The sacred sweat lodge ceremony

I was fortunate to be invited to attend a sacred sweat lodge ceremony recently.

It is a spiritual tradition practiced by indigenous peoples to release physical, mental and psychological toxins, to appreciate all those things in our lives we might take for granted, and to pray for the release of pain in ourselves and others. Those we know and don't know. The powerful and the voiceless.

Seeking clarity and motivation to make a positive difference in our own lives and the lives of others.

Before we enter, we are "smudged" with smoke from burning sage and sweet grass - purifying ourselves.

It takes place in a dome-shaped structure made with certain materials that not only allow the spirits to freely pass through, but honor the living materials that serve us such as wood. It's short, so it only permits those entering to crawl through the opening and then sit, preferably cross-legged.

As we enter, we kneel and put our heads to the ground, on the prayer blanket, saying, "All my relations." Meaning we acknowledge the one-ness of everything as being related to us in some way. That we are family with the planet or world (thus grandfather rock, grandmother tree -- every living thing has a soul. Yes, rocks are indeed living things).

The sweat lodge represents the mother's womb, which we enter to be re-birthed with a sense of release and freedom from the burdens we carry as we crawl into the darkened space.

This dome did not have an extended tunnel opening, much like an igloo, which another tribe whose sweat lodge I was invited to experience used.

A large circular pit is dug out in the center of the circle, into which large rocks are place that have been heated by burning wood for many hours. The person - door tender - who brings the grandfather rocks into the lodge is blessed, indeed, for he is bringing the energy of the world, as long as it has existed, into our presence.

Using antlers, honoring all animal spirits, the rocks are put into place, honoring the four directions: north, east, south and west.

As the flap door closes, the only light permitted emits from the red-hot rocks, onto which water is poured, releasing the dynamic steam, which is not only extremely hot, but cleansing.

In this sweat lodge, participants wear comfortable clothing; in other sweat lodge ceremonies I have attended no clothes were worn, for we go in and come out as we were born, men and women. There is NO sexual connotations to these ceremonies, and I mean NONE.

In some cases women sweat together, as do men, when no clothes are worn. It depends on the tribe and the ceremony.

In our case, we were genuinely blessed to have in our presence JC, true Lakota, who led us in song and speaks Lakota, which is a *beautiful* language.

Very sadly the tribal languages are being lost over the centuries, in too many cases because American and Canadian Indian children were taken away from their tribes to be "educated" in Catholic and other religious schools, where the children were punished for speaking their native tongue.

Remember it was Navajo code talkers who played a large role in helping the US win World War II because no one other than the Navajo US Marines could understand it.

Simply put, codes can be broken; languages must be understood, and tribal languages do not emanate from any "root" language with which Europeans or Asians are familiar. Many tribal members who do not speak their indigenous language are now choosing to learn them, and thanks to modern technology, those who do speak it can have their words captured for eternity.

So you can understand how fortunate we felt to have him in our presence. He simply dropped by our host's home for the first time in about a year and a half, not realizing he and his wife were preparing for a sweat ceremony.

JC also brought with him the pipe of his people to be smoked - one small puff each - after the sweat to unite us in our peaceful pursuit of life with all living things.

There are four "rounds" of sweat, each with its own purpose, each honoring its own life chapter - birth/infancy, youth, adulthood, and senior years/death - as well as other teachings of the animals, spirits and humans.

TaTonka, the sacred, powerful, respected American Buffalo, represents health, spirit, vitality, defiance and the balance of nature. It also represents the lesson of self sacrifice. JC told us that "When the tribe became hungry, they would ask TaTonka for life-preserving meat to eat. The TaTonka would unite as a herd, running away. Then stop. And one TaTonka would come back to the tribe, offering himself to them, sacrificing himself so they might live. This is the self-sacrifice lesson of TaTonka."

The first session, no one is permitted to drink water (unless medically advised) because part of the ceremony is to understand life-giving, life-saving and sustaining things we take for granted. As we become more thirsty, the value of water becomes paramount. As the heat flushes the toxins and water from our bodies, coolness becomes not just a desire, but a need. As the steam singes our bodies (slightly), we understand the importance of clothing that protects us in the world. As we allow the steam to stream through our nasal passages and throats, the need for pure air is clear.

We acknowledge that there are those in the world who suffer from the lack of these life-giving, life nurturing elements, and we share their pain, no matter how temporary, enough to understand it sucks.

As we sit in the stark darkness, sharing energy with those in the sacred circle, we are at once alone and with others. It is so dark even the presence of those in the circle can't be felt, let alone seen.

Fragrant lavender or other scent-producing dust is sprinkled on the rocks, producing a remarkable sparkling quality to each stone a particle touches.

At the end of a round, the front and back door flaps are open to receive cool air, but only for a few minutes. Water is offered to the thirsty.

The second round, seven more stones are added, increasing the heat. I chose to share a song, which I ordinarily sing loudly and without sweat pouring down my nostrils or steam affecting my breathing. I managed to get through "You Raise Me Up," as softly as I could.

In subsequent rounds, more rocks are added. Prayers are offered and supported with the others responding "Ho," which is much like saying "amen" in other cultures.

Physical and emotional responses to the ceremony are vast; fingers are swollen to the point that rings won't fit back on for awhile, some of the group are completely wiped out, others wishing only to be silent.

Most of us took towels and lay on the cool grass, visiting our own thoughts and feelings; sharing those we wanted with others.

Interestingly, as all chemotherapy recipients, especially those who have had it administered over a long period of time, my joints suffer.

When I entered, kneeling and putting my head to the ground, saying, "All my relations," I did with great discomfort and found it very difficult to sit in the small space with my knees bent because of these joint problems. But over the time and with the warmth of the steam, they relaxed and I was comfortable sitting cross-legged and had no problem crawling out or putting my head to the ground as I left, saying, "All my relations."

A wonderful, cleansing, spiritual experience with some magnificent, enlightened beings and spirits, followed by some warm congenial camaraderie and the most amazing food! As one person put it, "Food tastes better than ever before after a sweat!"

Amen.

I mean, Ho!

I look forward to sharing many more sweats with this extraordinary, grounded, truly spiritual group of people. I felt I had fallen into the arms of peace, power and wisdom beyond my comprehension.

Note: to find out about the quest to stop the slaughter of free roaming American buffalo in Yellowstone, please click here.

My new projects

Last week I wrote the script and did all the preproduction work for directing a commercial I'm shooting this coming Thursday.

Preproduction means: working the set into place (designing it), props, cast, hair, make-up, costume, lighting, camera angles, sound, working with my lead actress (who will undoubtedly be a star after this) - the script is letter perfect, not a single change needed.

I'll also be working with a 3 year-old boy, whom we'll put on the set at the very last minute because he has one word to say - several times - then he has an action to perform. I have an understudy in case the first boy doesn't quite get what to do quickly.

I expect to get it done fast anyway because we don't want any cranky kids to deal with! And I work really well with kids.

Especially the kids who want to be returned to their mommy if they do what I tell them ... ;-)

I'M KIDDING!!!

I'm very fortunate to know a writer/director whose fantastic equipment we'll be using for the shoot, making it just a cut above technically while still looking not too polished so it can resonate with the audience.

As soon as we finish shooting Thursday, the video is being whisked to the editor, whom I shall join when I return from an out of town trip to fine tune it, frame by frame (I'm one of those hands-on directors).

When it's finished, by the end of this coming weekend, we'll upload it to the sponsors, and my blog if my webmaster can put it up here framed, then you can judge for yourself.

It's fun, funny and memorable, so I think the product reps as well as audiences will appreciate it.

I'm working with some GREAT people -- cast and crew. Hopefully I can post it here - it will be :30 seconds, and it will be available other places online and possibly even network TV. I'll keep you updated.

I'm also doing a lot of unexpected in-depth research for my new screenplay. Even though the story is very serious, I want to present it as a comedy because it would be tough to take in as a drama - but you'll get what you need to out of it while you're laughing. I'm really in favor of enlightening experiences with as little suffering as possible....

The two leads are put on the "horns of a dilemma," which means that just about any answer or solution they come up with is uncomfortable to both of them. They both have a lot to lose by getting what they want and need.

And of course whatever they do affects everyone around them. So do we go for our passion knowing that in the end everyone will benefit? Or do we spare everyone any discomfort by trying to compromise what in the end we know is the truth?

I'll leave it at that.

All the research is about how do we deal with dilemmas, rather than problems.

Dilemmas deal with two choices, neither of which is "acceptable." -- problems can usually be worked out with everyone winning in one way or another because one choice is generally best.

Lots of philosophical reading, because these characters have to do it poorly - mess up along the way -- as well as figure out how to properly figure out what to do in the end. And there can be no "tricks" or phony secrets that suddenly pop up to make the work any easier.

In fact, every obstacle they face has to be greater and make their work more difficult.

In the end, does one give up? Is it just too hard to figure out?

Or are they both equally as committed to work it through, no matter what it takes, while still being sensitive to the needs of others involved?

Mind you, both have a *lot* to lose no matter which way they turn ... and they must figure out if that loss is worth the journey. Is this issue really worth the immense loss? Is it a short term gain, long term loss? Or a short term loss with a long term gain?

Defining their personalities is something they can help me with as I fill my mind up with all the choices we can possibly have; they'll pick and choose based on their background and personalities.

I also outlined three more screenplays, one of which is very commercial and would sell the quickest, but I need to go through this journey with characters suffering the process of seeking their way out of a dilemma because it's so complex, difficult and challenging for me.

I figure between this work and all the others I've done, I should be able to make it through any writing challenge after this.

Back to work, me!

Pat Tillman fragged?

Dear Reader,

Originally I planned to proceed with part 2 of my 3-part series (2. prosperity, 3. health and how a peace time economy helps these things flourish, a war economy does not), but I believe the breaking story about former football star and now war hero (as a US Air Force veteran, I believe all our soldiers killed in battle are heroes because they have put themselves in harm's way on our behalf) Pat Tillman.

It has long been suspected by his family that Tillman, for whatever reason, was fragged while on duty in Afghanistan, and that the US government, particularly the White House, wanted to cover the facts of his death because he had been used as a propaganda tool by President Bush, who insisted - untruthfully - that Tillman was a patriot who supported his administration's policies.

Tillman, a true patriot indeed, did not support the US invasion of Iraq and was outspoken in his political and personal viewpoints.

"Fragged" is the American military term for US soldiers killing one of their own, usually an officer, for a number of reasons, but the top of the list is just that the person is "unpopular."

This term (not the practice) started in the Vietnam war, and the usual means of killing the person is a hand grenade (fragmenting the person and the weapon so it would not leave any clues or evidence about who committed the murder as bullets do).

At first the military reported that Tillman was shot by the enemy. Later they confessed that Tillman had been killed accidentally by "friendly fire."

But the evidence does not indicate an accidental shooting.

Tillman was shot in the head three times, the bullets all close together and from American military rifle(s). The military admitted there was no enemy fire in the area. IMO, the bullets should provide the evidence needed with ballistic tests. The investigation should also include the location of the bullet casings to determine where the shooter was; it's estimated Tillman was shot at close range, accidental or not.

You can read Martha Mendoza's Associated Press report about the investigation for the here.

In it, she writes Tillman's last words were to a frightened comrade: "Stop sniveling."

[NOTE: A comrade of Tillman's says this "quote" is not true; that Tillman would not speak to a suffering soldier this way; that it is a continuing post-mortem character assassination made by the Bush administration's refusal to release all the investigation information surrounding Tillman's death.]

Tillman's mother has said many times she wants to find the truth about her son's death, and if he was murdered, as she has long suspected, justice for those who killed him - particularly if he was "fragged."

War: easier than peace. The cost: health, prosperity

Think about it.

1. The key to peace and healthy interaction with anyone in any situation is relationship skills.

By that I mean the ability to communicate, negotiate, conciliate, reconcile, mediate, understand both sides; have confidence and poise; use diplomacy, have enough knowledge to propose a plan; savoir-faire, and the ability to articulate objectives, purpose and the desired outcome(s). In most cases, not to take things personally but work on behalf of the relationship with both sides benefiting from the outcome of the agreements reached.

Whether it's at the negotiating table or the kitchen table, it is much easier to bring up old resentments and grudges, to blame the other person for the problems that exist, to get angry and refuse to communicate rather than spend the energy and time it takes to unify, humble oneself, find common ground and do whatever it takes to "work things out."

Both sides must be equally dedicated to finding ways to gain clarity, find beneficial solutions and communicate successfully - for themselves individually and collectively - or there is no hope for a positive outcome.

In some cases, one side must convince the other to engage earnestly - openly, honestly and directly - especially when a third party, such as a child, is involved in a dispute like divorce.

Ruthless actions and war break out when one party stops listening, refuses to listen, negotiate or care about the other person/side and takes violent action against him or her out of anger in an attempt to overthrow, subdue or eliminate the other person, or even entire populations, from mediation.

It's a "my way or the highway" mentality for one of the parties that creates the warring action.

Despite the protestations of caring for or even loving the person or people they hurt, the violent individual ceases to care the moment s/he plans to put them in harm's way.

Again, it matters not whether we're talking about the US and Iraq, the Nazi's and Europe in WWII, or hostile actions taken in the privacy of homes.

It's no secret that 85-95% of domestic violence victims are women, that the leading cause of injury to women is domestic violence -- and that pregnant women compose the highest percentage of all categories of people killed in acts of domestic violence by male intimate partners, boyfriends and husbands.

The men who beat, abuse and/or kill the women in their lives generally blame the women for "making" or "driving" them to take their anger out on "their" women because the women did not behave the way the men wanted them to. Since they realized they could not force the women to do what they want, they injure, cripple or murder them.

Essentially, the men who do not get their way refuse to negotiate - an action that would help them find a common ground to continue communication and a positive relationship in some way. Instead, they simply take their aggression out on people less capable of defending themselves - women and often their own children

So the aggressor in war, by this reasoning, would be the government that stops listening, refuses to negotiate, communicate or care about working through differences with the other side and strikes out to gain power over the other government, nation or populations. So that targeted people will behave the way the aggressor wants them to.

The Nazi's in Germany are classic examples of not just cutting off negotiations but of instigating an all out propagandist hate war against Jews, which then gave Hitler permission imprison and kill not only millions of Jews but millions of other "unpopular" groups as well - homosexuals, Catholics and anyone who opposed his drive for a "pure" Aryan race.

Because he fomented his nation to see enemies everywhere instead of negotiating partners, he literally declared war against the world with the blessing of Germans who participated because they drank Hitler's Kool-Aid.

Any time war breaks out, someone has drunk some aggressor's Kool-Aid.

Which apparently has the effect of preventing the drinker from being capable of thinking for himself or willing to investigate statements made that are intended to manipulate and control their behavior, making them willing to kill others for the cause.

In short: communicating honestly and earnestly=negotiating, building a relationship. It's tough. Very tough. Ask anyone in a healthy relationship, let alone a troubled coupling.

Cutting off communication, withholding "affection," wanting and trying to control and manipulate others=warring behavior.

Which can be as simple as trying to control someone by hurthing him or her with words, "that" look, silence, a slap, hiding his/her favorite ice cream, rumors, distance, lies or propaganda.

Or as complex as torturing and/or killing, or ordering people to torture and/or kill others for specific or unknown reasons and goals created by the person declaring the war.

Either way, violence is way easier than doing everything possible to "work it out" and go the limit to prevent unnecessary injury, harm or death.

If the two parties are very very different? Then it takes even more relationship skills to gain momentum to perhaps even outwit the withholding partner in order to negotiate honestly and forthrightly with a positive outcome in mind.

A champion for children everywhere

New York Times columnist and two-time Pulitzer prize winner Nicholas Kristof is a phenomenon.

If you look up the term "genuine journalist with impeccable integrity" you'll find "Nicholas Kristof." His compassion and care for the human condition is, IMO, unparalleled.

And if you're a very lucky university student, you can enter a contest that allows the winner to take part in covering significant, meaningful stories alongside him - in Africa or other parts of the world.

See how he thinks, how he works, how he researches, how he interacts with people from every cultural, political, racial, religious and social background - and perhaps most of all, how he puts all this information together and writes what he has investigated for millions of readers.

Kristof believes in helping young people discover what being a real journalist is all about - the honorable profession it is when it's executed correctly. Pure journalism is not just a job, it's a calling; a calling for which hundreds of journalists and photojournalists give their lives around the world every year.

Journalism is not just about discerning the truth among the lies and deception, of finding that truth when people go to extreme and lethal lengths to hide it, then having the guts to tell it. It's about giving a voice to the voiceless.

Few voices are ignored more than the world's exploited and abused children, whose cries are heard only by their pillows in the bleak of night.

A few of the many significant and world-changing subjects he has covered internationally and extensively is child sex and work slavery. Kiddie sweatshops. Kiddie porn. Kiddie prostitution.

And the innocent children, women and men slaughtered in Dafur.

Kristof uncovered the lies and deception perpetrated by the Bush-Cheney administration nearly at the getgo of the bloody debacle in Iraq.

He and his wife, Sheryl WuDunn, also a New York Times journalist, were the first married couple to win a Pulitzer Prize for their coverage of China's Tienanmen Square democracy movement in 1990.

He won a second Pulitzer last year for what Prize jurors referred to as, "his graphic, deeply reported columns that, at personal risk, focused attention on genocide in Darfur and that gave voice to the voiceless in other parts of the world."

His popular blog is here, but you must have a low-cost Times Select access subscription to the New York Times online (about $4.00/US per month) in order to access it.

Kristof has won many other journalism awards, but I have the feeling that his most important reward is reaching and informing us - his readers - with the truth.

Sadly, the truth we don't always want to hear.

Bush and Iraq: God makes him do it?

David Brooks, a New York Times conservative columnist and supporter of President George W. Bush, had a heart to heart with the President for his July 17 column. Bush says his strength comes from two places:

"The first is his unconquerable faith in the rightness of his Big Idea. Bush is convinced that history is moving in the direction of democracy, or as he said Friday: 'It’s more of a theological perspective. I do believe there is an Almighty, and I believe a gift of that Almighty to all is freedom. And I will tell you that is a principle that no one can convince me that doesn't exist.'"

It sounds as it he doesn't define democracy or freedom the way his own nation does - from the US Constitution to the average individual voter.

The US is far less free or democratic now than it was when he was elected the first time and especially the second.

Is he saying he's just doing what God intends for him to do because God intends for the entire world to be democratic and his is the job to force that upon the world? That he has a theological point of view of being a president rather than a constitutional or democratic point of view?

When he speaks of freedom, I wonder if he understands how many Americans he denies freedom because they don't agree with his political, personal or religious beliefs. Like the freedom to investigate the questionable firings of several US Attorneys whose severance appears to be purely political. And the freedom to have a government with three functioning branches whose job it is to provide check and balances from the abuses he openly commits against the US Constitution.

Interestingly, John F. Kennedy had to prove, over and over, that he would NOT permit his Catholic religious points of view interfere with his leadership and presidential decisions. That he would not be executing the will of the Pope or his church. And he did not. He maintained the separation of church and state, which is the edict of our constitution.

But Bush feels he can use his theological philosophy to make governing decisions, which has cost this nation its very raison d'être. He's so confident we'll agree it's a good thing God is in charge of our nation, in fact, and he's doing the right thing by following what he believes to be God's guidance, he feels free to talk about his believed "divine guidance" to people like David Brooks.

This is the price of allowing any fundamentalist religious group to hijack a political party over the past 20 years, which has also cost the Republican Party its very raison d'être. That takeover by fundamentalist Christians parallels what has happened to nations throughout the world that have been overtaken by Islam fundamentalists.

It is also the cost of the congress passively, gradually allowing a president to take over the rule of all three branches and departments of government, of allowing a president to rule by the politics and psychology of fear instead of leadership, leading to the neglect and debilitation of a system with checks and balances.

While Bush says he will do what the military generals say he should do in Iraq - he has not done what our military leaders have told him to do in the past, why would he start now? Military leaders who disagree with him are released and replaced with someone more aligned with Bush's points of view -- at least when they are appointed. If they change their minds once fully involved with the war? Buh-buh.

If he had listened to them to begin with, we would have completed our honorable mission in Afghanistan and not diverted our military resources to the conundrum that is Iraq.

And if I hear one more person say, "Oh, so the world was better with Saddam Hussein in it?" I will puke. Saddam Hussein could have been removed without trying to take over the whole country for an ideology that will not work in that nation right now because of its historical and present cultural, political and social issues, and escalated the chances of it becoming another fundamentalist Islamic state.

Meanwhile US soldiers remain "boots on the ground," in harm's way, as the Iraqi congress takes its annual vacation throughout the month of August instead of working on a policy or two that will help stop some of the killing. Political solutions are necessary to stop the bloodshed among warring factions in Iraq. If the US leaves Iraq, so will members of Al qaeda because the warring factions are not interested in Al qaeda's agenda and won't need its help fighting the US any longer.

Interestingly, members of the Iraqi congress do not live in Iraq because it's too dangerous. So instead of suffering through the daily bloodshed, bombings and threats their country people suffer, they are flown in when the congress is in session. Amazing that they would take any time off while their country is in a war, but they are just following the example of the US president and vice-president, who vacation at will.

And I assume the US Congress will take its summer vacation as well, though for most it is a working vacation in their home states. And this year they will all be working hard because most of us are furious with the state of the nation and they are responsible for allowing a president to become king over the past six and a half years.

It's a shame that our soldiers fighting, being wounded or dying in the Iraq war cannot take a vacation, they can't even have a proper break between being assigned there. This not only exacerbates the potential for being injured or killed because of battle fatigue, but also of being hit with PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder). VA Hospitals are understaffed to deal properly with PTSD because of the vast numbers of our military members returning with mental problems from being in that war.

Despite his claims of supporting our troops, he opposes even minor pay raises for them.

After reading so much about Bush's fundamentalist Christian religious beliefs, I say this in all seriousness:

The only way I imagine George W. Bush can live with himself being responsible for creating this lethal, bloody, irresponsible international quagmire, destabilizing in the world from his actions in Iraq, is that he honestly believes our dead soldiers are better off with God. Much as the Muslims killing themselves and others believe.

And that somehow because God is in charge so everything will turn out just fine. Which is why he has a Chancey Gardner lack of emotional investment in his decisions - he's so distanced from his responsiblity for the global bloody calamity that is going on - it is almost as if he doesn't understand his role creating so much of the horror he has unleashed upon the world.

Doesn't the bible say that God helps those who help themselves?

And he knows how much money he and his family will ultimately make from the Iraq oil debacle; and how much money he and Dick Cheney will make from the phenomenal, world record-breaking Halliburton profits.

The modest, world changing worker bee

Think about it.

The bee - related to the hard-working, persistent ant - goes about doing its life's calling.

Diligently, splendidly, beautifully visiting flowers, bushes, trees and plants of all sorts looking for nectar. The food that makes it happy and can create an excellent elixir.

The honey bee returns to the queen bee and combs to generate its delicious delicacy.

So it gathers its food and travels to so many places - all the while completely unaware of the difference it makes in the world.

Without the bee pollinating plants everywhere, a task it is quite unaware it is completing, we wouldn't have the splendid foods we do that grow from flowering plants and trees.

There is a concern now because, for some reason, there are certain honey bee populations in the US and some parts of Europe disappearing, which affects the entire ecological cycle.

OTOH, Africanized bees, which were accidentally released in Brazil by biologist Warwick E. Kerr in 1957, are so aggressive they have been known to attack and even kill anything perceived as a hunter.

Despite its ill temper and bullying ways, it still pollinates. Changing the world in positive ways without being aware of it.

Do you know there are also sting-less bees?

Point is, it's amazing how we can affect and change the world, including everything and everyone around us, when we go about simply being truly ourselves, true to ourselves, doing what we were meant to do --constructively.

And how happy people are to sample the honey you create by just doing what you do in the way you were honestly intended to do it.

Namaste.

Pro-lifers miss their biggest opportunity

You know, if pro-lifers were really pro-life?

They would be lobbying - working around the clock for nationally funded health care.

Here's why:

1) The US has a national, regional and local tax-funded police force. Our police are paid to protect us, help us in matters of threats and life and death without first asking who we are, what religion we claim, where we live, if we have a pre-existing life and death case for which they've been called to help us before (which would disqualify us for protection and justice), and most importantly -- if we have police insurance coverage.

More, when we want to support another nation or we need police support, we help one another.

2) The US has a national, regional and local nationally funded fire department. Our firefighters are paid, our volunteer departments equipped to protect us, help us in matters of threats and life and death without first asking who we are, what religion we claim, where we live, if we have a pre-existing fire problem for which they've been called to help us before (which would disqualify us for fire fighting protection), and most importantly -- if we have fire department insurance coverage.

More, when we want to support another nation or we need fire fighting support, we help one another.

Now, what should be #3 but it that doesn't exist:

(Imagine!) --The US has a national, regional and local nationally funded Health Care . Our Health Care workers are paid and equipped to protect us, to help us in matters of health threats and life and death issues without first asking who we are, what religion we claim, where we live, if we have pre-existing health issues for which they've been called to help us before (which would disqualify us for current health care), and most importantly -- if we have health care insurance coverage.

Historically, like way back when, women were the healers. They not only educated themselves to heal others, they passed their knowledge down from mother to daughter for generations and were highly esteemed in communities.

Because women "healers" had knowledge men did not, and men wanted to assume the power of healing, these women were accused not of healing people but of practicing "witchcraft" - and were not only shunned but killed for, according to their detractors, defying Christianity.

Over the centuries, men came to run the healing arts, with women assisting them; only relatively recently have women returned to the field of primary health caretaker when they were finally allowed to attend the male driven and run medical schools.

Along the way, it was decided that a new "US health care" system should be privately funded for the most part. Make profits, not healthy people! OK, that's hyperbole, but you know what I mean.

It would make this blog too long, but there actually is a fantastic, economically sound and good health reason for creating a nationally funded health care system.

It does not have to emulate what exists now, but can be a fresh, sensible, streamlined, effective and efficient health care system that will make the US the healthiest, most prosperous nation in the world thanks to a well-run nationally funded health care program.

Those who make so much money off the current health care system - insurance companies - do not want it changed. They do not care about patients, the nation's health care, the fact that if this system continues to degrade the health of the American citizen and health care system -- the country itself will suffer in ways that have already been predicted but ignored.

And once again, the horror of that outcome, which will deeply impact our nation so harshly, will come as a "surprise" to people who have been warned over and over again what these destructive, greedy actions will have on the nation, its citizens and the health care industry, but they choose to continue to ignore it.

At this point, that includes you.

It all boils down to this very basic question:

How much does the American government - and public - value its citizens? Enough to protect them against crime and fires -- but not enough to protect their health.

Something tells me those who claim to be "pro-life" will continue to confine their efforts to maintain a negative attitude, working against a legal procedure rather than think positively, working FOR something constructive that would actually end up making that legal procedure almost entirely unnecessary.

New N I E released: US vulnerable

You know how I've been saying that it seems to make common sense to me that if we're fighting terrorists "over there," it leaves our own borders at risk because so many of our defensive resources are being used outside the nation?

And you know how I've been saying that invading Iraq was seen as an act of unnecessary aggression by a nation that had no business doing it - that the US would therefore be seen as an interloper and occupying nation?

Well, the new National Intelligence Estimate (a report gathered by some 81 separate intelligence agencies, approved for security and released to US elected officials and government bureaucrats) was just released and not only said that invading Iraq acted not only as a huge recruiting incentive for Al qaeda worldwide, but that the Iraq war has proved to be an extraordinary and efficient training ground for them, fighting US forces.

They do not need to stay in Iraq because so many Iraqis are fighting the US on their own. Only a small percentage of those fighting the US in Iraq are identified as Al qaeda.

Here's the deal: There are three major populations in Iraq: The Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. Kurds want independence from Iraq--from the Sunnis and Shiites; the minority group Sunnis (formerly supporting Saddam Hussein) are fighting with the majority Shiites.

This is what they call the basic civil war that has been fought for centuries.

Pile on top of that many more individual tribal battles and Al Qaeda forces fighting in the mix and you've got a good picture of the bloody dilemma there.

That means at this point there is basically no national identification or allegiance to Iraq; there is more of an identity with a specific group within Iraq to which the individual belongs. So the wish for any sort of democracy that George Bush says he wants for the country - the reason we have supposedly been spending half a trillion dollars and thousands of American lives has no chance of being realized because the unified nation of Iraq does not exist.

More, even if popular elections were held, Iraq would become a theocracy because Islamic fundamentalists are fighting to gain power over the nation.

A new documentary, Islam: What the West Needs To Know, says that Islam is a system of law more than a religion and is explicitly expansionary. That Muslims want to convert the world to live according to Islamic law. According to the film's co-director Bryan Daly, Islamists have been conducting their expansionary efforts for more than a millennium, with varying degrees of success.

They wish to live under the theocracy of Islam - living as they claim the Koran dictates - rather than consider itself a religion apart from a state, just as fundamentalist Christians want in the US - to live as they claim the Bible states we ought to, without any secular input - without the separation of church and state.

The US Constitution and Bill of Rights is based on the separation of church and state.

What they would like to see in the US pledge of allegiance is virtually, "One nation, ruled under God." That is, "One nation, run by our personal interpretation of God's will."

Islam: What the West Should Know is produced by Quixotic Media, LLC, whose backers are not clearly identified, and based on the book Religion of Peace? Islam's War Against the World by Gregory M Davis.

The documentary is a New York Times Critic's Pick, and correctly notes that the film has a very strong conservative point of view, but one that I think could still contribute to a greater understanding of Islam when taken in context.

Meanwhile, the NIE report indicates that three terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda and Hezbollah want to attack the US within its borders and claim to be working toward that goal.

Since there are still serious border security problems and massive defensive resources being exploited outside the US, the country remains vulnerable.

The federal government still has no plan to prevent, protect us from or recover from another terrorist attack, despite the billions of tax dollars spent on the Department of Homeland Security. More, according to the New York Times, 25% of all positions at DHS are currently vacant (in case you're looking for a job).

One thing we can do to help protect ourselves from terrorist attacks in any nation is keep an eye out for people doing weird things - no matter their race, age or gender. If we only look for a "certain type" of person, we'll miss the folks who can actually do all the damage.

Great TV for writers and actors!

I'm sure a lot of people would consider it snooze time TV, but for writers and actors there are incredible, informative, insightful and illustrative programs that give us so much fantastic fodder for our work!

If you have basic cable, there are educational, C-SPAN, political and Book TV channels *on fire* with fantastic ideas, research with new developments and facts about all sorts - whether it's psychology or history or background on news stories and personalities.

There was a talk by Dr. Marsha Linehan presented a talk about the latest psychological research findings about working with suicidal patients. She not only outlined the various types of patients who are at risk, but the new and much more successful methods (survival rate) she has developed to work with them.

Authors on Book TV are the best because they talk about what we care about most - even if you're not up with the "big" topic: the people involved and how they reacted. What motivated them to do or not do what they did to make history, in a positive way or in infamy.

Language programs are everywhere - French, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese and more.

Discovery and other commercial channels do some great documentary work on subjects you may never have considered fascinating until you watch these programs.

I watched the historical documentary series on The Mormons, which was an earnest, factual attempt to show Mormons and their history in a way that would help the average person understand who they are and why they do what they do in a way with which we could identify.

I'm not sure they succeeded in connecting what they believe and what they do with the average American, but it was the truth - Mormons approved of the series - and a genuinely fascinating experience to see how people come to believe what they do in a way that brings them to devote themselves to those beliefs.

I love watching all these programs, not just to feed my habit of wanting to learn *everything* before I die, but see how the things I learn lend themselves to the characters and stories I write. Even picking up a very small personality trait that can make the biggest difference creating a memorable character - or bring a new (to me) element to a story we wouldn't otherwise know to bring .

With Book TV authors, they add insights to characters in their books - those I've read as well as those I want to read. OK, I hate to admit it, but in some cases I decide I don't have to read the book for a number of reasons.

I guess if you're not into being very curious and wanting to know this information, you may not be interested.

But one of the most memorable weekends I spent learning was when Book TV featured a series of authors whose books dealt with national security: each telling how the Bush administration was sacrificing in some significant way our national security because he has committed so many resources to Iraq. These were people who worked in security of airports, trains, and other areas in which terrorists could find relatively easy access to and through America's borders, many of whom resigned their government jobs in an attempt to push for what they consider necessary change to protect US borders.

It was about three years ago, when it gave me the greatest understanding about how I was not receiving accurate news from any government or mainstream media sources relating to Iraq, security, national security, Iraq, science, health matters and other subjects upon which we should be able to rely from government sources, since we pay for every bit of it with our hard-earned taxes.

Questioning the accuracy of anything we hear, especially from those who have an axe to grind or that requires an action, money or unquestioning belief is something we should do anyway. As a journalist, I tended to do this anyway, but that weekend was a huge wake up call for m.

I realized I had to sharpen those skills to their utmost with the state of the misinformation and disinformation passed on through mainstream sources in the US.

Some mainstream (corporate) media are catching up to the truth; unfortunately it's way too late for all the people who have lost their lives unnecessarily thanks to the policies and practices of the Bush administration and the minions who have done his bidding, even when they knew they were dealing in lies, misinformation or disinformation and attempting to dismiss, demean and ridicule those who were actually telling the truth. When anyone like Sean Hannity and other right wing mouthpieces call people names instead of telling the truth, you know there is a problem with the information.

I have a sense that as people learn the truth, they are getting angry and demanding 1) the truth and 2) justice for being virtually jacked around for the past six years: resulting in the unnecessary loss of so many patriotic American lives - within its own borders as well as an unnecessary war into which we were coerced by intentional lies.

Do not get mad. Get informed. Work from the truth and the truth will set us all free. Or at least get us back on the track of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights!

What a great summer!

My coachees are kicking all sorts of booty, as well as pushing their game into the "A" column; many of them working for real *cash.* It's always the pride of any coach to have their folks working, especially for money

I tell all my coachees the primary reason to work for money: pay your coach! ;-)

The most important thing is that they are investing in themselves, their professional and personal constructive growth, achievements, self appreciation and love -- and perhaps most importantly, never to take themselves too seriously - just the work - and to enjoy the whole process.

And I'm kicking booty, too!

Not only have I been writing my heart out and coaching some great talent, I've been doing so many things I've wanted to do in the past several years, but was too sick - doing chemo or recovering from chemo - or just plain too busy to pursue my fun activities and passions.

This summer I'm catching up and doing just about everything I've wanted to do in the way of fun and activities I love.

My dream is to have a small farm with animals, living in a cozy log cabin with my studio for coaching, writing, making and editing films attached to the main house.

One animal I'll have is a horse. I need to be sure that the horse I get is not the type to get lonely without a pal, so I'll get either one or two. I found out there are horses who need a pal, and others who just get jealous with another horse around. I'll have an electric invisible fence around the house to protect the smaller pets and animals from wild predators - including eagles.

Eeeewww. Someone had to cut down a tree recently because it was diseased in a rural place here. They found eagle nests - filled with *cat collars!* Kitty, kitty, kitty! I'll have to figure out what to put on Allie Cat to make her downright distasteful to our national bird.
Anyway, I really miss horses. I haven't been around them for several years. I love grooming them, walking them - I don't even need to ride them, even though I enjoy that as well. There's something about the horse soul that those who are "horse people" understand.

It's a sense of peace and substance and being incredibly grounded. Like all animals, one can not have an ego around them. Despite considering me an alpha leader, they pee, poop, belch and laugh at us .. OK, me .. at will.

All of which is to say I'm really excited about going horseback riding and grooming horses this coming weekend. My friend Kevin is taking me to a horse ranch - his friend the horse ranch owner invited me to join him.

I had to get a new pair of cowboy boots for the occasion. It's been a little too long since I've ridden a horse to start out bareback, which is the way I used to ride when I groomed horses and cleaned their stalls for fun.

Their muzzles are the softest skin on earth.

And I'm a little more cautious about where I walk around their hooves, thought. I was grooming a horse and he - all 2,000 pounds of him - stepped on my right foot. Ow. Double ow.

I elbowed him - HARD! And he moved off it, but not before doing some damage to my poor (I was going to put "little," but thought better of it looking at my size 9.5's) foot.

Mercifully I was wearing cowboy boots, which have a reinforced toe (I'm sure it's reinforced to prevent more injury) so nothing broke, but my big toenail on my right foot was pretty much wiped out and severely blackened for years. It's just now starting to grow back after falling off. Several times.

All well worth it for spending a great day working with horses!

I would say horses are also great conversationalists, but .. you know .. ah .. if I did, you might think that me being an animal whisperer (I actually used to be a professional pet calmer) means that I hear as much as I speak to them .. and, um..

Oh, my goodness. I just remembered I need to dig up my cowperson hat!

Yeee-ha!

Shoulder to shoulder

I'm not talking about marching or working together, I'm talking about tension.

Stress. And the management thereof!

I've had a lot on "my plate" recently, and I finally realized how much when I looked in the mirror and saw my shoulders were up past my ears, plastered against my head. They're so high my arms reach out several inches above everything I'm trying to touch, pick up or hold.

Time to de-stress. Relax.

Interestingly, my four pets don't tend to reflect my stressed out periods. They continue to be chill, which is *great.* I'm not sure what I would do if all 5 of us were on our very last nerve!

Eek!

Perhaps that is why pets are supposed to be so good for our blood pressure. They know what's really important - naps, pets and hugs, food, water, toys, access to a yard, safety - and not necessarily in that order.

I sent the first draft of my screenplay to the committee in LA, so that's a huge relief. While I was writing it, I outlined another screenplay to work on now. Or I could also work on the rewrite of another script that is a kiss away from being sale-able.

The story/outline for my new story reads like it's a drama, but I want to write it as a comedy because watching the drama would be less enticing.

So, back to deep breathing exercises, meditating, massages, taking a jacuzzi, a nice bath with candles at night, planning meals and having meals on at least somewhat of a scheduled basis, more walking, working out at the gym, getting a full night's sleep, putting my house back together, cleaning it, paying bills and socializing!

I'm getting together next week with a dear friend for an extended period of several hours over a meal through the evening, which I just love. Chat, chat, chat. And that includes a simultaneous animal play date for our pets!

Movies and Mariners games, visiting a friend and her baby, walking around Green Lake, tennis, going to a batting cage and more. Whew. Back on track.

Something I want to change: when I work on the final writing stages of any project - which can take from one to three weeks - I tend to become tunnel-visioned about working on it, and I'd like to make it more of a strategic, streamlined schedule.

That's a little difficult when I spend several hours a week coaching and working on a variety of other projects, such as my column for movieScope magazine and other exciting ventures people ask or hire me to do. And I love being a think tanker. Or a thinker tank person. Or a thinker tanker .. or .. Anyway, it feels good to be asked for my opinion of this or that and get paid for it!

So I want to keep more careful track of my working schedule with all I have going on, and I'm getting very good at saying no to things I simply can't do because I need not to overextend myself - that puts me in the stressed mindset to get so much work done in a short time, because even though I'm pretty good at everything I do, something loses in its quality and I can't tolerate sacrificing quality for anything.

My work, projects, coaching, relationships or life.

Balance. Scheduling. Being flexible but not to the point of breaking from trying to respond to too many jobs and too many requests. And naps. I have a very good friend who is a best-selling author and screenwriter and wonderful, charming individual who swears by her naps, and I'm getting in the swing of them now!

It also makes a difference that my hair is finally growing back in after being done with chemotherapy more than two years, now. That stuff is finally, finally working its way out of my system in a noticeable way. That feels great!

Witness tampering by the White House

You know those people who *used* to be employed by the Bush administration who have been told not to testify?

Those folks are now ordinary, private citizens.

They've told congress over and over again that President Bush instructed them not to testify or not to give congress any information they seek or both.

Here's the deal: If I publicly told a *former* employee not to testify in a courtroom or for congress? I would be, um, arrested and tried and found guilty of witness tampering.

Which would put me in jail. For a long time.

Apparently the president doesn't think any witness tampering laws apply to him ... not because he's the president (these laws do apply) ... but because he's George W. Bush, a president who doesn't seem to understand how government and the rule of law work in the US.

Even military service people, under the Nuremberg Rules, Nuremberg Agreement and Nuremberg Principles, do not have to follow orders to commit illegal acts or crimes against humanity, even in times of war.

On that basis, if witnesses refuse to testify, they would be open to criminal charges of contempt.

Some would argue that under the Nuremberg Rules, Agreement and Principles, as well as several articles of the United Nations Charter that the US invasion of Iraq is illegal.

You know, I get no thrill from talking about my US president this way. In fact, it just plain hurts.

I simply can't believe someone who is so completely without conscience or integrity or knowledge was elected by us to run our nation - a country that prides itself in the promise of the US Constitution and whose integrity is supposed to be upheld by the rule of law.

Only recently Bush indicated that finding the person in his administration who outed an undercover CIA agent wasn't high on his list. He hoped they would step forward, but he wasn't interested in investigating an act considered treasonous in time of war -- identifying an undercover CIA agent.

Apparently he wont' take any legal action because it's one of his people and he's just loyal to his loyal peeps.

Like I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, whose jail sentence was commuted by Bush because Libby knows where all the Bush administration skeletons are hidden in all those White House closets (I mean this *only* as a colloquialism!) and would probably be too tempted to share that information if he were sitting in jail with not much else to do.

It is so sad. I swear, I do not understand why people do not take responsibility for their actions when they have harmed others. Bush says he commuted Libby's sentence because it was tough on his wife and kids (which under the law judges are not supposed to consider when they sentence convicted criminals).

It seems to me that the best thing Libby could do for his family - especially his children - is be a good role model and man up, taking responsibility for hurting a lot of people and their families through his illegal actions.

Bush sabotages science - again

The US Surgeon General between 2000-2006 says he was muzzled or censored when it came to health issues and policies -- that if they didn't fit the Bush administration's political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda, they would often be ignored, marginalized or simply buried.

See Christopher Lee's Washington Post story about Richard Carmona's congressional testimony here.

The extraordinary interference, censorship and misinterpretation of bona fide science, truthful information, the economy and anything that empowers the average citizen because of the Bush adminstration's political, theological and ideological interference, malfeasance and censorship is not only shocking but historical in its nefarious influence.

I think it's safe to say we can expect the typical Democratic party response, "Wow. That's bad."

A lie does not equal one side of a story

I was asked to clarify something to which I referred in an earlier blog about journalism. Namely the lack of fair and thorough reporting in the US, especially when it comes to the Bush administration.

Here's how it works:

US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tells a lie. He tells congress - officially - that there were no accounts of any reports of civil liberties being denied or abused because of the Patriot Act, which gives the government lots of leeway to track down real and imagined "terrorists" within the US.

This lie is reported as "one side" of a story, instead of questioned, which puts the "other side" of the story (that's a lie) on the defensive.

First, if anyone had investigated, they would have found that his statement - apparently one of the few things he could remember - was not true. Several complaints had in fact already been registered to the FBI, all of which went to his office.

Result: misinformation put out to the public.

Generally, it was reported this way: "US Attorney General Gonzales says that, despite concerns about the Patriot Act, no civil liberties have been reported to be denied or abused."

Do you remember that story? I do because I didn't believe it.

So the "other side" of the story is defensive, saying that there have been civil liberties abuses.

Those who are certain there have been abuses - or even those who have actually filed abuse complaints - sound like weak whiners. Or bitter liberals. Or just plain liberals who "hate the Bush administration."

Eeeeeeeeeew.

To those "critics," the response is simple: those people don't like Bush. They do not bother to even try to find or tell us the truth. It is simply their way or the fairway.

The fact that there were complaints of civil rights abuses and complaints before Gonzales' testimony for congress was later reported, but not in a way that would challenge his dishonesty.

Except on Keith Olbermann's MSNBC program, which was reported long after Gonzales testified.

The only way a lie should be considered a story is when something is reported to be a lie.

For example, the story *should* read, "US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lied to congress today when he assured them there had been no complaints of civil liberties abuses due to the aggressive enforcement of the Patriot Act. In fact, before his first appearance before congress, six were confirmed by the FBI and forwarded to his office..."

This would put the liar on the defensive, rather than the truth tellers.

But thanks to so much misinformation and outright lies told by the memory-challenged Gonzales, the judicial branch of government has been hijacked; it is the first domino to fall in the long line of tumbling judicial domino's that are disabling the branch.

It starts at the top.

If the folks at the top, like Bush, don't respect the rule of law - ignoring it, snubbing their nose at it or not care about breaking the law because they know they won't be held accountable - how do they expect any of us folks down the food chain to respect it?

If government leaders tolerate or even perpetuate lies rather than facts; if media news chiefs don't make certain their reporters question sources - especially those known to misrepresent information or outright lie, the voting public remains ignorant and misinformed. Which keeps the abusers in power.

To get the truth, reporters need to make certain they do their research - or have time to do it before they're expected to tell the listening, reading or viewing public.

If news organizations are understaffed or staffed with too many inexperienced reporters, little research gets done so the "other side" of the lie is not reported. I remember one major national story that wasn't even recognized as a major national story because none of the inexperienced reporters (cheaper labor) was old enough to remember the initial event that made it such a huge deal.

Without the necessary knowledge or research, the "story" only goes out as the same old BS "he said," "he said," news, rather than reporting the actual facts - like the truth - or include any perspective.

If "we report ... he said x and she said y ... you decide." That is not journalism or reporting. It's transcribing what people say, whether it's a lie or the truth.

Meanwhile, speaking of the judicial branch: I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby had his 30 month prison sentence commuted by President Bush because Bush said Libby's family had suffered enough.

This is a boon to defense lawyers everywhere! Because according to the law, judges are never to consider family and other extraneous personal matters when determining the sentence of a convicted criminal.

Since the president himself has done it, watch for defense attorneys to ask judges to consider these personal matters when the judges before whom they appear determine the sentence for their clients.

There is still a year and a half of the Bush administration to go, and I cannot even imagine the amount of destruction to the government and the nation this guy and his henchmen will generate.

Sadly, Democrats come across as weak, powerless and incapable to do anything about these extraordinary abuses. They complain about the horrors of the administration, but then do little or nothing to stop or even curb them.

They can't stop this administration's hubris, arrogance and outright criminal destruction caused by an ignorant, incompetent, spiteful administration that chooses to live in denial of the wrath it has created in its own nation and the world - leaving in it's wake the bodies of thousands upon thousands of innocent victims and courageous military service people killed from Louisiana to Iraq.

Northwest actors who want to work in LA!

Award-winning comedic actor, stand-up comic and writer Bob Bledsoe moved to LA (not that long ago) from Seattle and is doing terrifically there.

He and I are in negotiations now to put on a seminar for you about working in LA.

You'll hear about the do's and don'ts, the myths and lies and pressures and phonies you'll run into -- how to avoid the wastes of time and deal with them all.

Bob is like me -- he will give you just the straight story, with all the information you could hope for about getting work as an actor in LA.

If you're interested, contact me at cpcontacts@comcast.net with your information. The more people who attend, the more economical we can make the workshop for you.

Crunch time

If you are a faithful blog reader, you know I've been completing the first draft of a new comedy feature script I'm writing for a deadline the past couple weeks.

It's the hardest writing work I've ever done because I've learned some new things recently that deepen my screenplay with character, structure and story details, and want to apply them. But dealing with these enormous changes and challenges consistently, persistently, paid off yesterday.

When I awoke yesterday - the full day dedicated to writing - everything fell completely into place. It all made sense; everything was factually and common sensibly logical -- even though you will be surprised at every turn.

The fun twists and turns may be perceived as unexpected, but in reality all the groundwork is laid for the film to show exactly the way characters I've created would actually react! Well, OK, there is some exaggeration in a couple of scenes. After all it is a comedy.

The key to making it to the point of joy was to stick with it day in and day out, to tough it out, to keep researching, do the ground work and put words on the screen.

It is like making my way up a steep roller coaster rail, one click at a time, until I reach the top and have a blast on the ride down! Especially since I'm coming in for a landing soon.

Honestly I was surprised at the quality of work I read when I reviewed it. Not that many changes in store for it so I did not have to spend additional hours rewriting or editing.

Still, make no mistake. The definition of writing is: rewriting. Rewriting to the 10th power.

I love this creative process - every bit of it. The highs, the lows, the yes's, the no's, the night sweats caused by trying to figure out how the heck he does that and she doesn't, the sleepless nights, the headaches, heartaches, victories, joy, laughs, frustration, dedication, devotion, artistic expression, personal fulfillment and success that only happens with persistence, persistence, persistence.

The creative spirits and forces share our journey; as long as they are with us we can't go wrong.

Environment economy basics

A reality show I saw recently was about a really smart guy who dedicated himself to ripping people off; conning them out of millions, and participating in all sorts of illegal activities including bank heists so he could get a trophy girlfriend and live the high life.

He actually hobnobbed with well established and wealthy people who unwittingly assisted him in his nefarious activities because they accepted him at face value.

Of course, he wasn't smart enough to get away with it forever, and today finds himself spending the majority of his life - the rest of it - in jail.

The sheriff who tracked him down said this: "It's too bad. If he had dedicated his intelligence, cleverness, charm and hard work for good -- he would be an incredible asset to the world."

Remember my blog about short term gain, long term loss?

This is a classic example. Especially because apparently he still tries to con more people from inside the slammer. Which only tacks more time ....

What has this got to do with environmental economy?

Well, it seems to me that if we invested in and worked to clean up the environment, we'd ultimately save an extraordinary amount of money.

Here's the money we'd save - individually, as taxpayers:

1) we wouldn't have to pay for massive clean up sites with our tax dollars because companies have poisoned our waters, air and grounds.

2) we wouldn't have to pay the personal price of sickness and death caused by pollutions created by polluters, including the US government.

3) we wouldn't have to pay the billions of dollars we do for additional, individually paid health care in addition to the billions of tax dollars we pay for people who can't afford health care.

4) we could redirect health care research away from treating and preventing toxic poisoning from pollution to other preventable significant conditions and diseases.

5) extraordinary insurance rates for businesses and individual health care would not be necessary

6) the mortality rate of our children could be significantly improved.

7) questions of skulduggery and even homicide preventing competition or new products introduced to the market that compete with such products as oil-burning autos will lessen.

8) the mortality rate of adults could be significantly improved.

9) non-renewable resources can be replaced with renewable resources.

In short, instead of spending the billions they do for products that pollute in their making and/or use, if they spent money to make certain their process did not pollute, did not unnecessarily waste natural resources or contribute to significant health problems, they'd save you and me a ton of money -- and themselves from costly lawsuits created by hurting people to begin with, then covering up their malfeasance.

Of course, they don't care about the money you and I have to spend through our taxes to protect or heal or bury ourselves, and that's why lawsuits that cost them dearly make a difference to them and why they want ceilings on punitive damages when they are sued by people who are hurt by them in some way.

I saw a film of children affected by pesticides -- at 3, 4 and 5 years old, their motor skills are extremely poor -- they can't catch a ball, for example. And they are developmentally disabled. This is the legacy of corporate farmers who neglect to learn the damage done by pesticides they are told will make their cash crops flourish, free from bugs and disease.

While we focus so closely on the 'bottom line' - the personal costs and pain people must endure thanks to careless and purposeful use of poisons to save money are pretty horrific.

Imagine how much better the world would be if these barons of business decided from the getgo to use their intelligence, cleverness and charm to do good -- a short term loss because of the investment required, resulting in a long term gain. Not just in terms of income but in good will.

Instead of remaining stuck in today's mindset that is so completely cost inefficient -- creating the mirage of a short term gain, while in reality causing an extremely negative long term loss -- wouldn't it be terrific if business people instead started to use a genuinely cost efficient model: believing people are an assett -- as workers, consumers and creators -- rather than a labor liability.

This cycle of destruction is true in every business that practices it - from motion pictures to car makers to oil companies to toy manufacturers.

Until these modern day Ebeneezer Scrooges decide that people are more important than profits, it won't change. And when they do understand that people are more important than profits, they will understand that people create prosperity, especially when everyone works for the greater good of individuals and society. Short term loss (investment), long term gain (profits, good will, prosperous workers and positive products that everyone not only wants but uses).

Purely profit-driven practices are always short term gains, long term losses.

Handwriting feels more personal

I recently decided to send a dear friend a letter of appreciation and admiration, and it was a challenge.

First, the decision to send my sentiments hand written.

I generally think on the computer, but I also write by hand when I'm separated from my laptop. In fact, I write by hand so little for other people to read, it was a shock to realize my handwriting is not the most pleasant work of art on which to cast your eyes.

When I take notes for interviews (I tape record them as well), I print.

When I take research notes, I (mostly) print.

My printing is not bad. But to send it as a meaningful, heartfelt message, I figured it would look more like a kidnap ransom note than a missive of affection.

So the outcome was a sort of hybrid between script and print, which appeared to me like it would pass for the handwriting of at least a near adult.

I attribute this to moving 17 times by the time I was 17. When a kid changes schools that often, handwriting seems to be a subject that is overlooked, especially when one can get away with printing homework early on and of course typing and printing it out later.

But everything I wanted to say, I did. And to have sent an email or typewritten letter simply would not have felt to me as if it was personal enough, as if it meant as much.
























My brother occasionally sends handwritten notes and letters. I enjoy receiving them.

My handwritten notes to him are usually on humorous greeting cards that I hope make him laugh. Hopefully, he considers my handwriting - my punchlines and "artwork" - part of the laugh.

In the end I wonder if it is so much the handwriting as it is the understanding of how much time it takes to write by hand in these busy days.

Taking time to think about what to say, then to carefully writing those thoughts and feelings.

Knowing this is my "real" gift, I probably end up feeling as good about writing them - struggling as I might with my penpersonship - as the person receiving it.

Using your cup?

I got a neti cup!

A couple years ago I worked on a film that dealt with east Indian cultural issues and learned about them. The fellow with whom I worked used one and demonstrated it for me, but for some reason I didn't think it was "for me."

For many years, I suffered with nasal stuffage, sinus problems, allergies and dreaded sinusitis - which can put me in bed with a very high fever for days.

Until my beloved primary health caretaker prescribed a daily inhalant (a steroid of the non-muscle building sort) and an antihistamine that does not cause drowsiness about five years ago. That was a great relief I've been primarily symptom-free since, and when I do develop symptoms of allergies, sinusitis, etc., I elevate my intake.

Well, turns out that by using the neti cup daily, I can enjoy the same symptom-free life without putting any chemicals in my body. More I don't have to suffer any symptoms as the call to increase the dosage of medications, no matter how effective they might be for treatment.

If you're new to the neti cup, simply fill it with a cup of warm water and 1/4 teaspoon salt. Pour the saline solution through your nasal passages by tilting your head to the side.

I finally understood what a great preventive and treatment tool it is when Dr. Oz showed how incredibly effective it is for all sorts of nasal problems on an Oprah show.

Watch him demonstrate how to use one here.

It's been used for centuries in other nations as a preventative and treatment measure.

I have to admit, the first time I used was a bit of a thrill. But each time after it only gets easier and faster, and my nasal passages not only feel better - free of any foreign matter, they're more open and feel as if they are huge caverns rather than straw holes!

Ahhhhh. I can breeeeeeaaaaathe!

And it unplugged my ears! I can hear!

ps - If you want to get one, I suggest you shop around online if there's no store in your area that sells them. Some dealers are charging more than necessary since the demand for them has increased. I paid a very fair price for the cup and the shipping.

Why diss Al Gore?

Lately I've seen "news" talk show guests who deny there is such a thing as global warming or a climate crisis. They say sure, it's a couple degrees warmer, but hey, it's not serious and people are silly for getting so "hysterical" about it.

Then they try discrediting Al Gore personally, accusing him of all sorts, including hypocrisy and manipulating scientific data, then claim there is no scientific evidence to prove there are any problems with our climate. That weather is happening just as it should.

I've not seen them sharing any facts. One anti-Gore spokesman only made generalisations and personal accusations against him without presenting one "fact" or suggesting one place we could verify his statements about what he claimed was Gore twisting scientific data.

It was a personal attack, not an attack on, or correction of, data.

Gore has, for decades, been in the fight to secure and preserve a healthy environment - and he's stepped on a few political and corporate toes along the way.

Here's my question: why would anyone want to diss achieving a healthy environment?

I wondered if multinational corporations selling products they want us to buy that are not in our best environmental interest might be involved.

I've been pretty careful with my resources over the years, I tend to live pretty modestly. I lived with someone who was wasteful for a few years and it nearly drove me crazy. She thought she was "normal," that I was a extreme. Um, I've known people who are extreme environmentalists and I'm not one of them, though I've decided to become even more serious about conserving resources.

At any rate, what I came away with after watching foes who personally attack Al Gore instead of the specific science used by environmentalists to prove we are in a climate crisis - caused by people and animals and an disappearing rain forest presence - is that they look and behave untrustworthy.

Al Gore's been selling his ideas with facts, scientific data and projections determined by people who have been investigating these issues for decades with information we've been tracking more than a century.

Some scientists working with the Bush administration who believe we are in a climate crisis have been fired, told to rewrite their summations or had them rewritten to reflect the lack of a climate crisis.

One detailed example of Bush's Department of the Interior tampering with scientific evidence involving endangered species is reported here. Usually these types of cover ups don't come out until after an administration is out of office because of the power they use to manipulate facts while they hold government employees/scientists in their grip.

So here's a tip to those who try to discredit Al Gore when it comes to environmental causes: you look foolish. You look like you don't know what you're talking about. Even if you might have some credible information.

He normally travels commercial.

His home is "green."

If you honestly believe that the climate crisis is no crisis at all; that the earth really is doing OK; that the loss of rain forests, industrial pollution, oil-burning vehicles, animal gases, chemical dumping and oil spills are not actually seriously affecting the planet in a negative way?

Show us evidence.

Show us pictures.

Speaking of which, here's a snapshot of The Lost City in China blanketed with "imaginary" pollution, which some scientists claim is contributing the "imaginary" climate crisis. If you suffer from asthma or other imagined pulmonary diseases, you are warned not to be outside during actual events of environmental particle poison.

Show us scientific research and reports.

There used to be arguments about the environment that went: well, you can have a clean environment or you can have jobs. One or the other.

People wanted jobs, only to see themselves and their families get sick and die from the pollution that was the byproduct of those jobs. The Asarco smelter in Tacoma, Washington, USA is a perfect example. In addition to all the people and plants its pollution harmed, it exuded a putrid odor for *miles* around, which created the city's slogan, "Tacoma has an aroma."

There used to be arguments by the tobacco companies that smoking tobacco was actually good for us. Seriously. They even used doctors to say so. For decades they swore there was no scientific evidence that smoking tobacco caused lung diseases and discredited people who insisted there was.

In fact there was scientific evidence proving smoking tobacco caused lung diseases in the 1950's in England. It's a famous report now, but it was debunked when it came out. If you're interested in a little history of the fight between the multinational tobacco corporations and those who insisted smoking is bad for our health, you can read it here.

Second hand smoke contributes to pollution and diseases. That smoke doesn't just disappear when people smoke outside.

There's another auspicious aspect to "climate crisis/global warming."

For some reason that will be known in the future, it is not a priority of the US government, particularly of the Bush administration. Perhaps they're upset that someone else is setting a priority for us when they believe they should be setting our priorities.

This doesn't fit their agenda.

Why it would not is very curious, indeed.

I mean, no one has excluded anyone with a different position about the subject of climate crisis. We're all looking for the truth and how to improve our planet - all credible research and data is welcome.

But we're sick to death of being told what - or whom - we should be against. Of the government trying to scare us into doing - or not doing - something.

Being for a clean environment is something that unites, not divides, us. How to make it cleaner, healthier - working together, everyone contributing.

Why wouldn't someone want to contribute to a healthier, cleaner, safer, more beautiful world? Understand that and you'll understand the people who speak against efforts to truthfully clear the air.

Back to Al Gore.

As a human being, I assume he has faults. As a leader who is honestly trying to find what we can do to improve our environment on a global basis, he comes across as truthful, sincere and dedicated to a cause he knows is much bigger than himself.

Because Al Gore is not the Cause. The Cause is the Cause.

Lobbyists who personalize the Cause in the form of Al Gore will only catapult him as a martyr-leader of historical proportions, as well as make the Cause of a healthy planet creating renewable resources as major and influential a Cause as the civil rights movement.

Come to think of it -- you want to diss Al Gore?

Fire away.

Please.

I'm writing!

My new screenplay's first draft should be finished by Monday!

I'm pretty much writing around the clock except for walking dates with friends - I'm on a roll!

Oh - yeah. And there's that deadline.

This gives you the perfect opportunity to read all the blog entries you haven't!

Have a marvelous weekend!

There is so very much to write about when I return -- news, my muse, views, blues, gurus and hues -- I can hardly wait!

Thanks for tuning in - see you Monday!

cp

Great art belongs to everyone -

Thank you, Beverly "Bubbles" Sills for a life dedicated to love.

Love of family and friends, music, opera and mostly for expanding your audiences to include people from every background - enriching the lives of everyone you touched, who heard you sing, or who enjoyed the benefits of your leadership of the arts community.

Thanks to recordings, video and film, your voice and influence will never be silenced. The choir of angels will be thrilled with the addition of your brilliant coloratura soprano voice.

Your life was one of joy, extraordinary talent, success and personal challenges you met with ultimate grace. Rest in peace.

Wanna get out of your jail sentence? Commit treason .. I mean, perjury ..

President Bush has commuted Lewis "Scooter" Libby's jail sentence of 30 months for perjury, obstruction of justice -- and other felonies -- because he thinks the term "excessive." And that Libby has suffered enough.

This despite 30 months being well within the specific sentencing guidelines under the law for the crimes he was convicted.

Which means Libby will be taken care of the rest of his life by right wing supporters because he lied to a grand jury when he was asked if he assisted in the outing of an active undercover CIA agent - who was dealing with some pretty bad guys.

She was outed because the Bush administration was upset with her husband for discovering that Iraq had *nothing* to do with Al Qaeda's attack on the Twin Towers September 11th.

Revealing the identity of an active undercover CIA agent is an act of treason, *especially* in time of war - a war that Bush literally lied us into with Iraq.

Treason is punishable by sentences up to and including death; he wasn't accused of treason even though the act of outing an agent is treasonous - he was accused only of perjury and obstructing justice.

Because he supported Bush and Cheney to the point of lying about the malfeasance and misfeasance of the Bush administration associated with Iraq, Haliburton, outing the CIA agent, etc., Libby is a hero to the right wing.

The next step may well be that Bush actually gives Libby a full out pardon for his crimes against the nation, not just commuting his sentence.

Despite the court's decision that Libby's crimes were bad enough to warrant serious jail time after he was convicted by a jury -- including the hard work of his top defense lawyers -- Bush takes it upon himself to supersede the court's jurisdiction and abuse his power to commute a sentence.

Bush has the right to do it - the president has the right to do just about anything, but it sounds like he's doing it to reward someone for lying and covering up the corruption that continues to erode the Bush administration and the US government.

It would be like Nixon setting the Watergate criminal mob - H.R. Haldeman, John Erlichman, John Colson, John Mitchell and many, many more - free. All were convicted and served jail terms for similar crimes.

It is stunning to think an American presidency is as corrupt, as destructive, as incompetent, as monolithic and as ignorant as the Bush administration is in 2007.

If you ever did not believe Bush and Cheney see themselves above the law - here's one more little clue if you're investigating.

I have to lay part of the responsibility of this outrage -- and it is an outrage, even though many are going to try to convince you otherwise -- on the media that has not reported extremely significant stories in a way that makes the American public aware of the massive abuse of the office of the presidency and vice-presidency.

Cheney and his henchmen have counted on an unquestioning media who will simply quote the lies of Bush, Cheney and others who so cavalierly pass on false information, then quote the people who disagree, leaving us with what is perceived as "two sides" of a story without any perspective or investigation.

If we had either perspective or investigation, we'd see that one "side" is an outright lie, not any side of any story.

So it's not a story at all, but unchallenging media still repeat statements of Bush and Cheney and their spokespeople as if they're facts when they have not the slightest basis in truth.

OK, maybe sometimes their statements have a slight basis in truth, but it's twisted beyond recognition of that truth.

I do not understand how good Republicans can tolerate what Bush and Cheney are doing to their party, how they are ignoring and obliterating the rule of law and why they would put up with Bush and Cheney's acts that disintegrate so many things that make our nation great.

On the other hand, it's outrageous actions like this that finally fire up an apathetic public; especially during a holiday that celebrates what makes this country the nation what it is supposed to be -- a nation where we are *all* - each of us - including the president and vice-president - supposed to be considered equals under the Constitution of the United States.

If it were not the Bush administration, this action would be absolutely unbelievable. But so many of us are so incredibly numb to the contempt this administration has for the Constitution, rule of law and common sense, all we can do is watch for their next even more ridiculous action which will leave us equally as speechless.

It's as bad as Richard Nixon being rewarded for his work helping the hopelessly alcoholic, rabid, right wing Senator Joe McCarthy and his heinous work on the notorious un-American activities committee, destroying the lives of thousands of innocent Americans unjustly accused of being "communist."

Thanks to his loyalty and support of unfounded attacks on innocent Americans, Nixon was rewarded with unceasing support right through reaching the White House as president.

Come to think of it, so was Ronald Reagan.

The saddest part of all this is that as angry as we get about the abuse of the system, ignorance and hubris costing thousands of American lives, tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis, the Taliban and Al Qaeda become stronger in Afghanistan and of course Ben Laden is still nowhere to be found or captured.

And our economy continues to take an extraordinary hit thanks to Bush putting us more than a trillion dollars in debt to pay for his war with Iraq.

All of which, by the way, Ben Laden not only hoped for but predicted. He knew Bush well enough to count on his knee-jerk, ignorant and inappropriate response to Al Qaeda's attack.

Put simply, Bush simply doesn't care how we feel - why should he? He continues to do whatever the hell he feels like with no accountability. As in, none.

I mean, Bush probably thinks that if HE doesn't have to deal with any scrutiny or accountability, why should anyone else in his loyal circle of pals like "Scooter"?

Heck, I bet Bush thinks "Libby's doing a heck of a job!"

More, Bush and Cheney do not care that we don't like them - why should they?.

Bush and Cheney do not care that they "get to" flaunt the law whenever they feel like it -why should they?

Bush and Cheney do not care that they have corrupted our government and given the finger to the rule of law, voters and the idea that there are actually three branches of government. Why should they?

Bush and Cheney do not care about ordinary Americans, the economy (do they know how expensive milk is these days?), how to actually and honestly combat terrorism, corrupting the government at all levels, reality, stealing, lying, manipulating or whatever they want to do, whenever they want, where ever they want, however they want to do it, regardless of how many Americans and Iraqis are killed in the process.

Again, why should they? They continue to do anything they wish with no accountability.

Remember my blog on "disinformation" recently? How I said that the government releases information when the public is busy with other events - like the weekend, the Rose Bowl, Super Bowl, and say -- big holidays like the 4th of July?

Well, that's why they released the announcement of Bush's commutation of Libby's jail sentence Monday night, July 2, when most Americans are getting ready to celebrate the holiday, hoping that they will not be watching the news, hoping they'll be too distracted to care and that the unquestioning media will simply release the statement and get some typical "liberal complainers" to respond.

By the way, Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani both agree with Bush's action. They are Republicans hoping to be nominated to be a presidential candidate, and many Republicans are doggone pleased they do!

Congratulations, Democrats! You could not have had a sweeter election gift than this because, gosh, the rest of us realize that when we break the law, we get thrown in jail. Seriously, even Paris Hilton.

Come to think of it, thanks to DNA, we're seeing how many people are thrown in jail even when they don't commit a crime.

Is fairness a US doctrine?

If you define doctrine as a concept, idea, theory or set of principles, it is.

If you define doctrine as a regulation or rule, not so much.

There's a great clamor over the possibility of the US Federal Communications Commission re-creating something called the Fairness Doctrine - hysterically renamed the Equal Time Rule by opponents, which it is not.

Here's the more detailed history of the Fairness Doctrine.

Basically it gives the FCC the power to check with local broadcasters periodically to make certain real issues - issues that directly affect you and your local community - are covered by your local stations. More that there is an outlet for healthy debate about those subjects, not presenting just one point of view.

Not at the same time, not equal time, not presenting both sides back to back, but having other points of view presented at some time during the broadcast programming.

The public airwaves - so-called "free" airwaves supported by commercials - stations you can receive without cable or satellite dishes belong to the citizens of the United States of America.

The FCC grants a license to individuals and companies to broadcast programs in the "public interest, convenience and necessity."

Networks like CBS, NBC, ABC and FOX offer news and entertainment programs to local licensees. The local station is ultimately responsible for every second of everything it airs. That's why local station managers can refuse to air network programs it doesn't like, agree with or feels is inappropriate for the community for which it broadcasts. By definition, networks don't focus on local issues of your community.

In the industry, the "joke" is that the FCC license is not seen as a means to inform and empower local viewers, but a license to make money for its owners without regard for viewers and listeners.

I worked in radio and television news when the Fairness Doctrine was in place, and our guidelines were to make sure that both sides were aired some time in our broadcast schedule. Again, not at the same time, not including equal time or in the same time period, back to back, but at some time during our programming schedule.

The way the stations determined what issues most concerned the community was to interview community leaders about the subjects they believed were of most concern to them and their groups and that needed to be brought to the community's attention.

I can assure you that all the time taken to interview these people and determine what they believed were of the greatest concern was pretty much a waste of time. Broadcasters most frequently paid lip service, if that, to those issues. If not disheartened, the leaders were angered by the failure of broadcasters to respond to what they clearly and sometimes urgently felt needed attention - particularly race relations.

Groups that are under-represented, misrepresented or neglected altogether would request more coverage; people suffering from the malfeasance or misfeasance of industry or government would report their concerns as well.

The largest number of complaints the FCC receives is not from people concerned that our nation is under- or inadequately informed, hurting our democratic republic from having an educated voting base; not from people concerned about the excessive violent content, including promotions for violent programs in non-violent programs -- but from people complaining about foul language and what they consider inappropriate sexual content.

An FCC license, even without the Fairness Doctrine, still says that that license is granted to the owner for the highest good of the public's interest, convenience and necessity. But when it was in place, stations would feature community issues on extremely low rated chat shows with no production values at strange hours - usually early Sunday mornings - just to show the FCC that the station had, indeed, "covered" the issues.

While it wasn't much, it was at least something. Some stations continue this practice.

In 1987 courts tossed the Fairness Doctrine, maintaining that the result of no Fairness Doctrine would be a more vigorous debate on issues important to the communities. I'm not certain how they arrived at that conclusion, given that newspapers were actually covering local issues and most broadcast stations would take their lead to cover local stories. How and why would the courts believe that stations would do more without even the suggestion of fair coverage?

It has always baffled me, because it had the exact opposite result.

Local radio stations and some television stations were affected immediately. The first thing to go: local news. Because it meant more profits by owners if they don't have to pay for local reporters and take those minutes away from more music more often.

In the 1980's, I worked as an assistant news director, commentator and occasional reporter for major stories for a local "free" station, KCPQ-TV (FOX/CNN) Seattle/Tacoma market.

Despite great and growing ratings, we walked into work one Monday morning in June ... to find the entire newsroom gutted.

Gutted. All the equipment and our personal belongings had been removed. The news program was arbitrarily dumped by its owner - who also owned stations in other markets - to make more money from showing cheap movies during the time slot instead of having to pay a news staff.

Sure, we could make money for the station, but nothing like the bucks they could rake in from showing cheap movies and charging businesses high prime time advertising rates. Plus they had "proof" of high ratings in the time slot from our work.

There was no concern whatsoever for the welfare of the community or us. I was lucky to have a strong contract, and got paid every cent I was owed from it (they tried to buy me out for less by paying me with one big check and I said no).

While news reports claimed the station was helping the rest of the staff find jobs - truth is they only provided a telephone, phone book and want-ads.

With a Fairness Doctrine, radio and TV stations at least believed presenting local news was a responsibility they had to their community, now a station can be sold to a national owner - one that sends the same music or other programming to many stations at once (there's no longer a limit to the number of stations a person or company can own as long as it's not more than one in each market) throughout the nation.

Talk about saving money and making way more profits! No more local personalities!

The only "broadcast" employee needed in many stations is an engineer to keep the electronic programming running smoothly sent from a central source far away while inserting local commercials. Now that is something that remains local. Advertising.

I've often wondered why local advertisers don't inquire about local programming because the money they're spending isn't staying home - it's being sent back to corporate headquarters in another state.

Many conglomerates that own radio stations also own television stations and newspapers and magazines and film companies and book publishing companies.

So if an author's book gets picked up, they save money by giving him or her a fantastic fee for publishing, film making and broadcast rights, any ancillary products (CD's, DVD's, games), and other products that might be developed that may come from that author's work.

While it may seem like a lot of money in one chunk, it's far less than the author would receive if separate entertainment business negotiated separate contracts.

Fewer owners, like Australian-born Rupert Murdoch, who has become a US citizen, means fewer issues, voices and viewpoints are aired.

Murdoch is known for owning media with very conservative points of view to the exclusion of other viewpoints while hyping themselves as "fair and balanced."

Meanwhile, "back in the day," all news and chat radio stations started up because of the new lack of news presented by most stations, supposedly to fill the community need.

They turned out to be real cash cows because they only had to hire a few chat show personalities and local reporters since they relied mostly on network news sources and wire services.

Commercials were experienced by listeners as simply more talk, so programmers packed more of them into their air time than ever.

There have been attempts to feature spokespeople from "both sides" of an issue, but as you see and listen for yourself, the programs tend to call the same people all the time, not necessarily those who are the best spokespeople for their particular issue on either side.

Broadcast personalities who emerged in tabloid programs were outrageous, getting high ratings but from a large but narrow-interest group of people. Howard Stern, Geraldo Rivera, Jerry Springer, Rush Limbaugh, Phil Donohue and a more tabloid Oprah Winfrey emerged as stars.

Winfrey went on to drop most tabloid content and become an internationally respected and revered broadcaster and international leader in her own right.

Conservative/right-wing talk shows with hosts like Rush Limbaugh emerged with good ratings - again with narrow-interest audiences.

Progressive or liberal radio talk show personalities such as Stephanie Miller, Al Franken and Thom Hartmann have emerged, also getting good ratings from narrow-interest audiences.

Miller is the #1 program in many markets she broadcasts.

Conservative broadcasters claim that there's no market for liberal talk show - that the free market dictates the public isn't interested in that format, but that is not true.

The truth is that there are so few owners of monolithic broadcast networks, most owned by people who only want to feature hosts with extremely conservative points of view, that they tend to be the only game in too many communities.

Where progressive programs are aired, they tend to flourish.

Air America is not the only progressive network, but while it took five years for conservative talk shows to get a money-making foothold, Air America has come out of financial difficulties in three.

If you're blessed with stations that feature local personalities in your community, appreciate them! I bet they're highly rated, too.

So before you believe propaganda and hysteria about a Fairness Doctrine - incorrectly called the Equal Time regulation, do some homework.

If we are to have a fairness doctrine - it needs to be reasonably created and mandated to foster healthy debate, not just the name-calling that plagues our airwaves now. And it needs to be enforced.

When it was in place, there was only the pressure on the broadcasters to be responsible to their communities without real enforcement of its mandates. But at least broadcast managers took it seriously enough to make contact with community leaders periodically, even if they took little action.

Absentee corporate owners are terrified that a new Fairness Doctrine would "force" them to pay money for local programming and staff - which would hurt their bottom line. That's why they're so adamantly against it. Your community's advertising dollars would have to be shared with - OH MY GOD! - YOU!

That is considered unAmerican by the right wing conservatives because they don't want to be told how to run their businesses and feel that a free market means everyone for him or herself. That if they do well - even though so many corporations have a bazillion tax shelters - the community somehow does well, too.

Riiiiiight.

Problem is, they're making all their narrow-casting money off the backs of our citizen-owned airwaves. And legally, they can't consider their business private property or have the right to take our publicly owned airwaves and do whatever they wish without considering the public's interest, convenience or necessity first.

But they want to and try to and the government has all too often allowed them to succeed in hijacking our means of information, education and entertainment in the name of "free market" business.

The FCC is holding hearings in some communities now - if you're interested in contacting them about this, or other issues, you can do it here.

With this background, Seattle Times editorial writer Ryan Blethen wrote a brief editorial I believe you'll find interesting and informative.

Blethen's family owns majority interest in The Seattle Times, one of the few locally-owned media outlets in the US.

In the name of full disclosure, I worked for The Seattle Times 1990-1992 as its ombudsman/Reader Advocate; writing a weekly column on various media subjects which you can read in The Seattle Times archives starting here - there are several pages listing my columns.