We begin with an interesting anniversary: Today in 1965, the Beatles used the final day of their five-day break from their U.S. tour to attend a recording session for the Byrds and to meet Elvis Presley at Presley’s Beverly Hills home.
The group reportedly found Presley “unmagnetic,” about which John Lennon reportedly said, “Where’s Elvis? It was like meeting Engelbert Humperdinck.”
Today in 1967, Jimi Hendrix released “Purple Haze”:
Three years later, Hendrix made his last concert appearance in Great Britain at the Isle of Wight Festival, which also featured, for your £3 ticket …
Does anyone find it a bit creepy that the number one song in Great Britain today in 1957 is about Paul Anka’s brother’s babysitter?
Three years later, the number one single across the sea required no words:
Two years later, the number one U.S. single was a dance that was easier than learning your ABCs:
Dr. Richard Menger of the University of South Alabama:
I practice medicine in an emerging Covid-19 hot spot in a state with one of the lowest vaccination rates. Last year I saw Covid at its worst when I deployed to New York to take care of patients in an overflow intensive-care unit. I am vaccinated. I wouldn’t say I “believe in science,” because science doesn’t work that way, but I trust the scientific process. Yet when it comes to trust and persuasion, the medical profession isn’t always winning the Covid-19 battle, and it’s worth understanding why.
The current attempts at persuading people to get the vaccine follow the typical trinity of persuasion put forth by Aristotle —logos, pathos and ethos. Social media and government platforms focus on data (logos), such as the stark disparities in serious illness between the vaccinated and the not. Then it turns into emotional pleas (pathos), with personal stories of lost patients or loved ones. Advocates talk about a moral duty of getting a vaccine (ethos).
But when the desired response doesn’t materialize—when a substantial portion of the country still refuses a shot—the calls devolve into histrionic and condescending pleas. Many people respond by digging in their heels. Plenty of research shows that once people make a decision and attach a strong moral identity to it, they ignore contrary data.
The medical community needs to confront the ugly reality of distrust, especially in my state. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study is a living memory. Between 1932 and 1972, government researchers actively withheld treatment for syphilis while promising free medical care, meals and burial insurance. Some reluctance in blindly trusting a new vaccine is understandable.
It is also cause for pause that the government appears willing to coerce Americans to take a vaccine that doesn’t have full approval from the Food and Drug Administration. President Biden has considered a $100 payment for vaccination. Such fiscal rewards will likely have the biggest sway on the vulnerable populations. But the government can use sticks as well as carrots. Is it morally acceptable to tax the unvaccinated $100? How would you feel if the government applied this tactic to something you strongly disagreed with?
The best way to change minds is to talk to people and treat them with respect and dignity. I understand a lot of my healthcare colleagues are frustrated and tired, but a sensationalist, sanctimonious narrative driven by social media doesn’t help anyone. This is part of our job: persuading people to take medicine they don’t want to take.
Healthcare professionals have a challenging obligation to work to understand where people are coming from, build a relationship, address their fears to help them understand, gently correct information that is wrong, admit when medicine was wrong and medical authorities misled people, motivate them based on their needs, and develop networks of support in the community.
Using this approach and more, Jacqueline Brooks, superintendent of the Macon County, Ala., School District, helped lead the charge that resulted in universal vaccination among the district’s custodians, bus drivers, and lunchroom workers. Macon County includes the city of Tuskegee.
Ms. Brooks engaged in personal conversations, reduced barriers to appointments, formed a partnership with a local medical center, made sure people were comfortable with the decision, and praised them for making a “sacrifice” and “taking on risk” for the community. Most important, when an initial cohort was in a “wait-and-see” mode, she acknowledged the risk, didn’t pressure them, and offered reassurance and data as more people they knew became vaccinated. The results speak for themselves.
Today in 1963, Little Stevie Wonder became the first artist to have the number one pop single and album and to lead the R&B charts with his “Twelve-Year-Old Genius”:
Today in 1974, one week after the catchy but factually questionable number one single (where is the east side of Chicago?) …
… the previous week’s number one sounded like Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony compared with the new number one:
Today in 1990, at the beginning of Operation Desert Shield, Sinead O’Connor refused to sing if the National Anthem was performed before her concert at the Garden State Arts Plaza in Homdel, N.J. Radio stations responded by pulling O’Connor’s music from their airwaves. To one’s surprise, her career never really recovered.
That was the same day that Iron Maiden won a lawsuit from the families of two people who committed suicide, claiming that subliminal messages in the group’s “Stained Class” album drove them to kill themselves.
As a member of the band pointed out, it would have made much more sense to insert a subliminal message telling listeners to buy the band’s albums instead of a message that, had it been followed, would have depleted the band’s fan base.
Another government failure, another outrage. This time the scandal is brought on by the less-than-orderly withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and the realization that 20 years of military presence in the country achieved nothing but death and chaos. Observing another instance of large-scale mismanagement, I can’t help being surprised that anyone is still surprised.
One needn’t be a foreign policy expert to recognize that something in Afghanistan went terribly wrong. While many will blame the Biden administration for a fiasco that will have horrifying humanitarian consequences for the Afghan people, the failure also belongs to those who made the decision to go and remain there for two decades. These American officials argued that a continuing U.S. military presence there was important for achieving several goals, like training the Afghan army to resist the Taliban. Yet, today, the almost-immediate collapse of the U.S.-backed Afghan government makes it clear that whatever our strategy was, it failed.
Unfortunately, it’s unlikely that those who believed in nation building in the first place will realize from this dreadful episode that it never works as well as planned, even though the tragic scenario now unfolding before our eyes isn’t the first U.S. government foreign policy disaster. And it won’t be the last. People never seem to learn. Making matters worse is the fact that this sad state of affairs isn’t limited to foreign policy. It exists everywhere and throughout all levels of federal, state, and local government.
During the pandemic, for instance, I was baffled to see Congress put the Small Business Administration (SBA) in charge of dispensing unprecedented disaster relief. This agency has a disastrous record of extending the suffering of small business owners after disasters like Hurricane Katrina. Having written extensively on that issue, I knew that this time around would be no different. It wasn’t.
A few weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal published an investigative piece about the performance of the SBA’s COVID-19 disaster loan program. The conclusion is that it was terrible. The report is packed full of examples of the ordeal that small business owners went through, many of which were carbon copies of stories that I reported about during other disasters. One of the recipients of the loans described dealing with the SBA: The agency “puts you in a state of confusion and doesn’t allow you to focus on what you should be doing, and that is to continue to rebuild your business after a pandemic.”
The article also includes an admission by a former SBA regional administrator who helped with the agency’s response. “On the disaster side,” he admitted, “we did a terrible job.” However, it doesn’t quite matter, as there will be no consequences for the agency. And the next time around, whether for a pandemic or a hurricane, the SBA will be called to the front lines yet again. And when it fails again, people will be outraged and wonder how this could have happened again.
I’m picking on the SBA, but the same criticism applies to other agencies and many other government efforts. Remember the flaw-filled rollout of the Obama-era Healthcare.gov? Remember the invasion of Iraq and discovering that there weren’t weapons of mass destruction there after all? Remember former President Donald Trump’s trade war, which was supposed to bring jobs back to the United States?
Books will be written for years to come about the utter failure of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to perform the most basic of responsibilities—preparing for a COVID-19-like pandemic. Authors will comment on all the CDC’s well-documented fiascoes, like the unwillingness to use existing COVID-19 tests and the failure to recommend that schools be opened like they are, successfully, in many other countries. Similar books will be written about the Food and Drug Administration’s poor handling of the crisis. The best of these books will even examine the agencies’ pasts and note that the recent mismanagements are just more of the same.
Unfortunately, the incentives within government are such that this pattern won’t change. After all, the same institution that’s unable to run the Postal Service or Amtrak without being in the red orchestrated the withdrawal from Afghanistan and our previous stay there for 20 years. The only thing that will make a difference is if we, the American people, start demanding accountability and reform. That may include the termination of a few—or perhaps many—agencies and programs.
Those of us old enough to remember the late 1970s — rampant inflation, high gas prices, and this country looking like a worldwide fool thanks to the foibles and failures of the Democratic president of the time — are getting another flashback.
The Wisconsin state senator who represents the towns around Fort McCoy has issued the strongest objection yet to the still murky plan to bring thousands of Afghan refugees to central Wisconsin.
Sen. Patrick Testin, R-Stevens Point, on Friday sent a strongly worded letter to Gov. Evers asking for answers about who the refugees are and where they will go once they arrive.
“There is no clear plan for background checks. There is no clear vetting plan. The plan for issuing visas appears to be dependent on using ‘volunteers’ – a proposal that raises strong concerns since prior to the pullout, qualified staff have been denying 80% of Afghani visa applications. There is no clear plan for health screenings. There is no clear plan for potentially necessary quarantines or vaccinations,” Testin wrote.
He said the Biden Administration has not provided any answers about the refugees. Now, he’s asking the Evers Administration.
“The people of Wisconsin are generous. We feel deep sympathy for those allies that our President abandoned and who now seek refuge. We honor the memory of the soldiers who gave their lives in an abandoned attempt to bring freedom and democracy to the Afghan people, while protecting our own,” Testin added. “We do not, however, trust that the President, or your administration, are taking even minimal steps to assure that the 30,000 Afghans to be moved to Wisconsin and Texas will be properly identified or screened, or that proper background or health checks will be completed.”
Gov. Evers said the number of refugees headed to Fort McCoy is anywhere between “a few hundred” and “two thousand.”
In addition to questions about vetting and background checks, Testin asked Gov. Evers some Wisconsin-specific questions about what happens when the refugees arrive”
- Refugees are eligible for Medical Assistance, BadgerCare, W2, and cash assistance. Has your administration calculated the added cost to Wisconsin taxpayers of 10-20,000 individuals who will doubtless be enrolled in these programs?
- If you plan to accept a population roughly equivalent to that of Marshfield, all of whom will be dependent on government assistance programs, have you asked for full federal reimbursement of all these costs that will otherwise be borne by Wisconsin taxpayers? If not, where do you propose diverting funds from to finance this expense?
- What plans has your administration made for the increased demands such a large influx of people presents to rural Wisconsin, including health care, law enforcement, education, and housing?
- What are your plans for transparency with this massive undertaking? When can we expect to see a dashboard so we may track the numbers, visas, health statistics, costs, problems and in particular the ejection of any refugees found to have terrorist ties?
Testin said the people of Wisconsin deserve the answers to the questions.
The flashback here is to the Mariel Boatlift, in which over six months in 1980 125,000 Cubans emigrated by air and boat to the U.S. That group, some of which ended up at Fort McCoy, included, depending on which source you believe, 2,700 hardened criminals (an academic study) or 16,000 to 20,000 criminals (the Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel). It also brought some number of former inmates of Cuban mental institutions, some of which were definitely mentally ill (as opposed to being institutionalized because you don’t sing from the Castro hymnal), and some of which ended up living on downtown Madison streets.
Some of those criminals were guilty of crimes that would not be considered crimes in civilized countries (for instance, selling on the black market, being religious or being “antisocialist”). But while the Mariel Boatlift brought to the U.S. businessmen and artists, it also brought the founder of the New York Kings gang, a serial killer, an arsonist and mass murderer, and two other murderers, part of the 7,000 Marielitos arrested for felonies in the U.S. by 1987. (Also the fictional gangster Tony Montana, grossly overacted by Al Pacino in the 1980s movie “Scarface.”)
The concern here is less about criminals or mentally ill Afghans, but about terrorists smuggled in with the other Afghan refugees. Americans with short memories forget that Osama bin Laden hatched his 9/11 plans from Afghanistan. And the idea of Afghans whose visas were denied suddenly being allowed here, if Testin’s number is correct, should raise questions at least.
Since we are an immigrant nation, we should welcome refugees who want to come to this country and live as Americans, not as expatriates of where they came from, or trying to foment terror in less likely places for terrorist attacks than New York or Washington were on 9/11.
Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog 