America is a sick nation.
Not from the swine flu pandemic, although surely that doesn’t help, but the U.S. is afflicted with an even graver illness. At the moment, it’s looking terminal. Health care reform and affordable medical treatment for everyone cannot come too soon.
Like most illnesses, no one is exactly sure when our patient contracted the disease. Sometimes, that’s not important; this time it is. If we can get to the source of this epidemic, we have a chance of preventing future outbreaks from happening.
Thus far, research points to May 15, 1940, the day Roger E. Ailes, the son of a factory worker, was born in Warren, Ohio. Apparently, Ailes was exposed to the AILE-ment when he was quite young. Although it remained dormant for a long time, the symptoms of Ailes’ disease erupted in 1967 when Ailes first met Richard M. Nixon. The disease known as Extreme-Partisanship, has progressed exponentially.
In 1968, Ailes joined Nixon’s presidential campaign. After leading Nixon to victory, Ailes’ symptoms became even more pronounced.
He founded Ailes Communications in New York. About the same time, one symptom, brain dysfunction escalated. Ailes became obsessed with right-wing politics, obsession as an addiction, being the major symptom of the disease.
Many credit Mr. Ailes with Ronald Reagan’s 1984 successful run for the American presidency. Reagan, history tells us, contracted the disease later in his life, in 1962, when he became rabid about his politics. No one is sure exactly from which carrier he contracted the AILE-ment.
But back to Ailes and how his disease manifested itself. No trick was too small for Roger Ailes. Obsessive partisanship exhibits itself through excessive measures. All reason is thrown out the window with this brain dysfunction. When there is no rationale, there is no underlying principle, only righteousness. Ailes hired New York Mad Man Philip Dusenberry to build the supporting ad campaign to further his cause and his candidate, Ronald Reagan.
Dusenberry created ads that seduced the public, infecting them with, according to unnamed sources, “swelling violin music and emotional, issue-free imagery of weddings, flag-raising, home-buying and peaceful, scenic vistas.” It was an alchemy to which many Americans succumbed, not understanding that they were being contaminated with a dose of Ailes’ AILE-ment that is highly contagious.
By 1988, Ailes was seriously ill with the AILE-ment. He helped George H. W. Bush defeat Michael Dukakis. Ailes and political guru, Lee Atwater, who had earlier contracted the AILE-ment, used race-baiting as a tactic to secure the win for their candidate. The subtle and undiagnosed disease was advancing rapidly in both men. Highly contagious, it often manifested itself in excessive meanness.
Radio personality, partisan and King of Mean, Rush Limbaugh, may still not know that he has the disease. But in 1991, Ailes exposed Limbaugh, who has the addiction gene (Oxycontin ring a bell?) to the AILE-ment. Together Ailes and Limbaugh worked on a TV show, but it was short-lived. Limbaugh, of course, has returned to radio where listeners are exposed to a daily dose of the AILE-ment at work.
Following his initial association with Rush Limbaugh, Roger Ailes’ disease went into remission. But in February 1996, Ailes symptoms returned. Rupert Murdoch of News Corporation hired Ailes to create Fox News Channel set to launch on October 7, 1996.
Ailes hired a coterie of right-wing broadcasters including Matt Drudge, Sean Hannity, Oliver North and Bill O’Reilly, all who had already contracted the AILE-ment. He also hired veteran broadcaster Geraldo Rivera who appears to have some resistance to the disease.
By now Ailes disease was full-blown. Did Ailes know that something was wrong? Perhaps as a cover-up, Ailes employed one of his New York Mad Men to create the slogan for Fox News Channel: ”fair and balanced reporting.” Of course, the AILE-ment prohibits fairness and balance because that’s exactly what the afflicted patient lacks as the insidious disease attacks the brain.
Again, the disease is highly contagious. It has spread across the airwaves. Turn on MSNBC and there is as much obsessive partisanship there as on Fox News Channel. MSNBC has caught the fever!
The other cable network, CNN, is losing viewers daily. Apparently, the disease has not reached the pandemic stage at CNN. It therefore looks weird to the American viewing public, most who have contracted the AILE-ment and no longer relate well to reasonable discussion.
Apparently, only 9% of Americans have full immunity against the AILE-ment. A 2009 Gallup assessment has found an average of 36% of Americans consider themselves Democratic, 28% Republican and 37% call themselves independent, although when pressed to say which party they lean toward, 51% of Americans identify as Democrats, 39% as Republicans.
In other words, 91% of Americans have been exposed to the AILE-ment.
Another manifestation of the AILE-ment is that Americans no longer pledge allegiance to The United States of America, but to their respective parties, an AILE-ment that is quickly bringing America to its knees.
Currently, there appears to be no effective vaccination against the disease. And there isn’t likely to be one soon. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) has apparently been exposed to the AILE-ment itself. And besides, the CDC has its hands full with the H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic, for which, thankfully, there is immunization.
Unfortunately, they’ve been unsuccessful in getting the vaccination to the people in a timely matter. They must be suffering from the characteristic brain dysfunction common from their exposure to the AILE-ment, apparently getting in their way of doing things reasonably.
Halli Casser-Jayne is the author of A YEAR IN MY PAJAMAS WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA, The Politics of Strange Bedfellows. You can read more of her opinions @ http://www.thecjpoliticalreport.com
c. 2009 Halli Casser-Jayne All rights reserved.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 69
Perhaps, the "aile-ment" prevents us from actually addressing our problems. Addictions are like that.
But if we grab hold of that common thread and pull it hard, all of these complex problems begin to unravel and we will find that we're holding the answer to all of them right in our hand.
The answer is to end our reliance on carbon-based fuels."
Al Gore: A Generational Challenge to Repower America
We played right into the terrorists' hands. The way to defeat them is to stop funding them.
(And we do need to kick the oil habit for a host of reasons.)
Halli, have you read any of my book "Invisible Hand" available here on Gather and at www.nopom.info? It shows how we could eliminate the divisiveness and unite the nation as never before. (I mean that in several senses.)
You left out "In My Opinion"...........
It was just the way you wrote "America is a sick nation" in such bold letters that it almost made it seem like it were true or something........
with sticking to unreliable "green" preposterous plans
with the rise in illiteracy from the dumbing down of our schools,
with the encouragement of immature/unwed parenting through no restraints on sexual behavior for our young,
with the fostering of entitlement mentality in replace of work ethic and self responsibility
and on and on... yes, I agree with you Halli,we should be fearful for the health of nation. .
What do you think the "cure" is?
For my part, I think the nation has no vision, which has the power to inspire. By "vision" I mean a unified theme that addresses the significant problems we face. I mentioned what I think that "vision" is above. I thought Obama might become the messenger for that vision (or close to it) - and he may yet - but again we seem to be bogged down in old controversies. Capitalism v. socialism, mideast wars. What we need is a quantum leap - a quantum vision - that doesn't just rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic.
Again, I refer to Al Gore's speech, "A Generational Challenge to Repower America," as an example of such a vision.
What are your thoughts about such a vision?
Nora: "unreliable 'green' preposterous plans"
I have posted many times that First Solar has achieved cost parity with coal. So why would you choose to sink $billions in R&D for non-existing "clean coal" technology? I have also posted many times that First Solar has production capacity of a gigawatt annually - and growing. That is the equivalent of an average nuclear plant. There is nothing "preposterous" about that. That does not even mention other solar companies, which are following First Solar very closely - and it does not even mention wind energy. Would you prefer that China, Japan, Spain and Germany expand production of these technologies? Then we can buy it from them?
So tell me - why would kids want to study science and math? Because you say they should? I think they need a vision, and the most promising vision on the horizon is "sustainability" - gosh, they even have a vested interest in that. But you demean it as "unreliable 'green' preposterous plans". Alot of inspiration there!!!
"with the encouragement of immature/unwed parenting through no restraints on sexual behavior for our young"
That's a symptom of a society that has no vision. I recall when JFK announce the goal of putting a man on the moon within a decade. Every kid I knew wanted to be an astronaut. Science projects abound with enthusiasm - mostly about planets and rockets. I can think of no better vision than Al Gore's speech above. Do you have a better suggestion?
"the fostering of entitlement mentality in replace of work ethic and self responsibility"
I think a vision includes some sense that "we're all in this together". People are not going to work enthusiastically when they know that the benefits of that work are going to enrich a small minority of its citizens. Why do you think they would?
Yes we need to correst things, but to bring in a Marxist that hates this country, by his own statements, was not the way to fix it.
Reference that....
"“But I think it is an imperfect document, and I think it is a document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture, the Colonial culture nascent at that time. "
Mind you that the issues he is talking about were addressed later, but for the most part. the Constitution has been a wonderful and near percet document, but nothing is ever perfect.
Th Constitution reflected an enormus blind spot, yet it left a means to be constiently rewritien to correct issues that arrise. As a Constitutional Lawyer, he should understand that, but doers not, so it is a flawed Document? No, it was designed properly, but in a way that opposes Obama's Agenda.
And yet we need to move forward with our technology. We've got to think solar over fossil fuels, we must clean up our air.
All of this is a tall order...but only because our politicians are gutless and self-serving. As long as money is a part of our politics, our politicians will make decisions based on what lobby buys them their election.
Do I have to say that I could go on and on about this?
I do agree with you on returning to the basics this country was founded on, and rebuilding from there, to correct the ills we have brought in, as well as keeping the lessons we have learned. Utalize History, to benefit us, instead of hiding from it. So amny things we should be doing instead of the crap we are now.
I'm all for national service. I think it should include all citizens. Adults could serve in a format, something like the national guard. Maybe, then they could get disease management services from something like the VA.
"...it's time to start teaching again...."
Teachers teach. What makes kids want to learn. What makes parents support teachers? What would families talk about? What makes the Pledge of Allegiance a real pledge, rather than a rote, empty ritual?
"...we need to move forward with our technology."
I agree with that, obviously, for the reasons I mentioned above (see Al Gore's speech, ""A Generational Challenge to Repower America." But then you have "conservative idologues", who refer to technological advances as ""unreliable 'green' preposterous plans".
"...only because our politicians are gutless and self-serving. As long as money is a part of our politics, our politicians will make decisions based on what lobby buys them their election."
Separating money from politics may solve alot of this, but many corporations have been on-board with Gore's vision above. There's alot of money to be made by opening up a whole new energy infrastructure. If fact, one of the most often mentioned criticisms re: Gore is that he's making alot of money!!! I'm for public financing of elections - but I think a vision is needed in the public discourse.
As I said above, I think that vision centers on energy. It address most of the concerns raised here. It is "conservative" in the truest sense of that term (conservation). It gives kids a reason to study and parents to support teachers. There is a sense that "all of us are in this together". It provides an arena for national service - e.g., building the national grid. It reduces the risk of war and provides linkage with other nations for peaceful and economic development, etc., etc. - "...I could go on and on about this."
It already works. Your obection is political/ideological. And it is a good example of what I mean when I say that "conservatives" are really anything but "conservative". But since you'd be against a national grid, which would support solar and wind energy (along with the jobs that would bring), and the massive deployment of solar panels and wind turbines (along with the jobs that would bring), and the primary place of the U.S. in emerging renewable energy markets (just leave that to the Chinese, Japanese, Spanish and Germans) - what is your vision for the nation?
Where can you site in the Constitution that this should be advocated? Whenever you MANDATE, it's a loss of freedom.
There is no freedom without responsibility. You have a problem with citizens having "skin in the game"?
So, amend the Constitution. If young men can be drafted into battle, surely all citizens can be drafted into public service. You would vote against it?
Dan R: "I disagree with the Solar over fossil fuels, as this will never work effectively."
I think this is the point of your article. The political/ideological environment, sickened by the likes of Roger Ailes, has made it much more difficult to articulate a true vision for this country - as sorely needed such a vision is.
I guarantee you, Gore is interested in the country winning - and not just the country - the world. And yet, you can see the ridicule he is subjected to. But why would anyone argue against the vision he put forth?
"Yet when we look at all three of these seemingly intractable challenges (climate, economy, terrorism) at the same time, we can see the common thread running through them, deeply ironic in its simplicity: our dangerous over-reliance on carbon-based fuels is at the core of all three of these challenges - the economic, environmental and national security crises.
We're borrowing money from China to buy oil from the Persian Gulf to burn it in ways that destroy the planet. Every bit of that's got to change.
But if we grab hold of that common thread and pull it hard, all of these complex problems begin to unravel and we will find that we're holding the answer to all of them right in our hand.
The answer is to end our reliance on carbon-based fuels."
We see First Amendment rights being challenged all the time. We saw it in the Bush administration and the left pointed the finger. We see it in the Obama administration and the right points a finger. If you're sneezing and coughing, pointing the finger at someone else who is doesn't take your ailments away. This is characteristically symptomatic of Americans, and is so evident to savvy, partisan, charismatic leaders that they take full advantage and capitalize on the idea that dogs go back to their own vomit. As long as it's packaged prettily enough with a big red or blue bow, they don't care whether or not it's really cleaned up because they can just as easily lap it up. A bold leader would have to run on a third party ticket, and there's no pretty red or blue bow with which to identify, so that's doomsday from the get go.
As you have implied, and as I have recently pointed out in a discussion with Larry, and again on one of Linda's posts, we allow a major foreign cartel to dominate and control our economy when cartels are prohibited from forming in this country through anti-trust legislation because of their devastating effect on free enterprise. It's preposterous to think that we are even functioning in a capitalist economy when our economic health is at the mercy of OPEC. This isn't even to mention that we've outsourced the very means by which we prosper to China that is fast taking America's place as the leader of a world that is only free to those who control it. Attempting to run a marathon in shackles would hold more hope than to hope our country is not already crippled beyond what any Jonas Salk discovery might have helped. It's too late, Halli.
I guess I believe that when people stop being sick and tired of being sick and tired they'll start doing things differently. Not just in the area of who we elect, but in all the areas that count. They'll come to understand they have to change the size of our cars and the way we fuel them (they have). They will understand that health care has to be reformed so that we don't treat the disease but offer first the prevention of it (they are). They'll see that we can't farm out our manufacturing without hurting our own economy (they're beginning.) There is no doubt we are in an era of big changes...about that, Obama was right. Change is frightening to most. Too many are reluctant to make the necessary changes. But, eventually, change comes, as it is beginning to now. Just these discussions fill me up with gladness, because they tell me that people are starting to address the need to make the necessary changes if our nation is to thrive again. Our job here and elsewhere is to stop the naysayers from getting in the way of making those changes.
What you've said in this article is so true, but you minimize the impact of your own words, and you shouldn't. There does come a point when people are too sick to take an initiative any longer, and I don't see any indication that Americans haven't reached this point. All those things that you itemize in your above comment are valid points, but they will is not enough now, even if I thought they were capable. They should have but they didn't because I don't believe they can. We just saw what they think change is. What more proof do you need that it's too late?
Hey, if people like you are filled with gladness because of discussions like this, I'm happy, but I'm still not hopeful. From what I see on this site alone, I'm not even sure that as a nation we're even worthy of saving. Call me anti-American if you want to, but I don't identify much with the minds of most Americans, and I probably never did to any great extent. (My father handed me the Dale Carnegie book, How To Win Friends and Influence People, when I was twelve. I didn't take heed because I was very popular and had lots of friends, but I just think he wanted me to have fewer enemies; I didn't care then, and I still don't.)
A oft-repeated phrase in mental health circles over the past couple of decades. I retired from a 30 year career in mental health. People can tire of being sick and tired - and not do anything to change it. Alcoholics and addicts do not necessarily get help when they "hit bottom", or as many of them say, "bottom is sometimes six feet under."
I don't agree with Sue that it's too late. Often I think, though, that those with her political leanings are unwittingly setting up a self-fulfilling prophecy. For example, when these folks cannot acknowledge the opinion of every major scientific organization worldwide re: climate change, what confidence can you have in their interest in addressing problems?
"They will understand that health care has to be reformed so that we don't treat the disease but offer first the prevention of it (they are)."
Andrew Weil, M.D. writes that until citizens actually care for their health (health care), disease management costs will continue to rise, regardless of the reforms enacted. But "conservatives" will oppose taxing those products (which are now subsidized) that make us sick and injured - tobacco, alcohol, hand guns, junk food, etc. Gosh, you could probably pay for disease management reform with that revenue.
"They'll see that we can't farm out our manufacturing without hurting our own economy...."
And yet, where is the "conservative" support for the most promisingarena of manufacturing jobs in this country? Why add to the trade deficit by importing wind and solar energy equipment from Spain and Germany? Do "conservatives" support net metering policies, for example? How about renewable portfolio standards? No - they typically support the myth of a free market, when that means only that the rules/subsidies favor the fossils and the auto companies (formerly known as the "big" three).
And as of right now, despite my repeated request for a vision - a long term outlook on where this country needs to go - nothing has been presented. Perhaps Sue's is: "It's too late, Halli."
I know what your point is, Halli. My point is that though Americans have to, they haven't, and the reason they haven't is because they can't; they're incapable. They're too sick to know how sick they are. Don't let me stop you from trying, but do let me stop you from grave disappointment.
Pay me now - or pay me later. The voluntary, preventive changes that can be made now, are alot less "dramatic" than the ones that are forced on you later. I think the old proverb, "a stitch in time saves nine," is a conservative one.
Thanks for the information re: the Kindle version of your book. I agree that the book industry is in a painful period of change. I have a friend, who owns a small, independent bookstore. They struggle to stay in business. I also buy their used books - and often donate them back when I've read them. I buy new books on Kindle, however. It's alot less expensive - in the long run.
And even more thanks to the great comments, especially from Steve B.