Things you gotta love

Ok, the Sunday news from the four newspapers (the two Seattle ones in a combined print) was interesting but nothing I could find to write home about, especially after Friday's news and some notes I have for new columns. But now and then, something shows up that is a real, "Huh?" moment.

The US Army has announced a $800,000 contract to Disney for improving morale at Walter Reed Hospital. Yes, really. And in response, "Col. Patricia D. Horoho, commander of the Walter Reed health-care system, said the goal is to change the culture there. "When you enter the hospital, we want it to be the best experience possible," she said. "Disney fits that."

I don't know about you, but if I were an injured soldier from the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq or a disabled soldier undergoing rehabilitation for past injuries, would I want my help to sound like Mickey Mouse? Smiling faces and cheery attitudes still won't make up for poor or inadequate service and care. While I won't argue there are some benefits to getting the doctors and staff to rethink or see things anew, but do you need Disney to do it?

I'm not arguing against humor or a positive attitude, that's essential in many situations. The positive attitude can help the patient, which Disney calls "guests", really that's a bit over the top for a hospital, through difficult treatments, pain, recovery, rehabilitation, and so on, but it has to be based on the individual patient and realistic expectations. Humor, I've found, is often useful to take the edge off something at the right time. Often patients get too fixated on something, humor breaks it to bring them back.

Anyway, it was interesting. And on the other side of life, South Africa has decided to allow killing elephants again. The herds are of sufficient size now they're not endangered. But who do you kill? We know elephants are very intelligent with terrific memories, not that far removed from humans with respect to consciousness and memory. So, who (elephant) do you kill to make another suffer the loss?

Apparently our planet is too crowded to allow for a few thousand elephants. Never mind they numbered in the hundreds of thousands in past millenia and eons, while we were just speck on the scale of species. So now, we command the planet and decides who lives and who dies, not realizing we're all in this together. Maybe it's not the elephants who are the problem?

Another, signing statements. For a number of reasons I like John McCain. I'm not sure he would make a good President, but I like his mavrick attitude and views on things. He said he wouldn't write any signing statements while Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama said they might or would sometimes.

We know Bush has signed more than all the previous Presidents combined, including ones stating while signing an act into law he doesn't have to abide by it or won't follow it. He considers himself above the law, even those Congress passes to exercise their right over the Administrtive branch of our government. It's within their powers and authority. But Bush says no. It's why we have an imperial presidency now.

And now Clinton and Obama have said they wouldn't return the power of signing statements. And Congress won't pass a bill outlawing them? Gee, maybe they're not separate branches of government after all? Why, when a bill or act in passed and signed into law all of us have to abide by it, except the President who can say he or she is above it, can ignore it or simply not follow it? Did the founding fathers really want an imperial President?

Another, ENDA and the HRC. Last October and November I wrote about the proposals for additions to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, ENDA, see "ENDA" in my columns. I don't think anything should be done until at least the fall of 2009 when everyone can be included in the new Act. But what I think is interesting is the continuing view by the Human Rights Campaign Director Joe Salmonese, who orchestrated the exclusion gender identity, expression and behavior in ENDA, to redirect or misdirect the discussion away from his stupidity.

While talking at a meeting in New York City, see article, he said, "I understand and I hear every day that some members of our community are feeling forgotten or left behind. It is easy to understand why," Solmonese told a crowd approaching 1,000 in the ballroom of the Hilton on February 23. But he also said, "We have to overlook our differences and we have got to see instead of our individual wants and immediate desires... a vision for the America that we all want to live in."

Gee, that includes just the people you argee with or want to associate with? And doesn't include other people? This is a way simply to deflect the argument from his decisions and actions then to disassociate the HRC and himself from transpeople. But he is neglecting his very own people, as many LGB people are trans or express some degree of non-stereotype expressions or behavior. What doesn't he understand all inclusive is what it is and exclusive hurts far more than you think, including your own friends?

Anyway, in the end it's just things you gotta wonder what they are thinking. You just gotta love human stupidity. It's always there in all of us, the question is when and how we express it.