Another Argument for Preventative Medicine Coverage
As insurers, employers and average Americans grapple with skyrocketing healthcare bills, a new study has found that a small number of illnesses -- many of them preventable -- account for most of the healthcare spending increase over the past two decades.
In the first comprehensive examination of which illnesses are driving an unprecedented rise in medical expenditures, Emory University health economist Kenneth Thorpe tracked 370 conditions and found that 15 accounted for 56% of the $200 billion rise in health spending between 1987 and 2000. Five conditions accounted for one-third of the increase, with heart disease topping the list, followed by pulmonary conditions, mental disorders, cancer and hypertension.
Thorpe's study was published as a Web exclusive by the journal Health Affairs. (Obtain the abstract or full study here) The study is a revolutionary one, especially given the attention that the presidential election is giving to rising healthcare costs. In the summary of the study, Thorpe states:
Health policy analysts, policymakers, employers, families, and the media pay a great deal of attention to annual increases in nominal U.S. spending for health care. In recent years the rate of increase in health spending has been greater than the growth of the overall economy and has therefore led to an increase in the share of economic output devoted to health care. This is usually viewed negatively, because an increasing share of the economy devoted to health care means a lower share devoted to other goods and services. Moreover, rising health care costs have also been shown to reduce the number of people with health insurance.
In light of our results, however, we believe that some of the concern about the growth in spending may be misplaced. Discussion of the magnitude of health care spending growth usually does not take into account changes in disease prevalence and demographic factors behind spending growth. Moreover, at issue is whether the higher growth in spending is purchasing larger increments in medical care benefits or whether the same improvements in health can be purchased at lower cost. However, in light of how we track trends in health care spending—by provider (such as hospital, prescribed drugs)—analysts have been largely unable to address this key issue. Our focus on tracking the level and growth in spending by medical condition allows a more natural evaluation of this important issue, because it can provide a direct comparison to changes in health benefits. Recent research has found that higher spending on treating heart attacks, low-birthweight babies, cataracts, and depression has benefits that outweigh the increased costs. Inasmuch as treatments for these conditions are cost-effective, their more widespread use is likely to represent an appropriate if costly expenditure by society.
I am a very strong supporter of the addition of preventative benefits to standard health insurance plans because my opinion, supported by some of Thorpe's study, is that if we spend money keeping people healthy it will decrease the amount of money we have to spend on them in the long run because they will stay healthier.
For several conditions, the rise in the epidemiological prevalence appears to be responsible for the growth in treated cases. This result highlights the importance of developing interventions designed to reverse the rise in disease prevalence. For example, in the study, Thorpe points out that diabetes accounted for up to 3 percent of the rise in health care spending, with about 50 percent of the rise traced to a rise in treated prevalence. The CDC reports a continued rise in diabetes prevalence that now exceeds 18 million cases among adults alone. The rise in the treated prevalence of diabetes closely mirrors the substantial rise in obesity in the population in our country. I believe that if more health insurance plans offered preventative care as a covered benefit, more people with the warning signs for diabetes (and other diseases) would have physician intervention before the condition was able to present itself and therefore the number of diabetes cases would decrease and the amount of money spent on treating the disease would decrease.
So. It's been a while since I've posted anything of real content. Sorry. It's been a smidge busy for us. Acutally, I don't know if busy is the turth. I have been busy at work, but outside of a small redecorating project this past weekend, I've been so "busy" at home that I've somehow managed to sit my butt on the couch for 2-3 hours every night for the last 10 days to watch the Olympics. Seriously, our TV has never been on as much as it has been the last two weeks and both Jeff and I have been transfixed nightly by the coverage....we've watched Michael Phelps win all of his medals, the women's softball team nearly shut out all of their opponents, the Men's basketball team squeek by in an early morning (live) game. We've seen ALL of the gymnastics controversies and a fair amount of equestrian jumping.
The bottom line is, I just can't get enough of the Olympics. I forget over the course of 2 years (between Summer and Winter games) just how entertaining the whole specatacle is.
My biggest beef with the games (to this point) is that...The gymnastics judges are inept morons.
Seriously. Not only do they mess up in the men's all around and sadly award the gold medal to the wrong individual, but then there was last night's debacle with the scoring on the high bar. It's unbelievable to me that at a competition of the caliber that the Olympics are, that the judges can't be as talented as the contestants. We've seen this happen in figure skating in Salt Lake and now in Athens in the gym. I think the IOC would be well served to take a long hard look at their screening process for judges before the Torino Olympics.
I forgot to include this in my earlier convention post. But...since that post was about as long as War and Peace, it's probably a good thing I did.
However, I do feel the need to mention it.
Last night, John Kerry promised to lower family insurance premiums by as much as $1,000 annually if he's elected. He backed the reimportation of lower-cost drugs from other countries, and touted the benefits of stem-cell research. His claim is that "Our healthcare plan for a stronger America cracks down on waste, greed and abuse." (But, I'll guarantee that he doesn't support a crack down on the waste, greed and abuse of malpractice suits by imposing a ceiling on the rewards. If he did, his running mate might have something akin to a coniption in the Cosby recording)
From the reserarch I've done, Kerry has said his 10-year, $895 billion healthcare plan would generate at least $300 billion in savings through better use of information technology and disease management. I think his math is a little bit skewed. Last year's Medicare reform law, one of the largest feathers in the cap of the Bush administration, included provisions expanding both disease management and healthcare IT. The Congressional Budget Office, however, estimated those provisions as a cost. So, how can Kerry now say that these things will save $300 billion?
* Thank Goodness It's Friday and The End of the Democratic National Convention
First and foremost....thank goodness this week is over. It's been a doozy and our trip to Chicago this weekend full of good food, wine shopping, golf and drum corps looks like it's a wonderful reward for having survived this week.
Secondly....thank goodness the Democratic National Convention is over.
I don't have anything against the Democratic Party...I guarantee that I'll be just as annoyed when the Republicans meet for their self-love fest in August...My problem is that I just don't understand the whole need for these conventions. They have morphed from a necessary democratic tool used to nominate someone from a party as their representative in the Presidential election into a giant four-day-long campaign rally. I have nothing against the idea of a giant party-pep rally, but why do we have to have constant media coverage of it? Wouldn't some of the parties money be better spent funding their individual programs or balancing a budget somewhere?
My minor annoyance with the media coverage aside, I don't think that they should stop having conventions, maybe just change the format a little. John Kass, a Chicago Tribune columnist, wrote his column for today's paper from Boston. His column is about how Americans just don't care about the conventions anymore (true in some part at our house) and how he thinks they should. He says:
"Yes, the conventions are scripted and they're made for TV. The nomination is no surprise, leaving only the performances, the speeches and the counter-speeches by opposing parties at their rapid-response centers near the convention site. These follow their own script, of course.
But I'd still argue that these political rituals are important to Americans, and I wish more of us were interested. Delegates come from across the country, meeting and forging alliances.
Conventions aren't only about the ridiculous habit of asking Ben Affleck his opinion on foreign affairs. They're about political parties advertising their ideals. They're about ambitious people privately wheedling for appointments, about position and about fundraising. They're about gathering, friendship, alliances, about who hopes to get what.
They're about democracy. Sometimes they even inspire a new generation to care about what happens in this country. They did for me.
I wouldn't get rid of them. They could be shortened, to a weekend..."
Kass makes some good points, and I agree that the conventions are a beautiful exercise in democracy, which might explain why I have paid a little bit of attention to what has happened this week at the convention. In fact, I've paid enough attention to even formalize some comments about it.
First, I have to wonder to myself just how the Republicans are going to top what the Dems did. The convention planners of this DNC were working their brilliant gene overtime when they formulated their line up of key note speakers. Barack Obama was not a household name two weeks ago. He is now. When the DNC asked him to speak, they were asking someone who didn't come to the podium with a national reputation, he came with a fresh voice, a fresh face and a good speech. I wonder if the Republicans have an Obama in their bag of tricks.
Additionally, the Kerry daughters gave excellent speeches that humanized their father. From what I've seen/read about their speeches (no I didn't see the whole speech) they offered speeches similar to the eulogies the Regan kids gave last month about their Presidential pop. We're a society of gossip...as a society, we care about J-lo's marriages and Brandy's engagement ring...letting American's into the "secret-personal-life" of a candidate excites America.
In addition to my own thoughts, I have to point out that the Googling Monkeystm over at The Note have done a good job of summarizing what we/they have learned and haven't learned from the DNC this week. An abridged version goes like this...
Here's what worked in Boston:
1. At least six great speeches (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Alex and Vanessa Kerry, and Kerry himself).
2. Explaining to America what Senator Kerry accomplished up to 1980.
3. The press didn't hate it.
4. Democratic activists who leave Boston more united, more fired up, and even better trained than when they arrived — and yet … not angry to the outside world.
5. Speakers masking pretty harsh anti-Bush rhetoric with warm rhetorical flourishes and Sheehan-esque delivery.
6. Using "No Surrender" (Note hint: major political reporters LOVE that song, and the expected upcoming "surprise" announcement about Springsteen is teed up quite nicely by the tune's use … .).
7. No actual labor trouble.
8. Marginalizing Nader but simply (mostly) not mentioning him.
9. Putting Bob Rubin next to Teresa Heinz Kerry in the box.
Here's what didn't work in Boston:
1. Explaining to America what Senator Kerry has accomplished since 1980.
2. The balloon drop.
3. Senator Ted Kennedy's speech.
4. Getting Trippi into the convention.
What we still don't know:
1. How would Kerry pay for all his programs? How would he handle the baby boom retirement cohort and Social Security and Medicare?
2. How can he keep explaining this complex positions and position changes in a way that works (or gloss them over)?
3. Whether Iraq was a mistake in John Kerry's nimble mind and what he would have done differently?
4. Whether John Edwards can "close the deal" (!!) with those constituencies his bill of goods promotes.
5. Can Kerry continue to give good speeches?
Wait … we can answer this one now:
At the Kerry-Edwards bus trip kick-off this morning in the North End, Kerry was, frankly, back to his old speechifying ways — ponderous, meandering, rehearsed-sounding, dry, filled with hokey "jokes," and unconvincing mannerisms. And the Edwards kids are STILL really cute. And Teresa Heinz Kerry still looked really distracted.
(There's enough in that excerpt to keep me blogging for a week straight, but I'll keep it short since I do have a job to attend to....and chances are so do you.)
I think the third part of that excerpt from The Note is the real reason that I don't like conventions. We just don't learn that much from them. I'd love to see the debates between the candidates get as much hoopla and pageantry displayed towards them...because that's where the issues are. Debates aren't infomercials for a party. They are the bare bones of what this man intends to do with my money, for me and to other people. How is Kerry going to pay for his programs? How is Bush going to stop driving the deficit higher? What are we going to do about Iraq?
When all is said and done, when the RNC is over in September, when all of the balloons have finally dropped and the confetti is swept up, that's when the election really starts. What should matter to Americans isn't who can throw a better party, who can wave the flag, dance under confetti and kiss children in the audience better...but who can go to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and represent you the best. I just don't think it's possible to know the answer to that question from a scripted pep rally.
This morning I'm having the oddest sense of deja vu. Let me explain.
Last night I had a dream about two of my best friends from high school. These two friends weren't really friends with each other, so the fact that they were present in my dream together was a little odd, but none the less in the dream we were all in our late twenties and we were together having a great time...just like we used to. Just like we may have been if we hadn't lost touch completely. I woke up this morning and as I was showering, getting dressed and driving to work I kept thinking about these two friends....wondering where they are, what they're doing in life...and how exactly it was that they fell out of my life completely.
Then...I get to work and I start pursuing a few blogs that I didn't have time to read yesterday when I stumbled on Wendy's post about her friends that have fallen out of her life and Jeff's comments in regards to the same issue. Seriously, I hadn't read their comments when I had my dream/thoughts this morning.
So, while it may just be an odd coinky-dinky that we're all having the same reflections, I have to wonder to myself if it isn't something more. Is it part of the clichéd "quarter-life-crisis?" Is there a point in your late twenties that you realize that friendships really are temporary things that we have with people throughout our lives and that most of them won't last longer than 5-10 years? Is it a matter of suddenly realizing that the person you thought would always be there, that it didn't matter if you called today because you would call them next week or next month...and never did...needed to be called or they would just vanish?
Friendships are a wonderful blessing. They change our lives and leave impressions on our hearts. For me, I have lots of friends in my life right now who have been there for ten or more years, and some who've been there for less. I value all of these relationships and they help make me the person I am. I don't worry about losing these people...but I didn't worry about losing touch with the friends that I have lost over the years, the ones who only visit me in my dreams. I think there's a lesson to be learned from that statement.
I didn't blog yesterday because I spent about 5 hours last night redesigning my "Reading List" that I link to on the left of this screen. My old one was just a list of books that I wanted to read and it's only real purpose was for me to keep a shopping list for the next time I went to a book store. My intention with my new reading list is to use it as a way to reccomend books to you. I'm not quite done with the page yet, but eventually, I'll post reviews of the books I've recently read, tell you a little bit about the books that I'm currently reading, have an area to reccomend one of my favorite books of all time, a wish list and an area for people to make their own comments/suggestions on books.
If you get a chance, check out my new Reading List, and leave a comment here if you have any suggestions for it.
In addition to redesigning my little blog this morning, I've been doing a little cruising around the web and catching up on the news that I was a little out of touch with all weekend when I was blog designing on Saturday and watching Jeff's cousin place second (in a sudden death play off) at the Greater Cedar Rapids Open golf tournament yesterday.
Most of the reading I've been doing this morning is about the Democratic National Convention.... Here's some thoughts...
Barack Obama is the Democrat's IT man of the summer. Even two weeks ago, most American's hadn't heard of Mr. Obama and Thursday night he'll give the keynote address before the introduction of Mr. Kerry as the Presidential nominee. The New York Times has a great biographical article today about the Illinois Statesman who is poised to become the only African American senator and who, at 42, is only beginning his journey into the jungle of Washington political life.
It looks like this year will be the first time that Bloggers are being issued press credentials to the Party Conventions. This NY Times article talks about how approximately three dozen bloggers have been issue press badges for this week's DNC and 10-20 bloggers will have badges for the RNC in August. Some of the bloggers who have been issued credentials run political blogs others will cover the convention for social reasons and still others because they'll be critiqing the media coverage of the event.
The article points out that "the question facing many of the bloggers, who do most of their work without venturing from their desks, is how exactly they will cover a live convention. Most built their followings by ferreting out interesting but obscure information or by providing commentary on events and on news coverage of those events." It goes on to quote Tom Burka, a lawyer in New York City, who maintains a satirical blog at TomBurka.com. "We've never been put in this position as bloggers to have this kind of access."
In my humble opinion, having bloggers at the conventions is brilliant. In a time when the national media outlets are scaling back their coverage of the conventions because people just aren't interested in watching it, the parties have found a way to create interest by bringing in people who aren't journalists, who don't have to fairly cover the events, but who are everyday Americans interested enough in the world around them to maintain a blog and open a forum for thought and discussion with other people just like themselves. People who have built a reputation for themselves in the blogoshpere and who are sometimes the primary source of news for some people.
In the NYT piece, they state that "the bloggers predict that they will provide coverage on issues too narrow for mainstream news media, while offering an irreverent eye on the media-political complex and gossipy accounts of behind-the-scenes convention life. " I would have to say, judging from TalkLeft's coverage of this morning's blogger breakfast with Barack Obama and Howard Dean, that this is one-hundred-percent true.
One other thing that separates bloggers from traditional journalists is the expense account... nobody's picking up the bill for these bloggers to travel to Boston and most have had to take vacation time from their "real" jobs.
Traditionally, the DNC offers an opportunity to open the convention with a blessing to the local Catholic Bishop or Cardinal (the offer was accepted in 2000 and declined in 1996, 1992 and 1984). In a break from practice this year, however, the Democratic Party is not inviting Sean P. O'Malley, the archbishop of Boston, to offer a blessing. The blessing will instead be given by a Paulist priest who is on John Kerry's side of the debate over whether politicians who support abortion should be allowed to receive communion.
For those of you who don't know (and don't worry, I had to verify it for myself) a Paulist Priest is a member of an order of Catholic priests dedicated to the evangelization of America.
The priest that the Kerry campaign chose is the director of the Paulist Center in Boston. John Kerry considers the Paulist Center to be his home parish and his campaign states this fact was the reason they chose to ask Rev. Ardis rather than Archbishop O'Malley.
I have to wonder if that in fact is true. John Kerry is about to be the first Catholic presidential candidate since John F. Kennedy, which could be a huge boost for him at the voting booths in November since there are 60 million Catholics in America. However, to say that you are Catholic and represent the Democratic Party is almost an oxymoron since part of the proposed platform of the Democratic party this year is that ''abortion should be safe, legal, and rare." Rare isn't going to be good enough for the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church teaches that abortion is never morally acceptable.
This very debate: whether as a politician you can be a member of a religious order that has views opposite your political views and the views of your political party or whether your political affiliation trumps your religious one, has prompted priests to refuse communion to politicians, the United States Conference of Bishops to issue a formal paper on the issue and the Vatican to send letters from the Pope to American Cardinals. So, can it really be by sheer convenience that Kerry's chosen to ask his sympathetic home priest to offer the blessing? It seems far more likely that the campaign is trying to avoid a repeat of the 2000 blessing offered at the LA DNC during which Cardinal Roger M. Mahony prayed, ''In you, oh God, we trust that you will keep us ever committed to protect the life and well-being of all people, but especially unborn children."
The Trib has an article today about the fact that Illinois Republicans are considering one Mike Ditka to replace sex-scandal-victim Jack Ryan on the Republican half of the Senatorial Ballot in November.
The article mentions some of the obvious concerns that high ranking members of the Illinois Republican Party have about putting Ditka on the ballot:
Public records show that while Ditka has had a Chicago residence since 2000, from which he has made his most recent political contributions, he is not registered to vote in the city.
His membership in the men-only Bob O'Link Golf Club in Highland Park could create some concerns among women voters. (I think this is crap...who cares if he's a member of a men-only golf club)
Throw his cigar-smoking, blunt-talking, finger waving NFL career, he has cultivated a public image that eschews political correctness.
The Party Looks Desperate.
Well. Guess what, the party is desperate. They were trailing the democratic candidate by double digits in the polls when the HAD a candidate, now they don't even have a candidate and the election is three and a half months away. At least by selecting Ditka they have the outside chance of interesting non-political people in the election. Or, more directly, they have the name recognition that might make someone uneducated about the candidates, vote for their candidate for completely unpolitical reasons. (Picture a voting line full of George Wendt's character from the SNL skits)
Of course, by selecting Ditka they have a candidate who is further from having a platform than I am. Outside of being a larger donor to the Republican party, Ditka hasn't ever had any political involvements and his only comment, thus far, about his qualifications to be a senator that he could "be a better senator then Ted Kennedy." He also tried to explain his lack of experience by saying that "I didn't have any experience of head coaching when I took over the Bears, either." thus reminding the fine people of Illinois of the level of success he achieved as the inexperienced head coach of their beloved Chicago Bears.
He might not have had experience being a head coach when he was hired by the Bears, but he had played football before. I'm not sure that this is quite the same thing. I don't believe that a candidate should need to have held any sort of public office in order to run for or be experienced enough to be a Senator, however, at least being registered to vote and showing an interest in the political system should be a requirement.
I liked Ditka when he was the coach of Da Bears and I've respected his ability to be himself in a politically correct world, but I think putting Ditka on the ballot is the best shot the Republicans in Illinois have and I'm thankful that I don't have to vote for him because I don't think he'll be a good senator.
As a side note: Mr. Ditka, if you do decide to run, I'd refrain from saying that you'll be a better senator than Ted Kennedy, it's hard to be a worse senator than him.
In an interesting editorial in the Boston Globe, Joan Vennochi writes about how "John Kerry has the right resume but lacks the Kennedy charisma. John Edwards has charisma but lacks the Kennedy portfolio. Like pieces of a puzzle, the two Johns might just make one Jack. That is the party bet."
It's an interesting idea that what the Dems think they need to be really successful is another Jack Kennedy...and they think they may have it in the two Johns.
I wonder how it'll play out over the next few months.
"Homeland Security Secretary Ridge to warn that al Qaeda is in "operational or planning phase of an attack" on U.S. before November election, administration official tells CNN."
The media seems to be overrun with KE04 news right now (do we really care what they ate for two days in a row?) but believe it or not there are some other interesting things going on in the world of politics...
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has hired legal council to represent him in the ethics probes in Washington and Austin, according to Roll Call's John Bresnahan.
The New York Times' Robert Pear leads thusly in his story about the investigation into actions by Medicare administrator Thomas Scully regarding telling Congress the actual costs of the program: "An internal investigation by the Department of Health and Human Services confirms that the top Medicare official threatened to fire the program's chief actuary if he told Congress that drug benefits would probably cost much more than the White House acknowledged." In the third paragraph he tells us that: "the report found that neither the threat nor withholding the actual number from Congress violates criminal law." (don't you just love the slanted reporting of the NYT?)
I wonder if someone told Wes Clark that he's not the running mate? Because, if they did, it looks like he's positioning himself for a cabinet position in the possible Kerry administration. On a stop in New Hampshire, Clark said, "I can't bear to see what this administration is doing to the United States Army," according to the AP's Anne Saunders. That should make "Bush's war" democrats a little more accepting of recent democratic convert Clark.
Nader is still running for President. Obviously even Nader knows that he's not going to be President, so it's possible that his campaign may be more of a publicity stunt for his new book. This week, Nader promotes his new book "The Good Fight: Declare Your Independence and Close the Democracy Gap" with public and media appearances in New York and New Jersey.
More Nader News...(I think that's similar to GNU-News)
I doubt he considered it but, yesterday John Kerry took Ralph Nader's advice when he selected Edwards. According to Nader's online campaign home/blog, on June 22, Nader sent a letter to Kerry urging him to choose Edwards for his strong electability, and his background as a defense attorney in support of a citizen's right to sue. Shortly after Kerry announced his number two, Nader issued a statement urging the ticket to "speak out against massive corporate lobbying efforts to weaken the right of citizens to sue when they are injured by corporations who produce faulty or dangerous products, put toxics in the environment, are injured by medical malpractice and other corporate negligence."
It's amazing what Mary Beth Cahill can do to stay on message.
Kerry/Edwards campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill appeared on both ABC's "Good Morning America" and NBC's "Today."
Watching her interview it's glaringly obviousl that the woman cannot be taken off message. She makes Karen Hughes look like Ray LaHood.
The attention turned right away to John McCain on ABC, when Cahill was asked whether McCain was really Kerry's first choice. "John McCain and John Kerry are very good friends. They served together in the Senate and talk often on the phone, but John Edwards was the first choice," said Cahill.
On the question of Edwards' experience, Cahill commented that "John Edwards has been a leader his whole life for working families and for middle class people. He understands exactly what it's like to try to pay for your health care, to put your child through college and try to keep a job." When asked how their battles in the primaries may affect their relationship, Cahill pointed out that the two have gotten to know each other very well through the process, "they got to admire each other's skills and became comfortable with each other. And everything they've done since has only added to that."
Announcing!
The arrival of the newest Utech!
Jeff and I are the proud aunt and uncle of....
Mr. Trenten Daniel Utech
Born July 5, 2004
9:30am
8lbs 9oz
I think he's proof that good people make good little people. Congratulations are in order for his Mommy and Daddy...Meghan and Greg!
I believe that there's nothing like a baby to change the way you see things, to make the world a better, brighter place. There's nothing like ten tiny toes, bright eyes and little ears, or the sweet expressions on his little face...
There's nothing like the pride and joy of holding in your arms the miracle of life, so fresh and new.
Trent is incredibly lucky to be born into the Utech-extended family. He's going to be spoiled rotten and loved unconditionally.
We're headed to Minnesota to meet the little guy this weekend and we just can't wait. It looks like he's already a perfect fit in the family. This is what Greg said Trent looked like when he told him he couldn't have cookies after his first meal:
I meant to post this on the 4th, but we were out of town without a high speed internet connection (I know, how can people live without it...it's like living without running water) so I didn't get this up. Basically this is a recap of my July 4th post from last year because nothing's changed.
I absolutely LOVE this country.
People make fun of me for my patriotism all the time. They tell me that when they walk in my house they feel like they need to salute. What people don't understand is that my love for this country is far greater than a decorating scheme or patriotic clothes can ever express.
I love that the words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" send chills up my spine.
I love that the American culture is made up of millions of individual threads from other cultures. Each thread brought here by a person fleeing poverty and oppression looking for a new life, freedom, and success. I love that you can walk down the street of Chicago and eat some of the best Italian food in the world right around the corner from some of the best Greek food in the world.
I love every concept the Statue of Liberty stands for – that individual liberty is held above the objectives of government – that, as Washington and Jefferson said, America imparts good will toward all and threatens no one.
I love the Bill of Rights – the most noble document ever written.
I love the concepts of free speech, absolute privacy and religious freedom embodied in our traditions and our Constitution. The fact that someone can stand on the sidewalk in front of The White House, their local City Hall or their own house and protest every law that's been made. The fact that I see the same protestor every Tuesday morning carrying her anti-government signs down the streets of Iowa City.
I love the rule of law – the right of accused persons to confront their accusers, the right to an attorney, the right to remain silent, the right to refuse admission to government officials wanting to enter your home or office.
I love that American's are free to practice whatever religion they choose, study whatever they want in school and travel anywhere in the world we want to.
I love an Iowa sunset behind shoulder high ears of corn. I love an Illinois sunrise over Lake Michigan. I love that people classify themselves as New York People or LA People. I love that we have vineyards in Napa and swamps in Florida. I love that People from Colorado think that people from Texas are idiots and that no one likes New Jersey.
I love that men and women can be so proud of their country that they voluntarily enlist in the military so they can defend, fight and even die so that my children's children can live in a free country.
In short, as John Wayne once said "You ask me Why I Love Her? I've a million reasons why: My Beautiful America, Beneath God's wide, wide sky"
Geesh. It's been over two weeks since I've posted. What the heck is wrong with me.
Well, it could have something to do with the fact that a virus erased my entire hard drive at work and I've spent the last 10 days trying to recreate 5 years worth of data. *urgh*
So. Between that and an unusual amount of meetings at work and a garden that I need to tend to in the evenings, I've been ignoring my blog. Hopefully that will end today....
Crate and Barrel has opened a new store called CB2. The CB2 website describes themselves as "A new destination from Crate and Barrel that dials up the fun. Smart designs, clever materials. Neat stuff, cool colors. A point of view: In the know, on the go. A ‘look what I found’ kind of place. For all the places you live. We’re one (two as of this summer) find of a store in an urban Chicago neighborhood."
You can shop online or at the store. I'll be in that hip "urban Chicago neighborhood" this weekend...so I'll do a little investigative work and keep you posted on what I buy see there! Stay Tuned!
As the Presidential race continues to heat up, it seems like every media outlet has their own poll to predict who the winner of the Presidential race will be.
Family Circle Magazine is no different.
Family Circle's quadrennial cookie election, this year pitting Laura Bush's "Oatmeal Chocolate Chunk Cookies" against Teresa Heinz Kerry's "Pumpkin Spice Cookies," has correctly predicted the winner in the last three presidential elections.
I haven't made the recipes yet, but I think Bush might have a slight edge in this "election"....it just seems to me that Laura is a little more happy-home-maker-ish than Teresa is.
Voters can log onto the magazine's Web site and cast their vote by Aug. 1. Look for the full results from Family Circle on Oct. 19 in their Nov 9th issue (that's published on Oct 19...I know...it doesn't make any sense to me either)
Ohio State backers are being sued in connection with the Jim O'Brien firing.... (gotta love the shot of one Duez Henderson in the background of the picture in this story)
I love that the American culture is made up of millions of individual threads from other cultures. Each thread brought here by a person fleeing poverty and oppression looking for a new life, freedom, and success. I love that you can walk down the street of Chicago and eat some of the best Italian food in the world right around the corner from some of the best Greek food in the world.