TO COMMENT CLICK HERE
welcome to reality trivia
reality is the state of things as they actually exist
mar 3, 2021
Real News Today
*MANCHIN YELLS HE WILL “NEVER… JESUS CHRIST!” VOTE TO KILL FILIBUSTER
(Sellouts)
*Donald Trump's "real" legacy to America: The weaponization of an alternate reality
(SUCKERS)
*A man in New Jersey admitted to working with white supremacists nationwide to destroy properties belonging to Black and Jewish Americans(Amerikkkans)
(for previous day's articles see "what's inside" below)
comment/tweet of the day
TRUMP’S PANDEMIC DEATH TRACKER:
dc report.com
Americans Killed by Inaction, Neglect, Incompetence and Corruption
514,657
(out of 28,664,481 current cases)
Vietnam War
1964-1975
American military - 58,000
Korean War
1950-1953
AMERICAN MILITARY - 37,000
WW2
1939-1945
AMERICAN MILITARY - 413,000
Spanish Flu
1918-1919
AMERICAN CITIZENS - 675,000
WW1
1914-1918
American military - 117,000
---
lex: summarizing fbi director wray: america has a white trash problem.
Trump served with civil rights lawsuit for Jan. 6 insurrection
Travis Gettys - RAW STORY
March 03, 2021
Former president Donald Trump has been served with a civil rights lawsuit that accuses him of inciting the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection.
Attorneys for Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and the NAACP formally served the lawsuit, which was filed in February, to the former president at his Mar-A-Lago club, reported The Daily Beast.
"Donald Trump has to go away," Thompson said last month. "If he doesn't, we will put him out of business."
The suit alleges that Trump incited the riot at the U.S. Capitol with his false claims about a "stolen" election, which the complaint says amounted to a conspiracy under the 1871 "Klan Act" to interfere with civil rights by stopping the certification of Joe Biden's Electoral College win.
The complaint names Trump, along with his attorney Rudy Giuliani, the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, as defendants.
No attorneys have stepped forward as Trump's representative in the lawsuit, which was signed for by someone named "Ricky" when it arrived at Mar-A-Lago by certified mail.
Attorneys for Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MS) and the NAACP formally served the lawsuit, which was filed in February, to the former president at his Mar-A-Lago club, reported The Daily Beast.
"Donald Trump has to go away," Thompson said last month. "If he doesn't, we will put him out of business."
The suit alleges that Trump incited the riot at the U.S. Capitol with his false claims about a "stolen" election, which the complaint says amounted to a conspiracy under the 1871 "Klan Act" to interfere with civil rights by stopping the certification of Joe Biden's Electoral College win.
The complaint names Trump, along with his attorney Rudy Giuliani, the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers, as defendants.
No attorneys have stepped forward as Trump's representative in the lawsuit, which was signed for by someone named "Ricky" when it arrived at Mar-A-Lago by certified mail.
Eating meat 'raises risk of heart disease, diabetes and pneumonia'
UK researchers find link between regular meat intake and nine non-cancerous illnesses
Denis Campbell Health policy editor - THE GUARDIAN
Tue 2 Mar 2021 09.20 EST
Eating meat regularly increases someone’s risk of developing heart disease, diabetes, pneumonia and other serious illnesses, research has found.
It is already known that intake of red and processed meat heightens the risk of being diagnosed with bowel cancer. But these findings are the first to assess whether meat consumption is linked to any of the 25 non-cancerous illnesses that most commonly lead to people being admitted to hospital in the UK.
The academics from Oxford University who have published the study found that consumption of red meat, processed meat and poultry meat such as chicken and turkey, either alone or together, at least three times a week was linked to a greater risk of nine different illnesses.
Their results add to the growing evidence from researchers and the World Health Organization that eating too much meat, especially red and processed meat, can damage someone’s health.
The findings, published in the journal BMC Medicine, are based on analysis of the health records of 474,985 middle-aged Britons. The researchers examined details provided about their diets with information from their medical records about hospital admissions and also mortality data for an average of eight years.
The study concluded: “On average, participants who reported consuming meat regularly (three or more times per week) had more adverse health behaviours and characteristics than participants who consumed meat less regularly.
“Higher consumption of unprocessed red and processed meat combined was associated with higher risks of ischaemic heart disease, pneumonia, diverticular disease, colon polyps and diabetes, and higher consumption of poultry meat was associated with higher risks of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, gastritis and duodenitis, diverticular disease, gallbladder disease and diabetes.”
The academics, led by Dr Keren Papier from the university’s Nuffield Department of Population Health, found that every 70 grams of unprocessed red meat and processed meat that someone consumed daily raised their risk of heart disease by 15% and of diabetes by 30%.
Those meats may raise the risk of heart disease because they contain saturated fatty acids, which can increase low-density lipoprotein or “bad” cholesterol, which is known to put people at greater risk of heart problems.
Similarly, every 30 grams of poultry meat eaten daily increased the risk of developing gastro-oesophageal reflux by 17% and of diabetes by 14%, they found.
However, it was mainly meat-eaters who were overweight or obese who were running these risks, it emerged during the study. Most of the increased risks of disease identified were reduced once participants’ body mass index was taken into account.
“Differences in BMI across the categories of meat consumption appear to account for a substantial part of the increased risks,” the article in BMC Medicine says.
Eating meat regularly did reduce the risk of someone suffering from the iron deficiency anaemia, though.
“We have long known that unprocessed red meat and processed meat consumption is likely to be carcinogenic and this research is the first to assess the risk of 25 non-cancerous health conditions in relation to meat intake in one study,” said Papier.
Further research was needed into whether the differences in risk she and her team observed reflected “causal relationships [with meat intake] and, if so, the extent to which these diseases could be prevented by decreasing meat consumption”, she added.
Public Health England said that anyone who eats more than 90g of red or processed meat a day should cut down to 70g
Dr Alison Tedstone, the agency’s chief nutritionist, said: “Globally the evidence suggests that people who eat red and processed meat should limit their intake. While it can form part of a healthy diet, eating too much has been linked to increased risk of developing bowel cancer.” For the sake of their health people should follow its guidelines for a healthy, balanced diet set out in its Eatwell Plate, she added.
The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition first declared in 2010 that eating too much red or processed meat probably increased the risk of bowel cancer.
The British Meat Processors Association has been approached for a response.
It is already known that intake of red and processed meat heightens the risk of being diagnosed with bowel cancer. But these findings are the first to assess whether meat consumption is linked to any of the 25 non-cancerous illnesses that most commonly lead to people being admitted to hospital in the UK.
The academics from Oxford University who have published the study found that consumption of red meat, processed meat and poultry meat such as chicken and turkey, either alone or together, at least three times a week was linked to a greater risk of nine different illnesses.
Their results add to the growing evidence from researchers and the World Health Organization that eating too much meat, especially red and processed meat, can damage someone’s health.
The findings, published in the journal BMC Medicine, are based on analysis of the health records of 474,985 middle-aged Britons. The researchers examined details provided about their diets with information from their medical records about hospital admissions and also mortality data for an average of eight years.
The study concluded: “On average, participants who reported consuming meat regularly (three or more times per week) had more adverse health behaviours and characteristics than participants who consumed meat less regularly.
“Higher consumption of unprocessed red and processed meat combined was associated with higher risks of ischaemic heart disease, pneumonia, diverticular disease, colon polyps and diabetes, and higher consumption of poultry meat was associated with higher risks of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, gastritis and duodenitis, diverticular disease, gallbladder disease and diabetes.”
The academics, led by Dr Keren Papier from the university’s Nuffield Department of Population Health, found that every 70 grams of unprocessed red meat and processed meat that someone consumed daily raised their risk of heart disease by 15% and of diabetes by 30%.
Those meats may raise the risk of heart disease because they contain saturated fatty acids, which can increase low-density lipoprotein or “bad” cholesterol, which is known to put people at greater risk of heart problems.
Similarly, every 30 grams of poultry meat eaten daily increased the risk of developing gastro-oesophageal reflux by 17% and of diabetes by 14%, they found.
However, it was mainly meat-eaters who were overweight or obese who were running these risks, it emerged during the study. Most of the increased risks of disease identified were reduced once participants’ body mass index was taken into account.
“Differences in BMI across the categories of meat consumption appear to account for a substantial part of the increased risks,” the article in BMC Medicine says.
Eating meat regularly did reduce the risk of someone suffering from the iron deficiency anaemia, though.
“We have long known that unprocessed red meat and processed meat consumption is likely to be carcinogenic and this research is the first to assess the risk of 25 non-cancerous health conditions in relation to meat intake in one study,” said Papier.
Further research was needed into whether the differences in risk she and her team observed reflected “causal relationships [with meat intake] and, if so, the extent to which these diseases could be prevented by decreasing meat consumption”, she added.
Public Health England said that anyone who eats more than 90g of red or processed meat a day should cut down to 70g
Dr Alison Tedstone, the agency’s chief nutritionist, said: “Globally the evidence suggests that people who eat red and processed meat should limit their intake. While it can form part of a healthy diet, eating too much has been linked to increased risk of developing bowel cancer.” For the sake of their health people should follow its guidelines for a healthy, balanced diet set out in its Eatwell Plate, she added.
The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition first declared in 2010 that eating too much red or processed meat probably increased the risk of bowel cancer.
The British Meat Processors Association has been approached for a response.
Federal watchdog asked DOJ to open 'criminal investigation' into ex-Transit Sec. Elaine Chao: report
Matthew Chapman - raw story
March 03, 2021
On Wednesday, The New York Times reported that the Transportation Department inspector general asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into former Secretary Elaine Chao, wife of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
"In a report made public on Wednesday, the inspector general said the Justice Department's criminal and public integrity divisions both declined to take up the matter in the closing weeks of the Trump administration, even after the inspector general found repeated examples of Ms. Chao using her staff and her office to help benefit her family and their business operations and revealed that staff members at the agency had raised ethics concerns," reported Eric Lipton and Michael Forsythe. "'A formal investigation into potential misuses of position was warranted,' Mitch Behm, the department's deputy inspector general, said on Tuesday in a letter to House lawmakers, accompanying a 44-page report detailing the investigation and the findings of wrongdoing."
"The inspector general's investigation detailed a series of instances where Ms. Chao directed her staff to spend federal government time and resources to help with matters related to the shipbuilding company and her father," said the report. "The Chao family company, Foremost Group, was responsible as of 2019 for a large portion of orders at one of China's biggest state-funded shipyards, and has secured long-term charters with a Chinese state-owned steel maker, The Times reported. Foremost's ships carry bulk cargo such as iron ore and coal, focusing on shipping those commodities to China."
"The investigators also found that she repeatedly asked agency staff members to help do chores for her father, including editing her father's Wikipedia page, promoting his Chinese-language biography, and directing two staff members from the transportation secretary's office to send a copy of her father's book 'to a well-known C.E.O. of a major U.S. corporation' to ask if he would write a foreword for the book," said the report.
Chao resigned in protest of former President Donald Trump's handling of the Capitol riot ahead of President Joe Biden taking office. The IG investigation had been ongoing for months, with the Trump administration accused of trying to replace the watchdog to produce a more favorable outcome.
"In a report made public on Wednesday, the inspector general said the Justice Department's criminal and public integrity divisions both declined to take up the matter in the closing weeks of the Trump administration, even after the inspector general found repeated examples of Ms. Chao using her staff and her office to help benefit her family and their business operations and revealed that staff members at the agency had raised ethics concerns," reported Eric Lipton and Michael Forsythe. "'A formal investigation into potential misuses of position was warranted,' Mitch Behm, the department's deputy inspector general, said on Tuesday in a letter to House lawmakers, accompanying a 44-page report detailing the investigation and the findings of wrongdoing."
"The inspector general's investigation detailed a series of instances where Ms. Chao directed her staff to spend federal government time and resources to help with matters related to the shipbuilding company and her father," said the report. "The Chao family company, Foremost Group, was responsible as of 2019 for a large portion of orders at one of China's biggest state-funded shipyards, and has secured long-term charters with a Chinese state-owned steel maker, The Times reported. Foremost's ships carry bulk cargo such as iron ore and coal, focusing on shipping those commodities to China."
"The investigators also found that she repeatedly asked agency staff members to help do chores for her father, including editing her father's Wikipedia page, promoting his Chinese-language biography, and directing two staff members from the transportation secretary's office to send a copy of her father's book 'to a well-known C.E.O. of a major U.S. corporation' to ask if he would write a foreword for the book," said the report.
Chao resigned in protest of former President Donald Trump's handling of the Capitol riot ahead of President Joe Biden taking office. The IG investigation had been ongoing for months, with the Trump administration accused of trying to replace the watchdog to produce a more favorable outcome.
Colleges confront their links to slavery and wrestle with how to atone for past sins
the conversation
March 1, 2021 8.18am EST
Colleges and universities across the U.S. have been taking a hard look at their ties to slavery.
This isn’t an entirely new phenomenon. Back in 2006, Brown University published a report showing that the university – from its construction to its endowment – participated in and benefited from the slave trade and slavery.
And since then, several other colleges and universities have disclosed their ties to the use of slave labor.
For instance, Johns Hopkins University – whose namesake and founder has historically been portrayed as an abolitionist – reported in December 2020 that its founder actually employed four enslaved individuals in his Baltimore household.
At the University of Mississippi, a slavery research group has found that at least 11 enslaved people labored on the campus.
At Georgetown University, officials disclosed in 2016 that one of its presidents – Thomas Mulledy – sold 272 enslaved men, women and children in 1838 to save the university from bankruptcy. The revelation sparked an effort to track down descendants of the people and to atone by offering preferential admission – but not scholarships – for them to study at Georgetown.
Georgetown University has since committed to raising $400,000 a year for reparations to help the living descendants of enslaved people sold by the school’s president in 1838. But some students have criticized the plan as not going far enough. Meanwhile, implementation has apparently stalled.
Action steps debated
Many universities benefited from slavery, and there has been a growing discussion about what, if anything, universities owe to the descendants of the people they enslaved and what they can do to atone.
In Virginia, for example, the Virginia House approved a bill to require five state universities founded before 1865 to offer economic assistance and four-year scholarships to descendants of enslaved people who labored on the campuses. The Virginia Senate has yet to take up the measure, known as HB 1980.
From my vantage point as a historian of slavery, capitalism and racial inequality, the issue goes beyond whatever “connections” U.S. colleges and universities have had to slavery. Even after slavery, these schools continued to oppress Black people by not allowing them to enroll as students.
Inequitable access
Institutions that used slave labor were slow to open to African American students. Georgetown graduated its first Black undergraduate, Samuel A. Halsey Jr., in 1953.
The University of Virginia graduated its first Black undergraduate, Robert Bland, in 1959.
Yet admission to traditionally white universities is one piece of the higher education puzzle. Historically Black colleges and universities, commonly known as HBCUs, continue to have an outsize role in ensuring African American upward mobility through higher education. Even though the nation’s 100 or so HBCUs represent less than 3% of the nation’s 4,360 colleges and universities, they graduated 13% of Black undergraduate college students nationally in the 2017-2018 school year.
And the institutions that tend to enroll higher proportions of historically underrepresented groups – including African Americans – also tend to be the least well funded. That matters because students who attend better-funded colleges tend to graduate at higher rates.
Financial disparities
The disparities transcend higher education. White families, on average, tend to have 10 times the wealth of Black families. That gap is likely to grow in part because the racial wage gap is expanding.
Student loan debt also disproportionately affects Black Americans.
Four years after they graduate, Black Americans have $25,000 more debt than their white counterparts, in part because of additional graduate borrowing and accrual of interest. Consequently, African Americans face more difficulties repaying loans than their white counterparts.
Are reparations enough?
Universities are beginning to put resources toward efforts to atone for their roles in slavery.
The Virginia Theological Seminary is designating $1.7 million as a reparations fund that will be spent on scholarships and new curriculum. Princeton Theological Seminary is contributing a $27 million endowment expected to fund scholarships, community engagement, curriculum development and other efforts to atone for its ties to slavery.
St. Mary’s College of Maryland has built the first memorial to enslaved people of Southern Maryland on its campus. I spoke with St. Mary’s history professor Garrey Dennie, who says that the college is building “a curriculum that is attentive to the experiences of African Americans both in the present and in the past” as part of an effort to right past wrongs.
Yet scholars and economists studying racial economic inequality, such as William A. Darity Jr., point to the need for federal action. This action could range from economic reparations and endowment-building at HBCUs to debt forgiveness for Black students.
As colleges and universities continue to examine how they benefited from slavery and shut out African Americans from their campuses for a century after slavery was abolished, reparations only to the descendants of those who were enslaved by agents of a particular college might be just one part of the equation.
To eliminate the educational disparities that they helped uphold after slavery, former slaveholding colleges must, I believe, address inequality on a much broader level. At the heart of the matter is the extent to which Black Americans can afford to pay schools that once paid nothing for the labor of the people they enslaved.
This isn’t an entirely new phenomenon. Back in 2006, Brown University published a report showing that the university – from its construction to its endowment – participated in and benefited from the slave trade and slavery.
And since then, several other colleges and universities have disclosed their ties to the use of slave labor.
For instance, Johns Hopkins University – whose namesake and founder has historically been portrayed as an abolitionist – reported in December 2020 that its founder actually employed four enslaved individuals in his Baltimore household.
At the University of Mississippi, a slavery research group has found that at least 11 enslaved people labored on the campus.
At Georgetown University, officials disclosed in 2016 that one of its presidents – Thomas Mulledy – sold 272 enslaved men, women and children in 1838 to save the university from bankruptcy. The revelation sparked an effort to track down descendants of the people and to atone by offering preferential admission – but not scholarships – for them to study at Georgetown.
Georgetown University has since committed to raising $400,000 a year for reparations to help the living descendants of enslaved people sold by the school’s president in 1838. But some students have criticized the plan as not going far enough. Meanwhile, implementation has apparently stalled.
Action steps debated
Many universities benefited from slavery, and there has been a growing discussion about what, if anything, universities owe to the descendants of the people they enslaved and what they can do to atone.
In Virginia, for example, the Virginia House approved a bill to require five state universities founded before 1865 to offer economic assistance and four-year scholarships to descendants of enslaved people who labored on the campuses. The Virginia Senate has yet to take up the measure, known as HB 1980.
From my vantage point as a historian of slavery, capitalism and racial inequality, the issue goes beyond whatever “connections” U.S. colleges and universities have had to slavery. Even after slavery, these schools continued to oppress Black people by not allowing them to enroll as students.
Inequitable access
Institutions that used slave labor were slow to open to African American students. Georgetown graduated its first Black undergraduate, Samuel A. Halsey Jr., in 1953.
The University of Virginia graduated its first Black undergraduate, Robert Bland, in 1959.
Yet admission to traditionally white universities is one piece of the higher education puzzle. Historically Black colleges and universities, commonly known as HBCUs, continue to have an outsize role in ensuring African American upward mobility through higher education. Even though the nation’s 100 or so HBCUs represent less than 3% of the nation’s 4,360 colleges and universities, they graduated 13% of Black undergraduate college students nationally in the 2017-2018 school year.
And the institutions that tend to enroll higher proportions of historically underrepresented groups – including African Americans – also tend to be the least well funded. That matters because students who attend better-funded colleges tend to graduate at higher rates.
Financial disparities
The disparities transcend higher education. White families, on average, tend to have 10 times the wealth of Black families. That gap is likely to grow in part because the racial wage gap is expanding.
Student loan debt also disproportionately affects Black Americans.
Four years after they graduate, Black Americans have $25,000 more debt than their white counterparts, in part because of additional graduate borrowing and accrual of interest. Consequently, African Americans face more difficulties repaying loans than their white counterparts.
Are reparations enough?
Universities are beginning to put resources toward efforts to atone for their roles in slavery.
The Virginia Theological Seminary is designating $1.7 million as a reparations fund that will be spent on scholarships and new curriculum. Princeton Theological Seminary is contributing a $27 million endowment expected to fund scholarships, community engagement, curriculum development and other efforts to atone for its ties to slavery.
St. Mary’s College of Maryland has built the first memorial to enslaved people of Southern Maryland on its campus. I spoke with St. Mary’s history professor Garrey Dennie, who says that the college is building “a curriculum that is attentive to the experiences of African Americans both in the present and in the past” as part of an effort to right past wrongs.
Yet scholars and economists studying racial economic inequality, such as William A. Darity Jr., point to the need for federal action. This action could range from economic reparations and endowment-building at HBCUs to debt forgiveness for Black students.
As colleges and universities continue to examine how they benefited from slavery and shut out African Americans from their campuses for a century after slavery was abolished, reparations only to the descendants of those who were enslaved by agents of a particular college might be just one part of the equation.
To eliminate the educational disparities that they helped uphold after slavery, former slaveholding colleges must, I believe, address inequality on a much broader level. At the heart of the matter is the extent to which Black Americans can afford to pay schools that once paid nothing for the labor of the people they enslaved.
'Bad policy and bad politics': Manchin is now trying to cut unemployment benefits and limit survival checks
Jake Johnson, Common Dreams - RAW STORY
March 02, 2021
Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and other conservative members of the Senate Democratic caucus are reportedly pressing for changes to the emerging coronavirus relief legislation that would cut the bill's proposed weekly unemployment supplement and further restrict eligibility for $1,400 direct payments.
The $1.9 trillion relief measure approved by the House of Representatives late last week proposes extending emergency unemployment insurance (UI) programs through the end of August with a weekly federal supplement of $400, up from the current $300-per-week boost that is set to begin expiring on March 14.
"Further 'targeting' or 'tightening' eligibility means taking survival checks away from millions of families who got them last time. That's bad policy and bad politics too."
—Rep. Pramila Jayapal
But as Roll Call reported late Monday after conservative Democrats met virtually with President Joe Biden to discuss the relief package, Manchin "said he'd prefer to see a $300 benefit in response to criticism that some laid-off workers could end up making more money on unemployment than they would on the job"—a right-wing talking point that Republicans have deployed in their efforts to slash UI benefits.
"We're just looking for a targeted bill," said Manchin, whose support Democrats need to pass the so-called American Rescue Plan (ARP) without any Republican votes.
According to the Washington Post, Manchin and other conservative Democrats also pitched "tightening income eligibility for the $1,400 stimulus payments," a demand that House Democrats rejected in their legislation.
The House-passed relief bill calls for sending full $1,400 payments to individuals earning up to $75,000 per year and married couples earning up to $150,000 per year, with the payments gradually phasing out thereafter—an eligibility structure that resembles the one used for the previous two rounds of checks.
Despite warnings that doing so would be politically "suicidal," Biden has previously said he would be open to lowering the income cutoff for the direct payments.
Noting that progressive lawmakers are already furious over Senate Democrats' plans to move forward with a relief bill that excludes a minimum wage increase—pointing to the parliamentarian's advisory ruling against the provision—economist Arindrajit Dube cautioned that slashing UI benefits or imposing additional restrictions on eligibility for direct relief payments would "cause a full blown revolt from progressives."
House Democrats, who did not have to contend with the Senate's so-called Byrd Rule, included a provision to increase the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025 in their relief bill.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, warned late Monday that "further 'targeting' or 'tightening' eligibility means taking survival checks away from millions of families who got them last time."
"That's bad policy and bad politics too," Jayapal tweeted.
The $1.9 trillion relief measure approved by the House of Representatives late last week proposes extending emergency unemployment insurance (UI) programs through the end of August with a weekly federal supplement of $400, up from the current $300-per-week boost that is set to begin expiring on March 14.
"Further 'targeting' or 'tightening' eligibility means taking survival checks away from millions of families who got them last time. That's bad policy and bad politics too."
—Rep. Pramila Jayapal
But as Roll Call reported late Monday after conservative Democrats met virtually with President Joe Biden to discuss the relief package, Manchin "said he'd prefer to see a $300 benefit in response to criticism that some laid-off workers could end up making more money on unemployment than they would on the job"—a right-wing talking point that Republicans have deployed in their efforts to slash UI benefits.
"We're just looking for a targeted bill," said Manchin, whose support Democrats need to pass the so-called American Rescue Plan (ARP) without any Republican votes.
According to the Washington Post, Manchin and other conservative Democrats also pitched "tightening income eligibility for the $1,400 stimulus payments," a demand that House Democrats rejected in their legislation.
The House-passed relief bill calls for sending full $1,400 payments to individuals earning up to $75,000 per year and married couples earning up to $150,000 per year, with the payments gradually phasing out thereafter—an eligibility structure that resembles the one used for the previous two rounds of checks.
Despite warnings that doing so would be politically "suicidal," Biden has previously said he would be open to lowering the income cutoff for the direct payments.
Noting that progressive lawmakers are already furious over Senate Democrats' plans to move forward with a relief bill that excludes a minimum wage increase—pointing to the parliamentarian's advisory ruling against the provision—economist Arindrajit Dube cautioned that slashing UI benefits or imposing additional restrictions on eligibility for direct relief payments would "cause a full blown revolt from progressives."
House Democrats, who did not have to contend with the Senate's so-called Byrd Rule, included a provision to increase the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025 in their relief bill.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, warned late Monday that "further 'targeting' or 'tightening' eligibility means taking survival checks away from millions of families who got them last time."
"That's bad policy and bad politics too," Jayapal tweeted.
PAYING HOMAGE TO A PIECE OF SHIT!!!
from under a rock
proof of stupidity, it always exposes itself!!!
where facts don't matter, racism revealed, and ignorance is glorified.
trump is toast but the stupid still THRIVE!
Mitch McConnell 'concerned' people won't go back to work if they get $1,400 checks
---
QAnon fan gets busted by his own Twitter account after vandalizing 4,000-year-old archeological site
---
‘Un-Christian liar’ Ted Cruz pummeled for lie blaming Joe Biden for totally non-existent ‘ban’ on Dr. Seuss Books
---
Mike Pence torn to shreds for justifying insurrectionists' conspiracies: 'These lies almost got you lynched'
---
GOP's Boebert freaks out that Equality Act will establish 'supremacy of gays, lesbians and transvestites'
they don't get anymore stupid than this clown111
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott ends statewide mask mandate and capacity limits on businesses
Texas Tribune - raw story
March 02, 2021
Gov. Greg Abbott announced Thursday that he is ending the statewide mask mandate and allowing all businesses to open at full capacity.
"It is now time to open Texas 100%," Abbott said from a Mexican restaurant in Lubbock, arguing that Texas has fought the coronavirus pandemic to the point that "people and businesses don't need the state telling them how to operate" any longer.
Abbott said he was rescinding "most of the earlier executive orders" he has issued over the past year to stem the spread of the virus. He said starting next Wednesday, "all businesses of any type are allowed to open 100%." He also said he was ending the mask mandate, though it was not immediately clear when that would go into effect. Abbott first instituted the mask requirement last summer.
The news is not entirely unexpected. Abbott said Thursday that his office was looking at when it could lift all statewide coronavirus orders and that he would have announcements "pretty soon." But it comes as the spread of the virus remains serious across the state.
The current trajectory of the virus has been difficult to measure in recent days due last month's winter storm, which forced many large counties to close their testing centers and not report any cases. Daily confirmed cases and deaths are clearly down compared to a statewide peak in January. Hospitalization data has been less disrupted, though, and has shown a consistent decline since late January.
Still, 59 new deaths were reported on March 1. And only 6.5% of Texans had been fully vaccinated as of Sunday, though Abbott has been optimistic that the pace will pick up as more vaccines are made available to Texas.
Experts say Texas is a long way from reaching herd immunity. Hitting the 70% to 80% level that many estimate is needed would mean vaccinating some 22 million people, or nearly 100% of adults in the state, according to census numbers. The vaccines are currently not approved for children under 16, who make up about 23% of the population.
Scientists do not yet know for sure whether or how well the vaccines prevent the spread of the virus, though some preliminary research has suggested that some vaccines might be able to do so to some extent.
The Centers for Disease Control recommends that people who have received two doses of the vaccine continue to avoid crowds, stay at least 6 feet away from people who live outside their households, and wear masks to cover their nose and mouth.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious-disease doctor, has repeatedly said that he does not know when Americans will be able to return to normal, but that they may still need to continue wearing face masks into 2022.
"It is now time to open Texas 100%," Abbott said from a Mexican restaurant in Lubbock, arguing that Texas has fought the coronavirus pandemic to the point that "people and businesses don't need the state telling them how to operate" any longer.
Abbott said he was rescinding "most of the earlier executive orders" he has issued over the past year to stem the spread of the virus. He said starting next Wednesday, "all businesses of any type are allowed to open 100%." He also said he was ending the mask mandate, though it was not immediately clear when that would go into effect. Abbott first instituted the mask requirement last summer.
The news is not entirely unexpected. Abbott said Thursday that his office was looking at when it could lift all statewide coronavirus orders and that he would have announcements "pretty soon." But it comes as the spread of the virus remains serious across the state.
The current trajectory of the virus has been difficult to measure in recent days due last month's winter storm, which forced many large counties to close their testing centers and not report any cases. Daily confirmed cases and deaths are clearly down compared to a statewide peak in January. Hospitalization data has been less disrupted, though, and has shown a consistent decline since late January.
Still, 59 new deaths were reported on March 1. And only 6.5% of Texans had been fully vaccinated as of Sunday, though Abbott has been optimistic that the pace will pick up as more vaccines are made available to Texas.
Experts say Texas is a long way from reaching herd immunity. Hitting the 70% to 80% level that many estimate is needed would mean vaccinating some 22 million people, or nearly 100% of adults in the state, according to census numbers. The vaccines are currently not approved for children under 16, who make up about 23% of the population.
Scientists do not yet know for sure whether or how well the vaccines prevent the spread of the virus, though some preliminary research has suggested that some vaccines might be able to do so to some extent.
The Centers for Disease Control recommends that people who have received two doses of the vaccine continue to avoid crowds, stay at least 6 feet away from people who live outside their households, and wear masks to cover their nose and mouth.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious-disease doctor, has repeatedly said that he does not know when Americans will be able to return to normal, but that they may still need to continue wearing face masks into 2022.
COVID-19 revealed how sick the US health care delivery system really is
the conversation
March 2, 2021 8.24am EST
If you got the COVID-19 shot, you likely received a little paper card that shows you’ve been vaccinated. Make sure you keep that card in a safe place. There is no coordinated way to share information about who has been vaccinated and who has not.
That is just one of the glaring flaws that COVID-19 has revealed about the U.S. health care system: It does not share health information well. Coordination between public health agencies and medical providers is lacking. Technical and regulatory restrictions impede use of digital technologies. To put it bluntly, our health care delivery system is failing patients. Prolonged disputes about the Affordable Care Act and rising health care costs have done little to help; the problems go beyond insurance and access.
I have spent most of my career within the domain of information technology and IT-based innovation and systems engineering. As a professor of health informatics, I have focused on health care transformation. For two years, I served on the Health Innovation Committee at HIMSS, the preeminent global health information and technology organization. In short, I have studied these problems for decades, and I can tell you that most of them aren’t about medicine or technology. Rather, they are about the inability of our delivery system to meet the evolving needs of patients.
We need a high-performance systemIn reality, the U.S. health care sector is not a system at all. Instead, it is an underperforming conglomerate of independent entities: hospitals, clinics, community health and urgent care centers, individual practitioners, small group practices, pharmacy and retail outlets, and more, most of which compete for profits and in some cases pay sky-high salaries to executives.
These entities often function in silos. Errors, gaps, duplication of services and poor patient outcomes are often the result.
Here’s an example: A heart surgery patient, still on oxygen and in intensive care just two days earlier, is referred to her primary care physician for follow-up, and to a rehabilitation center for therapy. Neither her doctor nor the facility knows the patient was even hospitalized, nor do they have access to her records or medication list.
Shopping for doctors
For patients, this might mean a disjointed set of services that don’t offer a coordinated plan of care or even a timely or comprehensive diagnosis of their health problems. Patients with chronic conditions often see more than 10 different doctors during dozens of office visits per year.
The specialist may not even be aware when the patient does not return. Patient information is seldom shared; specialists are often associated with different medical systems that don’t share records. And even when they try, accurately matching patient IDs in different systems can be problematic.
The challenge now is to transform the status quo into a high-performance system, a true 21st-century health care delivery system. Bringing systems engineering and information technologies to medical practice can help make that happen, but doing that requires a holistic approach.
Let’s start with electronic health records. More than 20 years ago, the Institute of Medicine called for the transition from paper to digital health records. This would allow patients to easily share lab, imaging and other test results with different providers. Nearly a decade went by before action occurred on the recommendation. In 2009, the HITECH Act was passed, which provided US$30 billion of incentives for the transition.
Yet now, 12 years down the road, we’re still a long way from a patient’s electronic health records becoming universally available at the point of care. Connectivity across systems and networks remains fragmented, and a lack of trust between organizations, along with anti-competitive behavior, results in an unwillingness to share patient information.
Unsafe medical treatment
One failure of the system is an inability to accurately identify and match patient records. Few standards exist for collecting patient information. With hundreds of vendors and thousands of hospitals, doctor’s offices, pharmacies and other facilities participating in the process, variation is huge. Is John Doe at 250 Park Ridge Drive the same as John E. Doe at 250 Parkridge?
In 2017, the American Hospital Association estimated 45% of large hospitals reported difficulties in correctly identifying patients across information technology systems. This means, on occasions at least, clinicians are making decisions that lead to increased chances of misdiagnosis, unsafe medical treatment and duplicate testing.
During a public health emergency like COVID-19, accurate ID’s of patients is one of the most difficult operational issues that a hospital faces. Accurate COVID-19 test results are hampered when specimens, sent to public health labs, are accompanied by patient misidentification and inadequate demographic data. Results can be sent to the wrong patient, or at best, get backlogged.
These mistakes also are costly. More than one-third of all denied claims result directly from inaccurate patient identification or information that’s wrong or incomplete. This costs the average U.S. health care facility $1.2 million per year.
Congress needs to act
For nearly two decades, the Department of Health and Human Services has been restricted from spending federal dollars to adopt a unique health identifier for patients. To remedy the problem, the U.S. House of Representatives in July 2020 unanimously adopted an amendment allowing HHS to evaluate patient identification solutions that still protect patient privacy. But the Senate chose not to address the issue. Still, many health care leaders are advocating for the new Congress to take action. Health care proponents are hopeful the new Senate majority leader will be more receptive to addressing the issue.
A bright spot in all of this is that many health care systems saw the advantages of telemedicine during the pandemic. It’s convenient for patients, it saves money and it meets the needs of patients who have difficulty traveling. Telemedicine could be just the beginning; with an ever-growing array of mobile health devices, physicians can monitor a patient at home, rather than in an institution. More must be done, however. Throughout the pandemic, some patients, with a lack of broadband access or poor Wi-Fi, had something less than a rich and uninterrupted visit.
Health IT advocates have long envisioned a health care system that seamlessly uses connected care to improve patient outcomes while costing less. When the pandemic subsides, the waivers and policies temporarily adopted will require not a sudden termination, but a transition to such a system.
Over the past year, doctors, nurses and health care systems have learned lessons out of necessity. Instead of abandoning our new knowledge, I believe we need to double down on a modern, stable and value-based health delivery system with equity for all. And at its heart must be one certainty: that accurate and comprehensive patient records are always available at the point of care.
That is just one of the glaring flaws that COVID-19 has revealed about the U.S. health care system: It does not share health information well. Coordination between public health agencies and medical providers is lacking. Technical and regulatory restrictions impede use of digital technologies. To put it bluntly, our health care delivery system is failing patients. Prolonged disputes about the Affordable Care Act and rising health care costs have done little to help; the problems go beyond insurance and access.
I have spent most of my career within the domain of information technology and IT-based innovation and systems engineering. As a professor of health informatics, I have focused on health care transformation. For two years, I served on the Health Innovation Committee at HIMSS, the preeminent global health information and technology organization. In short, I have studied these problems for decades, and I can tell you that most of them aren’t about medicine or technology. Rather, they are about the inability of our delivery system to meet the evolving needs of patients.
We need a high-performance systemIn reality, the U.S. health care sector is not a system at all. Instead, it is an underperforming conglomerate of independent entities: hospitals, clinics, community health and urgent care centers, individual practitioners, small group practices, pharmacy and retail outlets, and more, most of which compete for profits and in some cases pay sky-high salaries to executives.
These entities often function in silos. Errors, gaps, duplication of services and poor patient outcomes are often the result.
Here’s an example: A heart surgery patient, still on oxygen and in intensive care just two days earlier, is referred to her primary care physician for follow-up, and to a rehabilitation center for therapy. Neither her doctor nor the facility knows the patient was even hospitalized, nor do they have access to her records or medication list.
Shopping for doctors
For patients, this might mean a disjointed set of services that don’t offer a coordinated plan of care or even a timely or comprehensive diagnosis of their health problems. Patients with chronic conditions often see more than 10 different doctors during dozens of office visits per year.
The specialist may not even be aware when the patient does not return. Patient information is seldom shared; specialists are often associated with different medical systems that don’t share records. And even when they try, accurately matching patient IDs in different systems can be problematic.
The challenge now is to transform the status quo into a high-performance system, a true 21st-century health care delivery system. Bringing systems engineering and information technologies to medical practice can help make that happen, but doing that requires a holistic approach.
Let’s start with electronic health records. More than 20 years ago, the Institute of Medicine called for the transition from paper to digital health records. This would allow patients to easily share lab, imaging and other test results with different providers. Nearly a decade went by before action occurred on the recommendation. In 2009, the HITECH Act was passed, which provided US$30 billion of incentives for the transition.
Yet now, 12 years down the road, we’re still a long way from a patient’s electronic health records becoming universally available at the point of care. Connectivity across systems and networks remains fragmented, and a lack of trust between organizations, along with anti-competitive behavior, results in an unwillingness to share patient information.
Unsafe medical treatment
One failure of the system is an inability to accurately identify and match patient records. Few standards exist for collecting patient information. With hundreds of vendors and thousands of hospitals, doctor’s offices, pharmacies and other facilities participating in the process, variation is huge. Is John Doe at 250 Park Ridge Drive the same as John E. Doe at 250 Parkridge?
In 2017, the American Hospital Association estimated 45% of large hospitals reported difficulties in correctly identifying patients across information technology systems. This means, on occasions at least, clinicians are making decisions that lead to increased chances of misdiagnosis, unsafe medical treatment and duplicate testing.
During a public health emergency like COVID-19, accurate ID’s of patients is one of the most difficult operational issues that a hospital faces. Accurate COVID-19 test results are hampered when specimens, sent to public health labs, are accompanied by patient misidentification and inadequate demographic data. Results can be sent to the wrong patient, or at best, get backlogged.
These mistakes also are costly. More than one-third of all denied claims result directly from inaccurate patient identification or information that’s wrong or incomplete. This costs the average U.S. health care facility $1.2 million per year.
Congress needs to act
For nearly two decades, the Department of Health and Human Services has been restricted from spending federal dollars to adopt a unique health identifier for patients. To remedy the problem, the U.S. House of Representatives in July 2020 unanimously adopted an amendment allowing HHS to evaluate patient identification solutions that still protect patient privacy. But the Senate chose not to address the issue. Still, many health care leaders are advocating for the new Congress to take action. Health care proponents are hopeful the new Senate majority leader will be more receptive to addressing the issue.
A bright spot in all of this is that many health care systems saw the advantages of telemedicine during the pandemic. It’s convenient for patients, it saves money and it meets the needs of patients who have difficulty traveling. Telemedicine could be just the beginning; with an ever-growing array of mobile health devices, physicians can monitor a patient at home, rather than in an institution. More must be done, however. Throughout the pandemic, some patients, with a lack of broadband access or poor Wi-Fi, had something less than a rich and uninterrupted visit.
Health IT advocates have long envisioned a health care system that seamlessly uses connected care to improve patient outcomes while costing less. When the pandemic subsides, the waivers and policies temporarily adopted will require not a sudden termination, but a transition to such a system.
Over the past year, doctors, nurses and health care systems have learned lessons out of necessity. Instead of abandoning our new knowledge, I believe we need to double down on a modern, stable and value-based health delivery system with equity for all. And at its heart must be one certainty: that accurate and comprehensive patient records are always available at the point of care.
Bites from Real News
*3/3/2021*
*BARBARIANS: Wisconsin Hunters kill 216 wolves in less than 60 hours, sparking uproar
*US Militia group draws members from military and police, website leak shows
Membership list of American Patriots Three Percent also shows widespread network of people from variety of occupations
*Bernie Sanders to Force Vote on $15 Minimum Wage Amendment
Sen. Bernie Sanders late Monday announced he will force a vote this week on an amendment to include a $15 minimum wage provision in the pending $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package.
*Democrats decry “new Jim Crow” as Georgia GOP passes drastic new voting restrictions
Georgia GOP responds to election lies by cutting mail and early voting, even banning water for voters in long lines
IGOR DERYSH
*White women and the right: Not just MTG
White women and the racist right: Marjorie Taylor Greene is not an aberration
Historian Elizabeth Gillespie McRae on MTG, "gender essentialism" and white women's central role in white supremacy
CHAUNCEY DEVEGA
*How Inequity Gets Built Into America’s Vaccination System
People eligible for the coronavirus vaccine tell us they are running up against barriers that are designed into the very systems meant to serve those most at risk of dying of the disease. We plan to continue tracking these roadblocks.
Unless it’s a tax cut for the wealthy, it’s always too expensive for Republicans
Pentagon Actually Took THREE Hours to Deploy National Guard to Capitol Riot: Testimony
WHY?
Ana Lucia Murillo - Breaking News/Cheat Sheet Intern
Updated Mar. 03, 2021 11:00AM ET
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
The Pentagon waited more than three hours to approve the Capitol Police chief’s request for National Guard troops during the Jan. 6 riot, Major Gen. William J. Walker, commanding general of the D.C. National Guard, said on Wednesday. Walker was testifying in front of two Senate committees about the security breach at the Capitol by a pro-Trump mob. “At 1:49 p.m. I received a frantic call from then chief of U.S. Capitol Police, Steven Sund, where he informed me that the security perimeter at the Capitol had been breached by hostile rioters,” Walker said in his prepared remarks, adding that Sund’s voice was cracking with emotion. “The approval for Chief Sund’s request would eventually come from the acting secretary of defense and be relayed to me by Army senior leaders at 5:08 p.m.—3 hours and 19 minutes later.”
Top law enforcement officers previously testified that they waited at least two hours for National Guard deployment to be approved.
Top law enforcement officers previously testified that they waited at least two hours for National Guard deployment to be approved.
Google Says It’ll Stop Tracking Users Around the Internet for Targeted Ads
PRIVATE EYE
Jamie Ross - Reporter
Published Mar. 03, 2021 9:47AM ET
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
Those creepy ads that won’t leave you alone after you search for something one time could soon be a thing of the past. Google is planning to bring an end to ads that are targeted at users based on their individual browsing history across multiple sites. “People shouldn’t have to accept being tracked across the web in order to get the benefits of relevant advertising. And advertisers don’t need to track individual consumers across the web to get the performance benefits of digital advertising,” David Temkin, the Google product manager, wrote in a blog on Wednesday. According to The Wall Street Journal, Google will instead use new tools to analyze users’ browsing habits on their own devices, and then allow advertisers to target groups of users with similar interests, rather than individual users. “There is no need to sacrifice relevant advertising and monetization in order to deliver a private and secure experience,” wrote Temkin.
Idaho Republican Complains: Early Education Makes It Easier for Moms to ‘Come Out of the Home’
OH, MAN
Jamie Ross - Reporter
Published Mar. 03, 2021 8:21AM ET
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
Did he really say this out loud? A state representative in Idaho brazenly explained his reasoning for voting against accepting state funds to help prepare kids for kindergarten on Tuesday—it would, God forbid, make it possible for moms to leave the house more often. The absurdly tone-deaf statement came from Rep. Charlie Shepherd—a Republican—who was testifying against a bill that would allow Idaho’s education board to use nearly $6 million in federal grants to extend early childhood education. According to KTVB, Shepherd said: “I don’t think anybody does a better job than mothers in the home, and any bill that makes it easier or more convenient for mothers to come out of the home and let others raise their child, I don’t think that’s a good direction for us to be going.” Shepherd’s official bio states that he’s married with four children.
*What's Inside*
MAR 1 - MAR 2
✔EVEN BY PENTAGON TERMS, THIS WAS A DUD: THE DISASTROUS SAGA OF THE F-35
(REALITY)
*THERE WAS A TIME REPARATIONS WERE ACTUALLY PAID OUT – JUST NOT TO FORMERLY ENSLAVED PEOPLE(HISTORY)
*WHY IT'S TIME TO MAKE LARGE CORPORATIONS PAY LIVING WAGES
(SLAVERY 21ST CENTURY)
*JUDGE APPROVES $650M SETTLEMENT OF PRIVACY LAWSUIT AGAINST FACEBOOK
(WORTHLESS MEDIA)
✔LAWSUIT REVEALS NEW ALLEGATIONS AGAINST PG&E CONTRACTOR ACCUSED OF FRAUD
(CORPORATE CRIMINALS)
*ATLANTIC OCEAN CIRCULATION AT WEAKEST IN A MILLENNIUM, SAY SCIENTISTS
(EARTH)
*WHO MADE JOE MANCHIN ‘THE DECIDER’?
(SELLOUTS)
*500,000+ DEAD NEED TO BE PILED IN FRONT OF THE GOP BY THE RUDE PUNDIT
(COMMENTARY)
*BLACK HISTORY MONTH MEANS GRAPPLING WITH THE FULL LEGACY OF RACISM IN THE US
(RACE MATTERS)
*MICHIGAN REPUBLICANS WANT TO MAKE IT ILLEGAL TO PRIORITIZE LOW-INCOME OR MINORITY AREAS FOR VACCINES: REPORT(GOP POLITICS)
✔PROGRESSIVES VOW TO FIGHT MANCHIN AND SINEMA HOLDING UP STIMULUS OVER $15 WAGE
(PROGRESSIVES)
*THE 1.5 MILLION CHILD SLAVES BEHIND YOUR CHOCOLATE BAR
(SLAVERY 21ST CENTURY)
*DON'T WORRY: IF YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT RISING FEDERAL DEBT -- READ THIS
(REALITY)
*WHITE SUPREMACY SET THE STAGE FOR TEXAS’ MISERABLE DISASTER RESPONSE
(WHITE SUPREMACY)
✔BILLIONAIRE DALLAS COWBOYS OWNER AND OIL MAN CASHES IN ON TEXAS BLACKOUT CRISIS
(CORPORATE CRIMINALS)
*NEW STUDY 'DEMOLISHES' MYTH PUSHED BY JOE BIDEN ABOUT STUDENT DEBT
(DEMO POLITICS)
*HOW CORPORATIONS TRY TO DIVIDE AND EXPLOIT AMERICA'S WORKERS
(SLAVERY 21ST CENTURY)
*DEAD TERRRORIST: RUSH LIMBAUGH WRECKED AMERICA BY THE RUDE PUNDIT
(COMMENTARY)
*'I CAN'T KEEP DOING THIS': GIG WORKERS SAY PAY HAS FALLEN AFTER CALIFORNIA'S PROP 22
(SLAVERY 21ST CENTURY)
*UNITED AIRLINES ENDING ITS FREQUENT FUCKFACE MILES PROGRAM
(FUNNIES)
*SATAN TELLS LIMBAUGH TO ‘FUCK OFF OUT OF HERE’
(FUNNIES)
✔HOW PUBLIC SCHOOLS FAIL TO RECOGNIZE BLACK PRODIGIES
(EDUCATION)
*REPUBLICAN PARTY IS NOW A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION — AND NONE OF THIS IS A SURPRISE
(GOP POLITICS)
✔VARNEY BLAMES BERNIE SANDERS AND AOC FOR TEXAS POWER OUTAGES
(WORTHLESS MEDIA)
*150 YEARS OF SPILLS: PHILADELPHIA REFINERY CLEANUP HIGHLIGHTS TOXIC LEGACY OF FOSSIL FUELS(OIL)
*late news of interest*
celebrating in the land of ignorance!!!
Independent of everything: Is America too dumb for democracy?
Our nation's massive ignorance and lack of curiosity have led us into crisis. Are we smart enough to survive it?
DAVID MASCIOTRA - Salon
JULY 4, 2019 12:00PM (UTC)
Independence Day presents a good opportunity to consider that many Americans act as if their young country is independent from the rest of the world. The former popularity of the mindless slogan, “My country right or wrong,” offers a perfect summary of America’s suicidal self-absorption. When the fireworks no longer illuminate the sky, the barbecue is down to bones, and the hangovers begin to commence, a genuine act of patriotism would insist on the widespread realization that small-minded chauvinism is not virtuous. One need to look no further than the early stages of the presidential campaign to survey the damage of a country’s inability to look beyond its own borders.
The provincialism of American culture renders its politics both farcical and dangerous. While it is encouraging to see previously “extreme” and “radical” ideas, such as socialized medicine, paid family leave and debt-free higher education, become mainstream in the Democratic Party, it is also amusing to imagine a French or Canadian observer watching American politicians debate a national health care program as if it were a novel concept.
Much credit goes to Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is fond of reminding his interlocutors and audiences, in a wonderful tone of exhaustion, that the United States is the “only country in the developed world” that does not achieve universal health care coverage through public funding. Sanders, and his fellow candidates for the Democratic nomination, have strenuous labor to complete considering that most Americans know and care little about the world beyond its borders.
In 2003, when Americans still had the minimal interest in international affairs necessary to understand who we were bombing, a U.S. strategic task force of Education Abroad concluded that America’s ignorance of the outside world was so great as to constitute a threat to national security.
The specific details only sharpen the image of American obliviousness. A recent National Geographic survey indicates that merely 37 percent of recent college graduates can identify Iraq on a map, most failed to identify North Korea, only one in four could identify Iran or Israel, and among Americans ages 18 to 24, 6 percent could not even point to the United States. If you are among the 6 percent, and you are reading this, that’s where you live.
Derek Alderman, president of the American Association of Geographers, argues for the urgency of a “radical geographic literacy” in the United States, expressing grave concern that President Trump’s denigration of African nations as “shithole countries” will resonate with too many citizens for comfort. He reports that the answers on advanced placement geography exams from high school students are often littered with racist stereotypes regarding Africa and Asia.
The American perspective on history is as sophisticated as one would expect in a country where Donald Trump can even run for president without eliciting of universal laughter and disgust. Three-fourths of the public is unaware why the U.S. fought a cold war with the Soviet Union, and 41 percent are unfamiliar with the term “Auschwitz.”
America’s perverted priorities of giving tax breaks to the wealthy while its public schools decline into states of disrepair, along with a shallow and superficial news media operating under the demands of corporate ownership, are largely to blame for America’s failures, but the general public is not exactly resistant.
Historian Richard Hofstadter analyzed “anti-intellectualism” in American life in his seminal 1963 Pulitzer-winning book. Decades of of compounding fatuity have created a culture where leisure reading, according to several reports, is at an all time low.
It seems unlikely that those Americans who do crack open a book are studying comparative politics or international relations. For the full picture of how pitiful American culture has become, consider that for many recent years the bestselling “historian” in the country was Bill O’Reilly.
To bemoan the spectacular incuriosity of Americans is not an exercise in snobbery, but a red alarm warning of an impending crisis. The consequences of American ignorance are not academic.
A Washington Post survey, two years after American forces invaded Iraq, revealed that 70 percent of respondents believed that Saddam Hussein was personally responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
American provincialism also functions as insulation of the brain, preventing the average citizen from seeing and hearing the warning signs that history offers into the transformation of democracy into despotic rule. Fascism is not an overnight development, and when your country is earnestly debating whether its treatment of immigrant and refugee children qualifies for the term “concentration camp,” you have already taken a few large steps down that deadly road.
The qualities of Donald Trump, and the zealotry of his worshipful supporters, resemble the images of nearly every authoritarian movement in European, Asian and Latin American history. If America’s political culture possessed some semblance of literacy, its voters would collaborate to consign Trump to the political garbage disposal. When it came to providing basic services for its own people, it would not allow intellectual titans like Chuck Todd to ask Democrats, “How are you going to pay for it?” — as if countries with far less wealth have not already managed to do so.
A friend of mine whose father recently died told me that her brother, who lives in London, took one month off with full pay to travel to Texas, make some final memories with his dad, and attend the funeral service. Britain, contrary to popular belief, is not a mythical, far-off universe from a fantasy novel.
If one wants to drift off entirely into dreamland, envision an America where its federal government invites consultants from countries with better performing health care systems, affordable universities and more effective poverty relief policies to assist in the expansion of the social welfare state.
Instead of seeking outside advice, we will continue to display the symptoms of national solipsism, bumbling along as if there is no reality outside what we can see right in front of us.
The United States of America is one year older today. Only time will tell if it is also wiser.
The provincialism of American culture renders its politics both farcical and dangerous. While it is encouraging to see previously “extreme” and “radical” ideas, such as socialized medicine, paid family leave and debt-free higher education, become mainstream in the Democratic Party, it is also amusing to imagine a French or Canadian observer watching American politicians debate a national health care program as if it were a novel concept.
Much credit goes to Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is fond of reminding his interlocutors and audiences, in a wonderful tone of exhaustion, that the United States is the “only country in the developed world” that does not achieve universal health care coverage through public funding. Sanders, and his fellow candidates for the Democratic nomination, have strenuous labor to complete considering that most Americans know and care little about the world beyond its borders.
In 2003, when Americans still had the minimal interest in international affairs necessary to understand who we were bombing, a U.S. strategic task force of Education Abroad concluded that America’s ignorance of the outside world was so great as to constitute a threat to national security.
The specific details only sharpen the image of American obliviousness. A recent National Geographic survey indicates that merely 37 percent of recent college graduates can identify Iraq on a map, most failed to identify North Korea, only one in four could identify Iran or Israel, and among Americans ages 18 to 24, 6 percent could not even point to the United States. If you are among the 6 percent, and you are reading this, that’s where you live.
Derek Alderman, president of the American Association of Geographers, argues for the urgency of a “radical geographic literacy” in the United States, expressing grave concern that President Trump’s denigration of African nations as “shithole countries” will resonate with too many citizens for comfort. He reports that the answers on advanced placement geography exams from high school students are often littered with racist stereotypes regarding Africa and Asia.
The American perspective on history is as sophisticated as one would expect in a country where Donald Trump can even run for president without eliciting of universal laughter and disgust. Three-fourths of the public is unaware why the U.S. fought a cold war with the Soviet Union, and 41 percent are unfamiliar with the term “Auschwitz.”
America’s perverted priorities of giving tax breaks to the wealthy while its public schools decline into states of disrepair, along with a shallow and superficial news media operating under the demands of corporate ownership, are largely to blame for America’s failures, but the general public is not exactly resistant.
Historian Richard Hofstadter analyzed “anti-intellectualism” in American life in his seminal 1963 Pulitzer-winning book. Decades of of compounding fatuity have created a culture where leisure reading, according to several reports, is at an all time low.
It seems unlikely that those Americans who do crack open a book are studying comparative politics or international relations. For the full picture of how pitiful American culture has become, consider that for many recent years the bestselling “historian” in the country was Bill O’Reilly.
To bemoan the spectacular incuriosity of Americans is not an exercise in snobbery, but a red alarm warning of an impending crisis. The consequences of American ignorance are not academic.
A Washington Post survey, two years after American forces invaded Iraq, revealed that 70 percent of respondents believed that Saddam Hussein was personally responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
American provincialism also functions as insulation of the brain, preventing the average citizen from seeing and hearing the warning signs that history offers into the transformation of democracy into despotic rule. Fascism is not an overnight development, and when your country is earnestly debating whether its treatment of immigrant and refugee children qualifies for the term “concentration camp,” you have already taken a few large steps down that deadly road.
The qualities of Donald Trump, and the zealotry of his worshipful supporters, resemble the images of nearly every authoritarian movement in European, Asian and Latin American history. If America’s political culture possessed some semblance of literacy, its voters would collaborate to consign Trump to the political garbage disposal. When it came to providing basic services for its own people, it would not allow intellectual titans like Chuck Todd to ask Democrats, “How are you going to pay for it?” — as if countries with far less wealth have not already managed to do so.
A friend of mine whose father recently died told me that her brother, who lives in London, took one month off with full pay to travel to Texas, make some final memories with his dad, and attend the funeral service. Britain, contrary to popular belief, is not a mythical, far-off universe from a fantasy novel.
If one wants to drift off entirely into dreamland, envision an America where its federal government invites consultants from countries with better performing health care systems, affordable universities and more effective poverty relief policies to assist in the expansion of the social welfare state.
Instead of seeking outside advice, we will continue to display the symptoms of national solipsism, bumbling along as if there is no reality outside what we can see right in front of us.
The United States of America is one year older today. Only time will tell if it is also wiser.