Maher wasn't racist on Leno

I missed Bill Maher on The Tonight Show moments ago, but to see how he did, I went straight to Twitter for the commentary. What I found, in addition to a few hateful Republicans from Texas and Louisiana (not surprising), were complaints about Maher's choice of language. He apparently referred to Barack Obama as President Blackenstein, President Kenya, and Django Unchained.

Some people on Twitter had a shit fit, crying racism.

Let me set you folks straight, ok?

Here's why it was not racism.

President Blackenstein, President Kenya, and Django Unchained are all terms representing how Republicans feel about Obama. Bill Maher is merely a voice describing the situation that is the racist attitude toward Barack Obama coming from the Right Wing types. Those nicknames are characterizations of Right Wing angst, not of Left Wing racism. Anyone who thinks such commentary is racist is a complete idiot, disconnected from the national dialogue present on the conservative side of the fence. 

In other words, you clearly don't get it. 

Maher does not believe Obama is President Blackenstein, President Kenya, or Django Unchained. He understands that Republicans think Obama is President Blackenstein, President Kenya, and Django Unchained. There are two Obamas. One is the real Obama. The other is Fantasy Obama, the one Republicans have made up in order to validate their disproportionate fear of a black man. Fantasy Obama is this big scary black guy who represents every stereotype they believe about black people.

It also is not a case of it being okay for a liberal to say something and not okay for a conservative to say something. In this instance, Maher is saying it is not okay for conservatives to perceive Barack Obama as President Blackenstein, President Kenya, and Django Unchained. He is saying it is not okay for them to be racist. He is not speaking in a derogatory fashion about the President. On the contrary, he is saying these are derogatory perceptions of the President held by conservatives. It's like if I said it's not okay for you to say the N word and in that very condemnation of you, I actually said the N word, not "N word." We're condemning you for your racism, not being racist. It's like if your five year old child said "shit" and in response you said "It's not okay to say shit." What you're doing is responding to my condemnation by saying "But you just said it." Your reasoning is like a five year old being a smart ass instead of learning right from wrong.

Any questions?

Would you rather us NOT talk about how the GOP views President Obama? Tell me why that is. Perhaps you are in denial. Perhaps you aren't aware of the problem. 

Tell me if you'd prefer that he would say "Big scary black guy" instead of the other terms. At what point does the message lose its value? The racism inside the GOP has to be called out. We can't sit here and say nothing.

(If you don't like that I called some of you idiots, here's a tip. Pay attention to the news. You are most definitely not up to speed on this particular issue. That makes you the idiot.)

The Two Biggest Problems With Clint Eastwood's Speech

While the internet is still buzzing from the hilarity that was Clint Eastwood's rambling on the RNC stage at the convention, two things stood out in my mind as I watched the coverage and replay of the poorly timed and poorly placed attempt at Republican enthusiasm. While I agree with Bill Maher that producing comedy with an empty chair is a difficult task and that Eastwood pulled that part off, I did not find the act itself to be of the quality or decency that we should expect in a campaign.

Let me explain what I mean.

Al Sharpton has already brought my first point to our attention, as have many others. The speech itself was disrespectful to the office of the President of the United States of America. Now before you get your conservative panties and secret mormon underwear in knots, let's cover one very important retort that I've seen. Yes, democrats have been known to say and do some very unkind things when talking about President Bush. This behavior, however, does not excuse you or Clint Eastwood from behaving the same way. You should strive to be a better person than your rivals, no?

Okay, then. So the fact that Clint Eastwood not only spoke in a condescending tone to an imaginary President Obama, but adding profanity to the mix made this performance especially disrespectful.  Had President Obama been in that chair, Clint Eastwood would have conducted himself in a more respectful tone.

This leads to my second impression of this crap.

This is the only way conservatives like to debate President Obama. Not only have they spent the last four years (election season and post-election first term) creating a fake story line about President Obama with which they have armed their dittohead minions for the sole purpose of making him a one term president, but in this instance, they created a situation where a debate without a retort from their opposition served only to fit their hate-laden fancy. They could argue with an invisible man from the comfort of their own echo chamber. Difference of opinion? What's that? It's what Republicans refuse to acknowledge in the name of arrogance and self preservation. This was hardly a respectable way to frame the campaign, let alone a debate. In that setting, no humor exists. It's a shameful representation of what the Republican Party has become.

Conservatives do not wish to debate the President on his home turf. No. This was an act of blatant cowardice. If they can't muster up the courage to debate President Obama face to face, then that makes them cowards. That makes Clint Eastwood a coward. To pull a line from Back to the Future III, Clint Eastwood is the biggest yellow belly in the West.

When in history has either party talked this way to a sitting US president? Oh yes, this might have to do with the fact that modern conservatives question the legitimacy of this presidency, from birthers, to people who think he is Muslim, to racists, and to people who think he stole the election. This kind of disrespectful behavior is rooted in the foul mentality that is the hatred modern Republicans have for President Obama. It's disgusting. We're Americans for crying out loud. Act like it.

That is all.

Because we value entertainment more

People are now asking why it was such a disaster was allowed to happen at the Indiana State Fair this past week end. The band, Sugarland, was about to go on stage. The crowd was awaiting their performance. While all this was going on, storm clouds were on their way, Indiana officials were seeking out advice regarding the weather, and people were admittedly concerned about the looming storm.

So, why was it, then, that people didn't leave?

I'm sure there were people who decided to head out. I'm sure some people looked at the sky and said "No, I'm not hanging around for this storm." I've been in situations where storms were looming as well.

Peer pressure is a powerful thing. If some people don't start the gradual flow, nobody leaves.

People came to that concert to see a show. They stand there waiting. They expect a show. Even when a severe storm stares them in the face, they stare right back at it and hope no rain comes. They still think everything is going to be okay. They think there will still be a show.

On the 4th of July this year, in Shreveport-Bossier, a healthy storm system moved its way across East Texas and Southwest Arkansas. I was watching it on the radar, wondering if the fireworks would be cancelled or delayed. Live footage of the celebratory events were being broadcast on one local television station. From their perspective, skies were clear. The weatherman was on tv, telling us that everything looked good and he hoped things would go off without a hitch. Nothing was further from the truth. I was staring right at the radar. I wasn't going to leave the house just yet.

But as the threat of rain loomed, I decided to hop in the car and head out. As I drove into town, lightning flashed around me. Skies were dark. Rain was pouring down. Streets were soon flooded, at least in one lane, sewer drains overwhelmed by the rush of water. Word spread that people at the Boardwalk were leaving. The crowds were thinning. Rain had scared everyone off. The show had been either delayed or canceled. Nobody really knew.

After the storm passed, people were still on their way out. I was stranded in traffic, but after 30 minutes of waiting in bumper to bumper traffic, the fireworks began going off. I was able to enjoy the show, but at what cost? My legs were still damp from getting drenched by the rain. It was really a mess I should have avoided.

But people in our area have taken this one step further.

When bad storms are approaching, in the past, our local news really didn't throw up a fuss. Over the past two years, the weather teams have improved their coverage of severe weather, complete with early warnings and detailed coverage. They still don't compare to other weather teams I've had the pleasure of knowing, but it's better than nothing.

Sounds great, right?

Well, they interrupted an LSU game and all hell broke loose on the internet. People were extremely unhappy that their beloved LSU Tigers were being blotted out by severe weather coverage. They wanted to see the game. There is even a Facebook page dedicated to this complaining.

So apparently, we'd rather sacrifice our own safety in the name of entertainment. We care more about being entertained than using our better judgment. We don't have the sense to realize bad weather can kill. We'd much rather watch a football game or some fireworks.

Because we value entertainment more than our own lives, we will continue to see sad stories like the one in Indiana.

There will be two kinds of Deathers

At a minimum, after the death of Osama bin Laden, the conspiracy theorists will come up with at least two rants that are rooted by the same mentality.

One will be fairly straightforward. They will question whether or not Osama is really dead. Look on Twitter for the hashtag, Deathers. The conspiracy has already begun.

The second batch of Deathers simply question the motive behind the killing. They will purport that President Obama, when faced with a relatively apathetic public and opinion polls which aren't the least bit flattering, politicized the event, making him more of a political opportunist than a successful leader.

Both, sadly, hinge on the idea that President Obama is not at all trustworthy. Both rely on a general distaste for Obama that resembles not that of a partisan slant, but more of a SEC football fan. Lunacy is the only name for such assertions. From here on out, it is how I view any conspiracy theorist. No lunatic has a voice on my stage unless I am poking fun at their insanity.

Who the hell is Robert Caspar Lintner?

Thanksgiving is upon us and while many are scrambling to make a flight, cook a turkey, and put up with family members, I'm standing here wondering who the hell Robert Caspar Lintner is.

Go ahead, do a Google search. Look on Wikipedia.

Nothing.

Well, except for the sites which provide two quotes about Thanksgiving. Why do you think I'm asking who this person is in the first place? Yeah. THAT quote is popping up everywhere. It's almost as if someone made the guy up. There are no other mentions of Robert Caspar Lintner, except in reference to either of the two quotes below.

Thanksgiving was never meant to be shut up in a single day.
and
Thanksgiving is nothing if not a glad and reverent lifting of the heart to God in honor and praise for His goodness.

Did I miss a lesson in History class? Am I not religiously well connected enough? Who is this guy? I do not pass along a quote unless I know who it is that coined the phrase.

Poor Yahoo/AP News Journalism Stirs The Pot

With rising costs of running government programs, certain decisions will be necessary. Some programs will face cuts. Others will be deemed wasteful and cut altogether. The fact remains that in order for Americans to continue to enjoy services offered at the federal level and to remain a major military power in the world, we are going to have to find money somewhere. We also owe a few countries some money. No bones about it. We need to figure this out.

But what has Yahoo News thrown into the mix? Fear over a VAT, a value-added-tax. In simplest terms, that's a value based form of tax where an expense gets tacked on to a product which represents its journey from creation to market. Not many like the idea of a VAT, but that's not the point of my post, at least not directly.

What Yahoo News has done is write an article with a daunting headline striking fear into the minds of taxpayers, specifically wingnuts, and stirring the pot of anti-Obama sentiment a little more.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100422/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_tax

What the article mentions, yet fails to responsibly convey, is that President Obama is not actually considering, nor his he proposing, a VAT. As expressed by the Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, a VAT “is not something the President has proposed nor is it under consideration.”

Can't get much clearer than that. The only people who should predictably fall for such an article already feel Obama is a liar. The truth could hit them in the nose and Obama would still be a liar.

But wait, there's more.

Like another recent debacle over a fishing ban spawned from one editorial piece on ESPN which got the wingnuts all riled up, the dubious VAT proposal is only being purported by Yahoo News. Anyone linking to a story about a VAT coming from the Obama administration leads directly back to the same Yahoo News Article. Read the article for yourself and follow along carefully. The headline asserts that Obama is considering a VAT, yet at every turn in the article, the message being sent in response is that a VAT is not being considered. What Obama did say is that many options are on the table. Perhaps he misspoke slightly, making himself appear as though in fiscal matters, he is remaining open minded. Blame poor question/answer prep.

Take the research one step further. Michele Bachmann tried to spin this VAT notion the other day when she went up against Chris Wallace. He called her on it, plainly stating that a VAT is not being proposed. Paul Volcker might have suggested that we as a country might have to consider it to pay our way out of the hole we've been left in, but that's as far as the idea goes. We all know Bachmann is nuts anyway.
http://factcheck.org/2010/04/sunday-slips/

Come on now people, crack some heads over this. Call me when Congress has moved beyond committee proposing an all out VAT. Otherwise, spare me the tin foil hat diatribes. The Senate just went 85-13 against the idea of having a VAT.

A New Trend: Being an "Independent" Voter

Has anyone out there noticed that when partisan politics becomes a topic of discussion, you always have an Independent sitting there with his or her arms out as if to say "Don't look at me. I'm neither Republican nor Democrat" completely exempt from responsibility? The label "Independent" has been confused with independent thinking. Independents are now people who are just fed up with the party they used to belong to. Does that change their core beliefs? Doubt it. Previously, you voted on the basis of either Conservative or Liberal principles. Suddenly becoming Independent does not alter those core principles. Those beliefs stayed the same. Being an Independent does not make you an unbiased source.

Being an Independent is the new way to be trendy. It's the loophole for those who like to criticize government without facing any criticism themselves. There is a certain smugness about it all. I know the smug reputation is a typical stereotype placed on the so called "Liberal elites," but the Independents are looking more and more smug these days.

Being an Independent does not mean your shit doesn't stink. On the whole, you still vote one way or the other and in that regard, you can be held accountable. You give off the sense that you are somehow not the least bit partisan, yet I have seen multiple examples of Conservative leaning Independents who flat out hate anyone who is a Liberal. I'm sorry, but that puts you on the other side of the fence and nowhere near anything Independent. To me, an Independent is someone who should, in all aspects, resemble a moderate voter. Instead, we have people on the far left and far right who also make themselves Independents. Those Independents are a far cry from being mediators between opposing sides. Take Lou Dobbs for example. As a self professed registered Independent, he fans the flame of partisan politics on a daily basis.

Do you know that here in the state of Louisiana, registered Independents cannot vote in certain elections? Your voice is not heard when primaries are held, for example. You are not involved in the political process. Is that your idea of being an Independent?

The new Independent voter is nothing more than someone who likes the spiffy new iron-on badge they added to their jacket. In any election, Independent voters are given credence just like partisan voters. Each side is going to try and play to the Independent voters to pull ahead. This notion is somewhat of a fallacy. As I've already pointed out, an Independent is ideally someone who sits in the middle and could sway in either direction. These new Independents are nothing of the sort.

Watch for these key phrases and be skeptical towards anyone who uses them.

I'm so glad I'm an Independent.
That's why I'm an Independent.
You can trust my opinion because I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat.
You can't blame me. I'm an Independent.
Don't look at me. I'm an Independent.

Let me give another example. Let's say you are generally liberally leaning on most issues. You want tax cuts for the middle class and understand taxes are necessary, so those who can afford to pay a little more, do. You like the idea of social programs and helping the poor. You support gay marriage. The only issue holding you back is abortion. You consider yourself pro-life. That one issue is not enough to consider yourself an Independent. That one issue does not put you in the gray area. One or two issues should not decide the party you are registered with.

If you are a politician running as an Independent, you are a wolf in sheep's clothing. Joe Lieberman would be a perfect example. You are not Independent. You just play each side against the other and hedge your bets. Lieberman is not a symbol of bipartisan progress.

If you are a voter who believes a little bit of both and sits more towards the middle, you are more than welcome to be Independent. You don't let one issue decide your vote. If you lean one way over the other, but are fed up with your own party, refuse to take any blame for your political choices, or use the label in an obstinate manner with the intent of being right all the time, you are nothing but a pretentious ass.

Why is this so important?
In every recent election, the politicians have been forced to cater to these people. They end up deciding the election. The fate of many rests in the decisions of the few.

Louisiana Family Forum Sends Out Propaganda & Lies

I received a piece of Louisiana Family Forum propaganda today in the mail. They tried to legitimize it by printing it in newspaper format. Even the type of paper it was printed on appeared similar. The unsuspecting reader may interpret this piece of propaganda as legitimate news.

The front page compares Obama/Biden and McCain/Palin on mostly social issues. The entire column next to Obama/Biden was filled with the word "No" and of course, the McCain/Palin side was flooded with the word "Yes." So much for educated critical thinking. Oh wait, these idiots rely on "faith" and an imaginary friend.

Upon turning the page, I found similar comparisons between other candidates running for Louisiana Office. What stood out was that on more than one occasion, many Democratic candidates had "unknown" positions. For instance, they seem to think that Mary Landrieu's stance on prostitution is "unknown." Give me a break.

For a group pushing good family values, they sure do like to deceive. I burned the damn thing. I hope they taste the same flame when they all burn in Hell for these sins. Dirty Christian Conservatives really take the cake. This is just one more example of how low so called "Christians" will go to push an agenda. If you align yourself with an organization as devious as the Louisiana Family Forum, you should rethink your religious commitments. These people are in no way, shape, or form, good people and you should reconcile to cut all ties with them.

What do you expect? It's Louisiana after all. These backwoods evangelicals wouldn't know right from wrong if Jesus himself came down and ripped them a new one for lying in his name.

Lie away you filthy bastards. I'm onto your BS and I'm going to knock you around every time you send me this crap in the mail.

Let me suggest one more thing. If you want to turn your backs on science, then I highly recommend you stop going to the doctor to fix your ailments. Stick to prayer and see how far that gets you. The more you try to chip away at what science stands for, the more likely it is that the quality of health care and technology in this country will crumble like dirt in your hand. You are in essence, paving the way towards the United States of Dumb.

(http://lafamilyforum.org/)

Send all complaints to
Louisiana Family Forum
655 Saint Ferdinand St
Baton Rouge, LA 70802
or call them up
(225)344-8533

Read more about these nutjobs at Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Family_Forum

The LFF is also a huge Bobby Jindal supporter. I have encountered a phone survey from the LFF with questions geared towards socially conservative issues and whether or not I held a favorable opinion of Bobby Jindal.

Teen shot while TPing a house

This story is why I'm not sold on the notion of using guns to protect your home and property.

I heard it on the local news and don't know all of the specifics. I'm not sure what town this occurred in either. Here's what I do know.

A few teens were toilet papering some guy's house. It was very early in the morning. The home-owner thought they were trying to break into his garage. Well he grabbed a shotgun and fired away. He hit a 14 year old in the chest, abdomen, and lower extremity. At this point, there is no information about what charges are going to be pressed.

I understand the need to protect yourself and your home. The problem is, people with guns are arguably a little on the trigger happy side. Gun enthusiasts always boast that they are responsible with their firearms. It's not the firearm that worries me. It's the brain of the guy or gal holding the firearm that seems to be the problem. Fear dictates your perception. Plain and simple. It sounds as though this home-owner wanted to shoot first and ask questions later.

I've been TP'd before. Kids scatter when you turn on the lights. I never got the impression anyone was breaking into the house. We let the dog loose. We might grab a kid by the collar and call his parents. What we didn't do was fire away into the night at anyone.

If gun enthusiasts weren't so damn trigger happy, I wouldn't be so supportive of gun laws. If I'm not sure and I'm holding a gun, I err on the side of caution. Of course, I'm not trigger happy.

Bush Family Dinner Commercial

A commercial has been on the air over the last few years and only seems to play late at night. It starts with an image of President GW Bush on a stage surrounded by listeners. One audience member, a young woman, asks a question about if the Bush family ate together around the dinner table, hinting at values surrounding families who spend time together. Bush jokingly says something along the lines of only eating at the dinner table so as long as his mom wasn't the one cooking.

Then Barbara Bush comes on the screen, obviously not laughing. She talks about how families who eat around the dinner table together have children who are less likely to smoke, use drugs, or drink alcohol.

What? Are you kidding? Who are you talking about again?

A lot of good those dinner table values did for those two screw ups. They picked the wrong family to serve as an example. GW was an alcoholic and rumored to have used cocaine. Jeb is also no saint.

Autism Wackos

Just saw Jenny McCarthy on a late night talk show. Decided to bitch about these crazies one more time. Maybe you could pass my kind words on to them when you get a chance. Pretty please?

Listen kiddies. As long as you keep going on and on about this "strong" link between autism and vaccines, you'll continue to do a great disservice to the men and women actually working on finding any one of the many possible actual causes. Get off your little bandwagon and let the CDC and the AMA get down to business. For crying out loud, you've convinced grandpa McCain that there's a strong link too. That boy aint right. You've got senility on your side now. Yeesh. Quit playing mean tricks on grandpa. And what's up with the Mc/Mc in the last name of both of these idiots? Coincidence? Which Mc- is next? Jenny, girl, stick to the whole nude model thing so I can beat off to you again. You can keep blowing this autism nonsense out your ass, but that's all it amounts to. Remember how she told Howard Stern about her fart fetish? Makes sense now doesn't it? Go away, go away, go away crazy lady!!! All of a sudden these blonde bimbos have causes and want to be experts about something. Pam has PETA and Jenny is going with autism.

(insert multiple expletives here)

"Fibromyalgia is real" commercial

Yeah. I know it's real. Who told you it isn't? What the hell is the point of your commercial? The medical community accepts fibromyalgia as a diagnosis. Anyone who tells you it isn't real obviously doesn't have a degree in medicine. Here's the kicker though. Fibromyalgia is a diagnosis of exclusion. That means we've exhausted all other investigations looking for another diagnosis, including any kind of somatization disorder. It really could be all in your head. Yes. That is an actual diagnosis too. Yeah it's unfortunate that you're in so much pain. There is no easy set of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of fibromyalgia.

If you want to diagnose yourself, skip the trip to the doctor and deal with it on your own. If you want to know what's going on with you, docs are probably going to be able to figure it out. Sure there are some piss poor physicians out there who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground. Most of the time, however, they are on the level. Don't fight them tooth and nail when they tell you a professional opinion. Fibromyalgia is not an easy diagnosis to make.

What is wrong with this country???

Yes I have met patients with this diagnosis. I've listened to them and even know a few things that have worked to help relieve some of their pain.

A Useful Link
Diagnosing and Treating Fibromyalgia in a Patient With Rheumatoid Arthritis.

• Jane Fonda Slip Up

Who cares if Jane Fonda said cunt on tv? I'm all for getting rid of censorship on television. Let people say these words and forget about playing the tippy toe game. I can't stand watching a movie that's been sissified by the censors. The things they say make absolutely no sense and we can always tell that the words we hear don't match the lips. It's bad enough that censors block these words out. It's even worse that this kind of stuff is considered newsworthy. Take away the shock value naughty words have by breaking television language wide open. Then maybe parents will be a little more involved with teaching their children what's right and wrong instead of hiding it from them. I sure as hell don't want to live in Disneyworld, USA. Do you?

• Conservatives still debate Reagan deficit?

Can you believe there are conservatives out there who argue that Reagan did not leave a deficit?

Pick up an encyclopedia why don't ya? I own three different sets of them and all mention the huge deficit he left. I also have access to a little thing called the public library. What? You think it's some kind of liberal conspiracy? It's not like I looked it up on the internet.

These kinds of conservatives are beginning to resemble mental patients with paranoid symptoms. Schizo. Yeesh.

• Eli Stone On Shaky Ground

The first episode of the show Eli Stone featured a story about a woman taking a vaccine company to court over a mercury/autism claim. There isn't a proven assocation between the preservatives and autism, but the episode portrayed it as such ending in the company cutting a deal with the mother. At the end of the episode, they put up a black screen with white text with a disclaimer that the story was fictional, that the association has not been proven, and information is available at the CDC web site. What? You can have a completely fictional yet controversial and incorrect story line and get away with airing it as long as you cover your ass with a silly disclaimer? I guess you can only expect underhanded goings-on from people who try to revive George Michael. This show stinks of hidden messages. Faith?

Let's talk about the mercury/thimerosal autism association crazies. Look, scientists have studied it and can't find a statistically significant connection. Science showed that the Earth wasn't flat. The world accepted it. The people jumping all over vaccines causing autism are just as hell bent with their cause as the people who don't believe in evolution. The science says otherwise. I could go through all of the data, but the one thing you need to consider is that the preservative was taken out and no impact was seen in autism cases. Oh, that's right. There's a huge cover up behind the science. If you don't get the answer you want, bitch, moan, and groan about it being a conspiracy until somebody kisses your ass. Americans have become the poster children for conspiracy theories. There are people that say there is a connection and I say those people probably can't sit down with you and have an in depth discussion on live attenuated vaccines, inactivated vaccines, toxoid vaccines, or component vaccines, let alone discuss the immunology involved. I challenge any one of you skeptics to do just that, and yes, I want it in essay format, not internet rant format. I want to know you are able to organize the information and understand it. Doctors can. Shouldn't I expect you to if I want to take you seriously?

How about you use those noggins and start thinking of other causes? You know, all the crap we eat, all the pollution in air and water, and let's not leave out genetics. We're surrounded by things that can harm us. Think about how people, including yourself, dispose of batteries, televisions, and computer parts. If you were as passionate about finding a cause as I think you'd want to be, you would be turning over every rock in search of a reason and trying to remedy the easy stuff first. If you can't find something in one place, you probably need to go looking somewhere else. As a medical professional, that's what I will be telling my patients in a much calmer and more charming tone. Who taught you how to look for things? What in the hell happens to these people when they lose their keys? Let's be a little systematic in our search. There's being reasonably skeptical about corporations and then there's having your head completely up your arse. The idea that we all believe our own truths is the real problem. We all get it in our heads that we believe something and we are uncompromising in nature, so these people will never get it into their heads that any other answer is even remotely possible. The quest to be right no matter what is sickening.

Stop hunting zebras when similar four legged creatures in your area don't have stripes.

Don't have a background in statistics or health care? Don't know what a p value is? People in this country don't seem to have enough education to process information anymore. The medical community is going to be the only group that will be able to find out what's going on with autism. When you allow people like McCain to say there is strong evidence supporting a link with vaccines and autism, you're effectually tearing down the one institution that is willing to find the cause.