Chris's Run for Office, John, a proud father submits this post

Election Day. Election Day. As I woke this morning I ruminated on the last 10 months and my campaign. I’ve faced many challenges in my life: some by choice, some not. The decision to run for Missoula City Council was easy for me. The actual process was not as easy. It has been a steep learning curve not unlike pursuing a degree, being self employed, or raising a child on my own. But as I have learned over the years, most things that are worthwhile are not easy. Whether... or not I actually receive the most votes, I have won.
One of my main motivations for this Herculean effort was to demonstrate to my 9 year old daughter how we as individuals can make a positive impact in our world. Three weeks ago out of the blue she looked up at me and said that she was proud of me for running for Council. It was that moment that I realized that I had achieved my main goal. I had won.
One of the many daunting challenges was getting out and knocking on my neighbor’s doors. I met many, many lovely people. People with diverse points of view who shared them with me. Smart people with good ideas on how we can improve our neighborhood, our city, our world. People who are already doing the good work that makes Missoula unique. The result of doing this has helped me increase my sense of community. I feel stronger and less isolated. I have won.
By exposing myself and my life to public scrutiny I have been able to shed many fears and apprehensions. I have grown as a person. I have been able to examine myself and my relationships not only with people but with the world around me. I have won.
I have discovered new friends, rediscovered old friends, and developed new relationships beyond partisan boundaries. My campaign could not have come this far without the guidance, support, and wisdom of many folks. I am humbled and truly grateful for those who believe in me. When we work together amazing things can be realized. Missoula has won. We have won.

Posted by John Badgley

Meeting of the Minds, Oct 23, 2017, A Medically Facilitated Catastrophe

   At a recent Wise Guys meeting, the issue of the opioid epidemic was raised

 and some asserted that the epidemic could be attributed to the medical profession. I write this blog as a physician who was caught up in this medical mishap. I was initially fearful of prescribing opioids lest such efforts result in patient addiction, but then subsequently became equally fearful of discipline from my hospital for failing to adhere to logarithms and “standard practice” for controlling pain. The purpose of this blog is to explore the crosscurrents of American medical culture that gave rise to the opioid epidemic and the efforts to ameliorate the damage that was done by well meaning people.

   Physicians have traditionally been wary of prescribing narcotics for fear of inducing addiction. As a result narcotic prescriptions have been confined to short-term treatment of acute pain.  All this changed in the 1980’s and more so in the 1990’s, spurred by a letter published in 1980 in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine. The letter claimed that narcotic use as prescribed by physicians did not result in addiction. Despite the lack of corroborating evidence, the medical community accepted these conclusions since the letter originated from the Boston Collaborative Surveillance study from Boston University School of Medicine. The authors Jane Porter and Herschel Jick later claimed that they had no intention of furthering the use of narcotics for chronic pain. Nonetheless, the damage had been done. These impressions were then supported by a study published in 1986 in the Journal Pain by Dr.’s: Portenoy and Foley.  The article consisted of a review of 38 patients treated with opioids for chronic pain .The conclusion of the authors was that that there was no addiction potential by such treatment. This conclusion resonated with the New England Journal letter and thus supported the notion that chronic use of opiates does not lead to addiction.  Although the study was flawed In that there were no placebo controls, the medical community regarded the results as unassailable.

 Following these publications, a complex interaction between academic physicians, the pharmaceutical industry (Big Pharma) and governmental agencies furthered the notion that narcotics were being underused, to the detriment of the suffering patients. The professional medical societies led the crusade and included the American Pain Foundation, the American Academy of Pain Medicine and the American Pain Society, which teamed up with the Pharmaceutical Companies to encourage narcotic use.

   The pharmaceutical industry has always sought to influence academic physicians by supporting conferences, paying for foreign conferences and providing a new physician’s first “doctor’s bag. Although it was not clearly delineated, the physicians returned the favor to Big Pharma by prescribing their products, either consciously or unconsciously. With the apparent support of academic physicians, governmental regulatory agents joined the effort to encourage opioid prescriptions.  The Federation of State Medical boards issued a policy to reassure doctors that they would not be disciplined if they prescribed even large doses of opiates. They went even further by encouraging boards to punish doctors for undertreating pain. Soon regulatory organizations joined the fray, which include The Joint Commission on Accreditation Of Health Care Organizations, and the Food and Drug Administration. Under the influence of governmental agencies, pain was proposed as the 5^th vital sign. It soon became required to question patients about pain and attempts to quantify pain were made, Patients were requested to choose an icon affixed to their hospital room walls, indicative of their level of pain. This number was then incorporated into the other vital sings, BP, P, temperature. It soon became inevitable, that opioid use would assume in a new role in the treatment of chronic pain particularly with oxycontin, an oral narcotic with a prolonged action.

   It soon became evident that efforts to promote use of opioids led to an opiate epidemic with profound consequences. On November 11, 2016, the CDC declared a prescription drug epidemic and laid its cause at the feet of doctors overprescribing opiates.  This finding led to some back peddling of regulatory agencies. That same year, JACHO denied a role in fermenting this problem and sought to promote counseling of those affected by drug addiction. State medical societies shifted from promoting opioid use to treatment for addiction. Naloxone was promoted for non-MD treatment of overdoses.  The FDA although approving oxycontin in 1995 and fentanyl in 1998, began to pull back, requiring warning labels on opiates and education for physicians. Large suits were brought against Purdue, the makers of oxyconten for inappropriately promoting opioid use.  The drug company switched to an abuse-deterrent formulation. Oxycontin originally contained a large dose of oxycodone. By crushing the tablet, addicted Individuals could obtain a large dose of the narcotic.  The newer formulation was much more difficult to crush and snort. The FDA although approving oxycontin in 1995 and fentanyl in 1998, began to pull back, requiring warning labels on opiates and education for physicians. As oxycontin became less available, its cost differential to heroin widened, and heroin became the choice of narcotics on the street, and what was an oxycontin epidemic became a heroin epidemic, sprinkled with fentanyl, a highly addictive and potent narcotic.

   We now find ourselves in the role of crisis managers. The medical community is presently in lock step with governmental agencies and the pharmaceutical industry to control the epidemic. Unlike previous epidemics of narcotic addition, which were confined to poor black neighborhoods, the latest epidemic now involves middle class white communities.  It is now a hot political issue. Donald Trump has demanded a new crusade against narcotic addiction, with assurance of seeming unlimited financial support. These issues are dealt with in an accessible way in a book written by Anna Lembke, Drug Dealer, and MD. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2016. The reader is referred to this book for a readable review of these issues.

Posted by Arthur Banner

A Korean Peace Treaty

   In 1951, the Korean War ended in bloody deadlock. . The Korean War grew out of border disputes between North and South Korea which were interpreted by many as a clash between democracy and dictatorial communism. Through the intrusion of foreign countries, what was a local disturbance was transformed into a wider dispute with millions of casualties on both sides.

  The war was followed by 3 years of negotiations, which like the war itself ended in stalemate. Although a truce was obtained, a peace treaty remained elusive. The world has been living with this situation ever since. After nearly 1 million deaths North Korea has sought some sort of meaning to the war. Not only did they not achieve their goal of unification of North and South but also the brutality of the regime and the absence of free elections has led many to question the very legitimacy of their government. In response, North Korea has developed nuclear weapons approaching parity with other nuclear powers.  This situation has resulted in a new cold war with North Korea and its Chinese and Russian backers and with the United States  and its allies as protagonists. The new reality cries out for a solution.

   The October 2, 2017 issue of Time Magazine contained an article summarizing the difficulties of convincing North Korea to give up its nuclear arsenal. The article by Philip Bobbitt was based on a longer work referenced in the Time article available online at the Time Website. The article consisted of a series of impediments to a final solution:

   There is nothing the Unite States can do to convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons, since such a measure would rob them of their security.

   There is nothing the US can do for North Korea to accomplish the same end, for the same reason.

  There is nothing the international community can do regarding sanctions since it is only the threat of nuclear weapons that prevents regime change.

    After expressing these difficulties, the article suggested another option, which is inherently dangerous. I.e. a direct attack on North Korea’s nuclear facilities. The author admitted that such an approach would invite a vengeful North Korean response including the use of nuclear weapons and possibly a worldwide war involving China and Russia.

   The article ended with a safer alternative, i.e. involvement of China to provide a nuclear guarantee to Korea to defend its existence and governmental legitimacy. The advantage to China would be that it could assume the role of a world player and hence raise its own prestige.  With the threat from the United States removed, North Korea might see itself clear to reducing its nuclear arsenal. The problem with this solution is resistance by the North Koreans who are burdened by the weight of memory of an endless and senseless civil war, consequent to foreign involvement.

    Other analysts have contributed suggestions for further solutions.

 On Sept 7.2017 John Badgley proposed  how this situation might be remedied. He suggested that what the North desired was leverage in dealing with the rest of the world. A solution to the problem might be to pick up where the world left off in 1953 and to obtain a peace treaty that would satisfy all sides. He suggested referral to the United Nations Security Council. Clearly we must deal with unfinished business.

 

   In conclusion, when truces are instituted to halt conflicts, peace treaties usual follow to settle political differences. This was never achieved for the Korean War and we are left with tragic memories.  It may be the “forgotten war” to us but the North Korean people have not forgotten it. In order to bring closure, a peace treaty between the combatants is required.  However, there is no clear pathway for this desired outcome other than to accept Korea as a nuclear power. Furthermore one needs to abandon demonization of the North Norean people and to recognize our shared humanity. Thus one must recognize the wishes and yearnings of the North Korean people. Like all people recovering from war they wish to obtain meaning for their suffering.  In addition they desire aid to reverse the devastating effects of sanctions from the United States whom they blame for their economic suffering. Many find meaning in their leader Kim Jong Un, who demands respect from his people and from the rest of the world, based on military might. For this reason, it is essential for them to retain their nuclear threat. 

   We have lived through this before in our dealings with the Soviet Union. Mutual assured destruction seems insane but is actually world stabilizing and may be required for a peace treaty.  Since the war was fought with the consent of the United Nations referral to the United Nations Security Council seems feasible and advisable. Although Kim Jong Un has been demonized and has been declared psychotic, there is little evidence for this.  Mutual provocations have been proven to have limited utility. It is time to achieve the peace that we have all yearned for.

 Posted  by Arthur Banner

The Shooters by John Badgley, 1994

We were just pulling up to the cattle guard when it went off. KAAABOOOM......  "Son of a bitch, he's ripped it this year,” Denny Dupuis shouted to Alice as the whole bunch leaped out of  their truck cabs to watch the huge dusty cloud rise from the gaping hole next to the fence. A half-mile distant they could just make out Stub Gillin doing a little dance on his weathered porch, turning in a circle, then leaning out to get a better view.  Ma Gillin raced out from the kitchen to stand beside him, then both pointed towards us.  You could just barely hear her chewing on him.  "Stub, you're just a big kid.  You'll never grow up, why you could have hurt them guys."

Alice and I lined up behind the cattle guard along with the dozen others, all of us giving ol' Stub the finger as a kind of salute for startin' off the 22nd Annual Shooters Convention right.  Frank Morrison and his new wife Beth stood on either side of us, with Beth next to Alice while Big Frank poked his middle finger up towards the sky. Big Frank was Head Shooter this year, and his was the lead truck that damn near got blown off the road.  This was the biggest crew ever since the Convention began right after the Korean War.  Frank came 400 miles, all the way from Hamilton up the Bitterroot, while the rest of us were closer.

Take ol' Ferd McCullough who was standing just beyond Big Frank. Ferd, he drove down from Lewistown which was just over three hours away.  His current woman, Elsie, was covering her eyes against the dust and sun and laughin' to beat all shit, pounding on Ferd's shoulder while her  big butt jiggle adjacent to his narrow ass.  Every year when they showed up I got  the same wierd image of them two makin' it with her cheeks hangin' down on either side while she pivoted astride him, revolving around his dick like a fat hen gettin' comfortable on her nest.  I could just see her head back, eyes squeezed shut and her mouth wide open to catch enough air, while poor is Ferd lying there, trying to keep it up and not lose interest in the action. A guy's mind does funny things, at least mine does, probably because I'm more Indian than White and see things different.

Anyway, I was glad to see Ham Michaels from Miles City back again with his buddy, Pete Ramirez.  Ham and Pete were in the First Cav during the Vietnam war and joined the national guard when they returned. They were real handy with every weapon in the armory, and always where kiddin' the two fat guys next to them, Art and Dave Little from Forsyth, who made the Okinawa landing as kids just out of high school.  Art and Dave farmed their Dad's patch of sugar beets along the Yellowstone, and kept pretty much to themselves and never married; they lived a hell of lot different lives than Ham and Pete who crowded the Antler Bar most any night in the week, pickin' up whoever  was lonely and available to heat up their beds during the long winter nights. Clootchs, that's who they were always looking for, but no women in their right mind would hang her bra on their bedpost more than a few nights in a row. As Alice put it, they were the funkiest cowboys in Montana. Just washing their sheets was a major action. 

Posted by John Badgley

Thirster Communication

*DYSTOPIAN POLITICS AND VIETNAM

Dear Thirsters in Residence:

On May 4th, Thirster Robin Henderson will speak about his experiences during Vietnam and in evaluating returned Vietnam veterans.   He will delve into the history of political contention over the Vietnam conflict, when it became very dysfunctional and affected the way the war was handled, including psychological damage to soldiers.  This includes the destruction of LBJ’s presidency, his experiences living in Chicago in the summer of 1968, which was an eye opener for him, and subsequent experiences in New York, especially when he applied for Conscientious Objector status and witnessed how secretly disillusioned many military leaders were.

From 1977 through 1996, Robin Henderson, conducted well over 1,500 detailed psychiatric assessments of Vietnam veterans to scrutinize for PTSD (posttraumatic stress disorder), including many other veterans from other combat arenas plus POW internments, ranging back to WWII.  He has his own perspective of the kind of damage the Viet Nam conflict wrought.

Please join us on Thursday, October 5th to learn more about the context of the Vietnam war and veterans

UPCOMING PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSION TOPICS:

        October 12th: Combat and the Destruction of the Soul - Robin Henderson

THIRSTER MEETING FORMATS:  Thirsters have several different kinds of meetings:  OPEN DISCUSSIONS - where we discuss whatever cultural topic is on our minds, TOPICAL DISCUSSIONS - where there is a brief introduction to an identified topic for discussion, DATA DISCUSSIONS – involves the presentation of graphs and figures followed by a discussion and interpretation of the data,  PRESENTATIONS - a more formal presentation of a topic for 20-30 minutes (often by visiting out-of-town Thirsters) followed by a discussion with the presenter, and SEMINARS - that ask attendees to read topical material in advance and come prepared to discuss that topic.

THIRSTER MEETING LOCATION:  MCMENAMINS BROADWAY PUB, 1504 NE BROADWAY (AT NE 15TH AVE), PORTLAND, OR 97232.

   - Thirsters meetings start at 7 pm with discussions, ale, wine, and food, and may continue until 11 pm.

   - Presentations or Seminars, if one is scheduled, start at 7:30 pm.

   - Topical, Data, or Open Discussions (when we don't have a presentation) start when Thirsters find themselves compelled, usually around 7 pm or shortly thereafter.

**  NEW RESTROOM CODE:  1504

THIRSTER DISCUSSION LIST:   This is an online discussion listserv where Thirsters can exchange ideas.  Please contact John Dougherty at: jdougherty-thirsters@earthlink.net if you want to join the Thirsters Discussion list.

*INVITING VISITORS TO THIRSTER MEETINGS:   All Thirsters are encouraged to invite colleagues, friends, and students to Thirster meetings.  If you invite someone who has not attended a meeting in the past, please inform them about the Thirster custom for paying for food and drink with cash. 

As always, please suggest the names of speakers and/or discussion topics for future meetings; many Thursdays are available for speakers.  We also encourage Thirsters to come and talk to us about their work or other activities related to culture.

John Dougherty

Co-Coordinator

Semper Sitiens

Meeting of the Minds, September 11, 2017

    At our meeting of the Wise Guys on August 21,2017 and then again on September 12, 2017 we dealt with the well-publicized violent demonstration in Charlottesville Virginia. The incident was initiated by a City Council vote to remove a statue of General Robert E. Lee from Robert E. Lee Park. A group of over 100 white nationalists carried torches in Charlottesville protesting the removal of the Lee monument as an affront to their notion of white supremacy. Their shouting of anti-Semitic slogans was chilling, reminiscent of similar demonstrations in WW2 Germany. A group of antifascists opposed the neo-Nazis in what became a lethal confrontation. To the white nationalists, Lee was a beloved confederate icon who came to represent a supporter of their effort to support and preserve the white race .To the antifascists, recall of Lee represented a clarion call for racism and bigotry. These opposing views of the warring factions were generated by different memories of identical historical events, consequent to different myths.  The role of myth making is central to understanding of these issues.

   Myths are generally concerned with a return to a lost paradise, wherein heroes roamed the earth in search of eternity. Such a paradise is contained within the Lost Cause Myth, generated by a defeated South. It heroes consisted of   its brave soldiers, loyal civilians and sainted generals such as Lee and Stonewall Jackson.  These men are regarded as stalwart brave, noble leaders, truly iconic characters who were doomed to oblivion, but for the persistent memory of slavery.  The fact that many in the North bought into the Myth of the Lost Cause is evidence that the issues resonated with northern beliefs of white superiority.

   After the defeat of the confederacy, the South was left bereft of its meaning and hope for the future. With the efforts of Lee and Jubal Early, history was rewritten in the form of the Lost Cause Myth. The myth represented a counter narrative whose purpose was to come to terms with an unacceptable reality, i.e. a defeated South.  In so doing the effort was intended to create space for living within the boundaries of the newly created reality.  According to the myth the South was defeated not due to military failure, but to being outmanned and outgunned. The outcome of the conflict was therefore rigged and inevitable. But the myth cannot out trump the reality of a system bankrupt of moral authority.

  

  According to this Southern generated myth, Lee struggled with whether his ties to the South took precedence over those to the United States. . Unfortunately for him and the country, he chose to ignore his close ties to the North and elected go with the South. His choice to go with the south was a tragedy to himself and to the country of his birth, The fact that most of the South and many in the North continue to honor Lee as an American hero points to the enduring quality of the Lost Cause Myth.

    However, consideration of the facts justifies rejection of the myth and consequently of Lee as s national hero. Lee could rightly be held responsible for the loss of the war.  The original strategy for defeating the North was the assumption of a defensive strategy aimed at preserving southern strength and impressing on the North the difficulty and inadvisability of continued warfare.  With Lee’s leadership, the South assumed an offensive posture, resulting in excessive loss of manpower and eventual defeat. As for Grant, the victorious general, the Myth generally ignores him, or regards him as a butcher without military skill.

   Although Lee claimed to be a son of the South, he lived most of his adult life in the in Arlington, which was part of Washington D.C. until retrocession to Virginia in 1847.  Of especial significance was Lee’s close relationship to the founding fathers, especially George Washington. He was related to a revolutionary war hero Light Horse Harry. He was not only a distant blood relative of Washington but was married to the daughter of the stepson of the first president.  Most ironically, his family owned Mount Vernon and leased it to Washington until its ownership passed on the Washington family. Finally he admitted that all he was he owed to the United Sates of America.  Why his ties to the United States were not enduring remains a mystery to this day.  Lee was and remains a hero to many on both sides of the Mason-Dixon line, but as a hero he is tainted with the moniker of traitor.

   The Lost Cause Myth is concerned not only with Lee but also with broader issues related to the war itself. The Myth argues that the cause of the Civil War was not slavery but preservation of the southern away of life, i.e. moonlight and magnolias. The black slaves were viewed as gentle people, unable to survive independently and thus grateful for the opportunity to serve their masters. .  Slavery was looked upon not as an evil but as a special form of benevolence for an inferior race. However, beneath the picture of beauty and serenity was the dark reality of human bondage with its attendant abuse and cruelty.

    With time the Myth has been fading into obscurity. Nonetheless, remnants hang over our society like a bad dream.  Occasionally, we awaken to old animosities and new violence. The Black Lives Matter slogan is an expression arising from Lost Cause championing of white supremacy. Ironically, many in the North bought into the post war myth. complicating the resolution of sectional differences  up to this today.  It may be that an additional century is required before these ideas are finally abandoned and hope for a united society can be rekindled.

.

Posted by Arthur Banner