CNN to Stand for Christian News Network?

Two nights ago I awoke from a dream with the pit in my stomach plummeting, my chest constricted and the sense that the world as I know it, is no more. Little did I know my television would confirm this discomfort. CNN did a bit on the Chocolate Jesus, the life sized statue of a naked Christ made of America's favorite confectionary.

The 24 hour news network interviewed the creator of the artwork and a Catholic "representative". They picked fundamentalist Catholic League head Bill O'Donahue to interview. Now they are running a series on "What is a Christian?" After reading the Chocolate Jesus transcript from Anderson Cooper 360, I really want a less hypersentive world, one more accepting of other's religious beliefs. The current win/lose version is a recipe for hate and violence. Read it and see how you feel:

ANDERSON COOPER, HOST: Cosimo, I want to start by asking you what your intention was with -- with this -- this piece of art.

C. CAVALLARO: My intention was to celebrate this body of Christ, and in a sweet, delicious, tasteful way.

COOPER: Why -- why use chocolate?

C. CAVALLARO: Because it's a substance that I like. And it's sweet. And I felt that the body of Christ, the -- the meaning of Christ, is about the sweetness.

COOPER: Were you trying to shock, I mean, to -- to cause attention?Often -- usually, when Christ is shown, he's wearing some form of clothing. This is a naked Christ, which has also caused some concern.

C. CAVALLARO: No more than the religion, the way they use it. I was just using it as an iconic figure. I mean, that my intentions was to shock people, no. I was -- my intention was to have them taste the -- and feel what they're looking at in their mouth.

COOPER: Bill, you call this exhibit hate speech. You said it's -- quote -- "one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever."What specifically offends you about it?

DONOHUE: Well, of course, asking the public to come in and eat Jesus, with his genitals exposed, during Holy Week I think would be self-explanatory. If we took an image of this artist's mother, and made her out in chocolate, with her genitals exposed, of course, to be equal, and then asked the public to eat her on Mother's Day, yes, he might have a problem. Maybe he wouldn't. But you know what bothers me? It's not even the artist. I mean, we have a lot of these loser artists down in SoHo and around the country. What bothers me is that this guy Knowles, who is an artist in residence, the owner, the president and CEO of an establishmentarian site, the Roger Smith Hotel, 47th and Lexington, in the heart of Midtown Manhattan, that is what bothers me, because now we have the establishment kicking in.And to put this out during Holy Week, on street level, when kids can walk in off the street, these people are morally bankrupt. And my goal is to make them financially bankrupt.

COOPER: Cosimo, do you understand the outrage this has caused? I mean, do you think it's overreaction? Do you get it?

C. CAVALLARO: Yes, I get it. I think it's an overreaction. You just heard the gentleman calling artists losers, or me a loser. I think what he's -- his assault is on the public at large, artists, and freedom of speech, and every Catholic. I'm a Catholic, and I'm a Christian. And I think this gentleman doesn't even represent the people that are in his faith.

DONOHUE: That's funny. You said I put out a fatwa, right? Or the -- or the -- that was the -- the guy who ran the lab, says I put out a fatwa. I put out a news release. So, you're accusing me of being like the Taliban; is that right? C.

CAVALLARO: Who, me? You're not that intelligent. (LAUGHTER)

DONOHUE: Oh, no, let me tell you something. You're -- you're lucky I'm not as mean, because you might lose more than your head.

COOPER: Cosimo, did you want people to eat this? Was that part of this?

C. CAVALLARO: No.Did you hear what this gentleman is saying, that I would lose my head?

DONOHUE: No, I -- you heard what I said. I said you're -- you're lucky I'm not like the Taliban, because you would lose more than your head, which is why...

C. CAVALLARO: Right. So, therefore...(CROSSTALK)

DONOHUE: ... guys like you wouldn't do this against Mohammed during Ramadan. (CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: No, because I'm a Christian. And I'm not trying to...

DONOHUE: Oh, you're a Christian. Please. Don't lie about it, all right? Don't lie about it.

C. CAVALLARO: I'm not lying. No, I'm not lying about it.

DONOHUE: Yes, you are.(CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: I want to ask you a question, Mr. DONOHUE.

DONOHUE: Yes.

C. CAVALLARO: Where do you think I should exhibit this? Because you -- you have bamboozled an art gallery.

DONOHUE: Right.

C. CAVALLARO: And you have bamboozled an establishment. You have put fear in people to listen to your rhetoric and to believe -- just because a man has got his arms extended and he's made in chocolate -- it's your Christ -- and it's offensive.

DONOHUE: That's right. (CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: And, by the way -- excuse me. I'm going to talk to you for a minute. You keep quiet.

DONOHUE: And you want the public to eat him.(CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: Now, you go to the Catholic Church...(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Let Cosimo finish his point.

C. CAVALLARO: You go to the Catholic Church, and you're going to see statues from Michelangelo that are nude. Are you going to clothe them for the Holy Week?

DONOHUE: OK. (CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: And are you telling me that, apart from the Holy Week, we could do anything we want to do with the genitalia? What are you talking about?

DONOHUE: The...

COOPER: OK. Let Bill answer.

DONOHUE: All right. All right, first of all, Leonardo, you're not. But, quite frankly, where should you have this displayed? In New Jersey is where New Yorkers put their garbage. There's a big sanitation dump. That's where you should put it.

COOPER: Bill, let me read you something that David Kuo, the former presidential assistant to President Bush, who worked in the Office of Faith-Based Community Initiatives, said in reference to your protest.He said -- quote -- "Instead of getting all amped up over this art, Christians should be spending time facing the real and very challenging Jesus found in the Gospels, and encouraging others to do the same."(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: Are you making a bigger deal out of this than it deserves?

DONOHUE: No, no, no, no.

COOPER: And doesn't this, in fact, give this more attention than it ever would have received otherwise?

DONOHUE: If, in fact, it was at some dump in SoHo, I probably wouldn't pay too much attention. But the fact that the Roger Smith Hotel...(CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: ... dump in SoHo.

DONOHUE: ... right here in New York City is doing this thing, no. If I don't pay attention to it, then I -- my people should ask for me to be fired.By the way, I am delighted with the response from Jews, Muslims, and others, not just Catholics and Protestants, with this. People are basically saying, enough is enough. This is absolutely revolting. And what you're saying, sir, is totally disingenuous. No one believes it. I don't even think you believe it.

COOPER: But, Bill, doesn't -- doesn't -- I mean, don't people have a right to express themselves? And isn't that what art is about? Aren't artists supposed to provoke thought?

DONOHUE: That's right. And, if we -- and if we put a swastika out on a stamp in the United States, we could call that art. It was an art exhibition. I don't think Jews would go for that. Just because art is art doesn't mean that it is a right that is absolute. Art can be insulting and it can be offensive. And when these people are whining, claiming victim status, as this guy is doing, because of my exercise of my First Amendment right of freedom of speech -- I didn't call the cops to come in and censor this. I'm simply saying I called up about 500 of my friends and -- running different Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and non- sectarian organizations to boycott the Roger Smith Hotel. They're morally bankrupt. I want to see them financially bankrupt.

COOPER: Cosimo, I want to give you the final thought. Do you plan to -- to display this elsewhere?

C. CAVALLARO: Yes, I do, hopefully. And I would like to add to the gentleman who referred to the swastika, he's actually acting like a Nazi. (LAUGHTER)

C. CAVALLARO: And I -- I would like to ask one question.Where do you suggest that I exhibit this? Because you basically pulled it out of a gallery for me. So, where do you think...

DONOHUE: No. I -- I told you...(CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: Where -- no, excuse me.Where do you suggest that an artist should exhibit his work that you don't infringe on?

DONOHUE: Well, you know, go to some dump down in SoHo, where...

C. CAVALLARO: A dump?

DONOHUE: ... nobody will pay attention.

C. CAVALLARO: Is there a church in SoHo that's a dump, too, because...

DONOHUE: Oh, you would like to...(CROSSTALK)

C. CAVALLARO: No, let me tell you something.

DONOHUE: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

C. CAVALLARO: There's two priests that have wanted to exhibit this in their church.

DONOHUE: Is that right?

C. CAVALLARO: Yes, absolutely.DONOHUE: Give me their names.

C. CAVALLARO: I will not, because you're a bully. (LAUGHTER)

C. CAVALLARO: And you know what? I believe that there's people in your organization that would like you to resign.

DONOHUE: Is that right?

C. CAVALLARO: Absolutely. And you're...

DONOHUE: Well, how come -- I haven't heard from them.

C. CAVALLARO: I got to tell you something, there's more filth that comes out of your mouth...

DONOHUE: Is that right?

C. CAVALLARO: Yes -- than I have seen...(CROSSTALK)

DONOHUE: Look, you lost. You know what? You put your middle finger at the Catholic Church, and we just broke it, didn't we, pal?

C. CAVALLARO: No. You're wrong. You're wrong.

DONOHUE: Yes, we did. You lost.

C. CAVALLARO: I have a lot of believers.

DONOHUE: We -- we won. You're out of a job.

C. CAVALLARO: And I'm a Christian. And there's a lot of people like me, who are opposed to what you're doing, because you made a big...

DONOHUE: Yes? But I got a job, and you don't.

C. CAVALLARO: You made a -- "I got a job, and you don't"?

DONOHUE: Yes.

C. CAVALLARO: You're acting like a 5-year-old.

DONOHUE: I got a job, and you don't.

C. CAVALLARO: You're talking -- you're acting like a 5-year-old. And I feel sorry for you.

COOPER: All right. We're going to -- we're...

DONOHUE: Well, I won on this, and you lost, didn't you?

COOPER: Well, let's -- let's leave it there. You both expressed your opinions.Bill DONOHUE, appreciate you being with -- and, Cosimo Cavallaro, appreciate it as well. Thank you, sir.

C. CAVALLARO: Thank you, Anderson.

COOPER: Thank you.

"Responsible" Bush Cuts Payments to County Hospitals while Upping Medicare Funding for Private Insurers

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently announced two regulatory decisions. One increases payments to private insurance companies for their Medicare Advantage plan recipients, while the other cuts funding for government owned hospitals serving the uninsured. Health insurance stocks rose broadly on the announcement. In contrast local and state owned hospitals have no stock to fall.

The move to increase payments to health insurers for Medicare Advantage took the market by surprise. Recent reports indicated a payment cut to be on tap, rather than a payment increase.

Should Susan Bayh, the wife of Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, waited before flipping her WellPoint stock options? She turned them in January for a net gain of $112,000. Had she made the same move today, Susan could have netted an additional $14,000.

Hospitals under the Bush plan stand to do much worse than Mrs. Bayh. With the regulation change, the feds expect to save nearly $4 billion over 5 years. How much will private insurers get under their fee increase? I’m still searching for that number, but if I find it you’ll be the first to know.

Yet Another Hand Holding Insurance Salesman

The images of the financial advisor lounging on the beach at your retirement home and attending your daughter’s college graduation will soon be joined by your health insurance agent taking high fat food off your kitchen table and imploring you to finish that 5K run with a sprint. That’s right, huge insurer WellPoint incentivized its employees to improve the health of the 34 million people it covers.

They picked 20 monitors and compiled them into a patient index. The various patient indexes are combined for an overall company score. If WellPoint meets its 2010 improvement goal then 42,000 employees will see the result in their bonus check.

The company’s chief medical officer said linking employee bonuses to care improvements will "get everyone energized about improving health care in our company.” Yes, but which way will this energy go? Corporate chiefs used 30% of their stock option energy to cheat by backdating. Some 700 Texas public schools had their No Child Left Behind bonuses held up due to suspicious test results.

Will the 42,000 work to rewrite their insurance products to cover the most effective treatment options? Will they simply choose not to write policies for even marginally unhealthy patients? A healthier patient to begin with brings “better outcomes”.

Will the 42,000 call you at breakfast to find what’s on the table? Will they meet you at the grocery store to monitor your food choices? Will they jog next to you at the gym making small talk like “how’s the weight?”

Or will 12,000 act like corporate big dogs by lying and cheating to meet their performance target?

Keep in mind other efforts to improve the quality of health care. One insurance company ranks and rates doctor performance in a manner similar to that called for by Medicare Super Chief Mike Leavitt. When one physician fell from the “best in class” status, he investigated why. The company cited his poor performance with diabetic patients. After a search of patient records, the doctor found 30% of his patients cited by the insurer didn’t even have the disease.

Who else will soon enter your living room based on inaccurate or erroneous information? Who is really looking to help you get healthier and who is looking to pad their personal compensation? This system (like all extrinsic motivation efforts) will be gamed. Watch as 2010 nears for the specific creative measures used by WellPoint employees as they spin the wheel faster to reach the cheese…

Presidential Update

Spring arrived with the U.S. Presidential field sprouting ample green and growing wildly. A few more Tom’s joined the already crowded 2008 Presidential race the last few days, ex Wisconsin governor and HHS chief Tommy “Implantable Human Chip” Thompson and Colorado Congressman Tom “O’Bomber Mecca” Tancredo.

The green came from the millions raised by front running candidates, shattering previous campaign fundraising records. Hillary Clinton netted $26 million, Mitt Romney $23 million, Rudy Guiliani $15 million, John Edwards $14 million, Bill Richardson $6 million, Chris Dodd $4 million, Joe Biden $2 million and Tom Tancredo over $1 million. That’s nearly $90 million without Barack Obama’s or John McCain’s significant sums (as they are yet to be released).

Let me get this straight. For the period of January to March 2007 candidates raised well over $100 million to fund their Presidential aspirations some 20 months away? It looks those billion dollar predictions will be on the low side. Now why would so much money flow into candidates campaign coffers? It’s clear they expect returns on their investment…

No Wonder Bush Team Can’t Do a Credible Investigation!

Does anyone else wonder why the Bush team botches investigation after investigation? The answer might be found in recent comments by White House spokesperson Dana Perino. She characterized private, un-sworn and un-transcribed testimony as being “extraordinarily forthcoming”. Ask any attorney general if they can make a case on such testimony.

The list of other booted studies or complete non-investigations include:

The White House whitewashed their inactions after Hurricane Katrina in their “Lessons Learned report”. It earned a huge sigh of relief from the Carlyle Group as their brand new affiliate LifeCare Hospitals had the highest patient death toll in the storm’s aftermath. This warranted not one mention in the Bush post mortem.

The non-investigation of secret CIA prisons throughout the world and any prisoner treatment that occurred under “the program”. Allegations of torture arising in current military tribunals are referred to the Pentagon for investigation. This is the same Pentagon that repeatedly flubbed ex-NFL star Pat Tillman’s friendly fire death investigation. Our European friends conducted a study on American secret CIA prisons without us.

A United Nations group requested for three years to investigate prisoner conditions at Guantanamo Bay only to be offered the official tour. Requests to meet with prisoners were denied. International experts refused to come as this is a key step in determining whether torture actually occurred.

The non-investigation of the White House leak of a CIA agent’s name. This later resulted in the conviction of the Vice President’s Chief of Staff for perjury. The President promised to look into the matter but no internal findings were ever released. That’s because Bush’s promised internal investigation never happened.

Attorney General Gonzales serves at the pleasure of a flat footed leader and it appears Alberto imitated Bush the last few weeks. Complete with contempt of Congress he told them he had “no role” in the firings. Documents and testimony of his underlings revealed otherwise, which sent Alberto into a fierce round of word parsing. The good news is Mr. Gonzales will stay on the job with the full confidence of the President and lead the investigation now hot on the heels of truth. However this requires basic memory capabilities, something currently in doubt for the nation’s top lawyer.

What’s good for the Bush clan should be good enough for every forgetful criminal. People suspected of a crime should give private, un-sworn and un-transcribed testimony. That might be good enough to get the latest round of Congressional investigations off the desks of Attorney Generals. Rep. Jerry Lewis and ex-House Ways and Means Chair Bill Thomas likely would send Alberto a thank you note…

Bush Worried about Matter, Anti-Matter Meeting

In Bush's world lines are drawn, sides are as clear as matter and anti-matter. Domestically Republicans are the matter and Democrats the anti-matter. When they collide major combustion occurs. They net each other out leaving the voters with nothing more than a concussion blast.

Internationally the democratic, capitalist West is matter and the Axis of Evil composed of anti-matter. Iran and Syria are the only two remaining countries from the "old axis" list. North Korea followed Libya by just changing its evil ways while Iraq has been freed to flourish as a democracy. However, inching their way towards anti-matter status are the Russians and Chinese.

The reason the Bush team won’t meet with Iran or Syria is he doesn’t want the two opposing explosive forces coming into contact. So what happens when an anti-matter Democratic leader travels to Israel to meet with their clearly material Prime Minister Ehud Olmert? Once there House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not explode, she promised to carry the Israeli message to Syria. So why didn’t Nancy and Ehud cancel each other out?

It turns out Nancy was converted at a recent AIPAC meeting. Speaker Pelosi is now a card carrying materialistic, capitalistic fan of America’s greatest ally in the Middle East. So President Bush doesn’t need to worry about Nancy meeting with Syrian leaders. She won’t add any anti-matter to their stockpile. Let’s just hope she wears one of those special suits that Christopher Hill wore to negotiate with the North Koreans when she delivers Ehud Olmert’s message. I’d hate to see a matter, anti-matter conflagration. It could mess up her hair and ruin Bush's cute nickname for her, "Pelo-chia-pet".

What happens if Nancy segways over to Iran to negotiate the British soldier release? President Bush just recalled America's tragic history with Iran by calling them “hostages”. In an odd twist, 200 Iranian students protested outside the British embassy chanting “Death to Britain” and throwing stones. If someone wanted the grease the skids for a Western attack on Iran, these images would be invaluable.

Likewise, Ms. Nancy Pelosi recently dropped any Congressional restrictions on attacking Iran. This happened during the huge AIPAC Policy and Issues convention in Washington D.C. What about Nancy’s recent meeting partner, Israeli P.M. Olmert? Just the other day he said now is "not the right time" to invade Gaza to root out a reportedly growing Hamas military threat. What is more pressing for the Jewish state? Do they have their eye on the Iranian ball as well? It’s perilously close to the nuclear technology no going back date offered by Israel’s Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni sometime last fall.

There’s so much matter and anti-matter. It’s just a question of when and where it will meet…

Bush’s “Worst of the Worst” Worked for British Intelligence

After five years in U.S. custody, several rendition flights and his time “in the tropics” at Guantanamo Bay, a British citizen was released from the infamous terrorist holding facility. Bisher al-Rawi’s freedom came from the urging of the British government as he’d previously been an informant for MI5.

Now free, the ex-prisoner alleges he’d been tortured in U.S. captivity. His brother claimed CIA agents threatened him with rape and torture.

After reading both U.S. and British news on the story, I noted several glaring differences.

1. The British account mentions the torture allegations, the U.S. does not. It does refer to his stay as “profoundly difficult”.

2. The UK version clearly states the MI5 cooperation happened prior to his imprisonment while the U.S. version glosses over past cooperation, making it sound like a condition of release.

3. The British account mentions his Iraqi citizenship and his residence in country for 19 years. This gets no mention in the American story.

4. The Guardian story clearly relates the conditions of his capture in Gambia while trying to set up a peanut processing factory with his brother. The AP version only mentions arrest in Gambia for having suspicious electronic equipment, later proven to be a battery charger.

5. The UK version notes his being taken to Bagram Air base in Afghanistan and then to Guantanamo Bay. The US says he went through Cairo to a secret CIA prison in Afghanistan, then on to Guantanamo.

The U.S. story states the reason they held the prisoner was his association with his association with an al-Qaeda linked radical cleric, Abu Qatada. It was this association MI5 mined through Mr. al-Rawi. So the very work he did helping British intelligence landed him in Guantanamo Bay!

If anyone tells you the heavy hand of Western might lands only on the deserving, think again. I bet another condition of his release is waiving any rights to sue for wrongful imprisonment or torture.

As the world reaches out in compassion for the 15 British soldiers who understandably lie after less than two weeks in Iranian custody, let’s consider the impact on years of confinement in U.S. facilities under conditions specifically designed to break the human mind/spirit. Might they also lie or say exaggerated things like those British Navy soldiers? I’ll close with a statement by the now freed prisoner.

"The hopelessness you feel in Guantanamo can hardly be described. You are asked the same questions hundreds of times, Allegations are made against you that are laughably untrue, but you have no chance to prove them wrong. There is no trial, no fair legal process."