of entitlement. It is all about them, what the individual can amass, without seeing the larger results of their behavior. This individual disconnectedness is especially inherent in this country due to its diversity and why the need to connect through religious organizations is so critical to our survival.

A Nation of Gluttons

Last week I was consulted on a patient in the hospital with an ear infection. She was a young woman and weighed over 300 pounds easy. I was rounding on her one day and her friend came in who also cleared 300 after just having gone to the cafeteria to bring up something for the two to eat. She brought two enormous slices of strawberry shortcake with mounds of whipped cream on top. They were neither embarrassed by their glutony or had any remorse in devouring these calorie laden snacks.

I have also seen incidences where an obese individual takes food from home and I am curious as to what they are bringing. I have seen one lady bring in granola, fruit, and yogurt every day thinking she must be trying to lose weight. But day after day, month after month there is no change. Now I feel sorry for her if in fact she eats a low calorie diet and cannot lose weight. But I suspect she goes home and gorges on yodels and ring dings. She brings in the healthy stuff to work just for show.

I just do not get it. What goes through these peoples mind as they add more girth to their bods and take years off their life. And don't give me the arguement that they are ignorant of the health effects or that they are so obese that they no longer care. If the fear of a shortened life with disease doesn't incentivize these individuals from restricting their intake then there is NOTHING that will. No government intervention, tax on certain foods, or public education will fix this problem. It is a national crisis and a huge economic burden on the health care system with no solution.

It is an American cultural problem of over consumption without thinking there is a payback. We over consume everything. We overconsume energy to the point of destroying our environment. We overspend and overborrow money to the point of bankrupting ourselves and our children. We overeat ourselves to the point of disease and death. We feel we can do anything to our bodies, our country, and our world because we are entitled. We have lost a sense of humility and self control. We care only about what we can consume at anybody's expense, even our own. We truly have a pathologic culture of conceit and self importance and I see no way to reverse it.

We need a national shrink to redirect our priorities and I think the only one who could do it is the man upstairs. Shana Tova

The Economic Tide

There is a simple truth which is lost on this administration. The fact is that the method to improve the lot of the poor and middle income people in this country is to improve the situation for business and the upper class which will raise everyone's standard of living. This so called supplied side economics or trickle down theory has historically been shown to be the most effective way to secure an improving future for most Americans and for future generations. But this simple reality is completely antithetical and an anathema to BO's ideology.

The problem lies in the fact that this administration is so ideologically rigid in it's idea that the rich have had all the advantages for so long at the expense of the poor. BO came in declaring now that I am here I will change the rules and the advantages will now go to the poor at the expense of the rich. They refuse to understand that it is not a battle of rich versus the poor, one having the advantages over the other. It's role is to improve both group's position and the best way to do this is not to take from the rich and give to the poor but to put in place policy that will enhance everybody's opportunity to succeed. A rising tide will raise all boats.

They must understand that there will always be rich people and poor people in a successful capitalistic society and in such a society the poor will be elevated economically as the entire pot increases. Success of the rich is not at the expense of the poor but to the benefit of the poor. The key is to provide OPPORTUNITY for all, not to guarantee the end result. Their job is to ensure a level playing field where anyone can excel based on his/her abilities but can also fail and be allowed to try again.

The administration must realize that the rich are not their enemies. The government must partner with business and the wealthy which then and only then will help the poor and middle class. Only business can produce wealth which can then be spread amongst all people and this idea is so distasteful to this administration. Their fault lies in the belief that they can short circuit the system by taking from the rich and giving to the poor without undermining the system. That government can orchestrate the distribution of wealth at it's whim and according to it's distorted sense of fairness spells the death of capitalism in the USA. It is said a rising tide can lift all boats, but contrarily, an ebbing tide will lower all boats however the rich will have the resources to move to a better shore.

Thank You and Goodbye

Thank You
A couple of weeks ago a 26 billion dollar package was passed by the government to deliver two main objectives. The first was to ensure that teachers would not be laid off and the second was to shore up medicaid programs in the states (government insurance for the poor). The next day I went to my children and thanked them for being so generous with their money. In essence the government is borrowing/stealing money which will be paid back in the future by my children and grand children. The government is basically taking their future income and giving it to me so I can take care of poor people. So thank you kids, for transferring your future wealth to me.

They are also transferring this stolen money to support ridiculous and unsustainable government pensions. This is instead of making the tough and necessary changes in those benefits just to continue pandering to secure votes and power. HOW IRRESPONSIBLE of these generational thieves to steal this money? They spend money as if there is no payback. Both parties are at fault (you know which one primarily) and are a bunch of pathetic cowards.

Good Bye
Yesterday I sent off my first child, my only daughter. She went to study abroad for 10 months before she starts college next Fall. I suppose I wasn't prepared for how difficult it was going to be for me. As if a piece of me has been removed, and one of my best parts. The years of her living with me under the same roof are over. It went way too fast. The memories are so numerous but it is difficult to think about them because they are by definition in the past and this marks the transition to a new stage for which I am not prepared. The memories just reinforce this painful change.

My daughter's main worry and apprehension was she didn't want things to change. She was worried that the dynamics of the family, the day to day relationship would be altered by her absence. Although I reassured her that things can never change between us, inevitably her absence produces a huge void in our household. Although this change is extremely difficult for me, it is good change. I know time will heal this emotional wound but in the meantime it is extremely difficult. As we enter a new and different stage in our father daughter relationship I know we will share experiences that exceed anything so far. So goodbye to my daughter for now. I miss you and love you so much.

Ground Zero Mosque, Too Close or Too Far

I think I have come up with the perfect location for the 9/11 mosque. Some say it is too close to the terrorist massacre that occurred but I say it is not close enough. I mean why should the mosque be built a whole two blocks away from ground zero. I propose that the mosque be located on the top floor of the Freedom Tower. Yes, one third of a mile up in the air in the replacement to the World Trade Center is the ideal place and fulfills several important goals.

I suspect it will be difficult to lease out the space on that floor. For whatever reason, companies and employees may fear occupying the top floor. By locating the mosque on that floor it alleviates this concern. Perhaps as time goes on they will need to expand and occupy more floors. Probably a Halal restaurant will need to be built on the floor. Maybe some office space or sleeping quarters for visiting Muslim leaders and dignitaries. Yes, put them all on the top floors of the Freedom Tower.

As tenants the Muslim community will be paying rent to support the existence of the replacement to the World Trade Center. This is a wonderful way to demonstrate their rejection of extremist Muslims. What better way to spend their dollars than to assist in the success of the building that was brought down in the name of Islam. Quite a statement by moderate Muslims that they will not be brought down by the extremists amongst their ranks.

The Mosque will be called the Cordoba Mosque in the Sky and will be the highest Mosque in the world attracting many tourists. The top floors will be packed with Muslim tourists from around the world to take in the views, be called to prayer, and to catch a bite at the Halal Windows of the World.

By putting a mosque on the top floor I think the chances of another similar attack on the building is brought way down. Al Quaeda will certainly be deterred from sending another plane or planting a car bomb in the basement if the result is the destruction of the Cordoba Mosque in the Sky along with their brethren in the building. It serves as a great deterrent.

Finally, Imam Rauf should have his top floor office facing New Jersey with all glass windows so he has a great view of any incoming aircraft.

9/11 Mosque, My Two Cents

Regarding the 9/11 mosque, there were two thoughts I heard that I thought were the most interesting. I am not sure where I heard the first but it alluded to the fact that the Muslims can build a mosque at ground zero when the Jews can build a synagogue in Mecca. This comment distinguishes the degree to which other religions are tolerated by Judaism and Islam. While the Jews and Christians are tolerant of Islam, unfortunately, the opposite cannot be said. By being intolerant of other religions, Islam engenders resistance when it requests to build a mosque based on our rules of equality, fairness, and tolerance.

The second was the comment by Newt Gingrich that if the goal of building the 9/11 mosque is to promote tolerance then why not have a building that houses a mosque, a church, and a synagogue. Let the religions co-exist in a building and be a microcosm of co-existence and tolerance. Let there be interfaith dialogue with classes, open debates, and courses that anyone can enrol into and potentially view over the Internet all over the world. If the religions can demonstrate peaceful coexistence and constructive communication in this building it will serve as an example to the entire world.

I think the sole purpose of this building should be as a symbol of tolerance amongst the religions. This is exactly the opposite of the mindset of the 9/11 terrorists and will have exactly the opposite outcome as the one intended by the terrorists (to instill terror). It should serve to eliminate suspicion and fear. Trust not terror should be the aim of this institution. It will hopefully serve as a deterrent to prevent future acts of intolerance and would also serve to encourage future generations to "buy in" to the idea of religious tolerance primarily amongst Muslims.

Unfortunately, the current plan does not appear to promote tolerance. In fact, it seems to be worsening the isolation of Muslims and promoting suspicion and fear. This is an enormous chance for moderate Islamic leaders to change their image that currently exists. By promoting inter-religious tolerance through this initiative they can impact future generations throughout the world.

OR Personnel

I was in the operating room a few days ago doing some procedures and a couple of things occurred which demonstrated the stupidity that has infiltrated the medical field. It also demonstrates the degree to which the legal profession has hamstrung the medical profession into the way we treat patients and in performing meaningless tasks which detract from patient care.

Besides the patient there are four professionals in the operating room. The surgeon, the anesthesiologist, the circulating nurse and the scrub tech (the person who assists the surgeon). The job of the nurse is to be available to the patient and the anesthesiologist throughout the procedure. In recent years all they have time to do is fill out the enormous volume of paperwork that must be completed for each procedure. In my case, a child was undergoing a procedure and the nurse was complaining that at the end of the procedure she had not yet completed her paperwork and was unable to help the patient. I do not blame her but I blame the lawyers who have created an atmosphere where everything has to be documented to such a degree in case anyone in the future needs to look back. More attention is paid to the paperwork than to the patient who is having surgery.

Due to the recent incidences of operations being performed on the incorrect side, the surgeon is asked to mark the site in the waiting room before entering the OR. My case involved an elderly gentleman who had a visible lesion on the outside of his ear. It was clearly evident to anyone who would look. The nurse asked me to mark the site. I said to her you must be kidding, the lesion is the mark. She agreed with me but told me this is the policy and I must comply. So here I was ridiculously making a mark next to a visible lesion to pacify some bureaucrat that created a policy to prevent lawsuits.

Although, the lawyers are supposed to institute changes which benefit the population, they have in certain circumstances created a system that forces that care to be diminished. We are so concerned with the threats of a lawsuit that our judgements are impaired and it is the patients that suffer. By instituting blanket policies it reinforces the belief not to use one's common sense but to create policies that dumb down everybody to pacify the lawyers.

In addition to the patient and the four professionals in the operating room I should truly add that invisible person that lurks in the shadows waiting to second guess, the patient's lawyer.