Healthcare Reform: How 'Bout It?

It's been a little while since my last political entry, so I figured it was getting to be about time. (I did say I'd get another post up while it was still August - maybe not in those exact words, but close enough!) And with all the insanity buzzing around the very notion of reforming our broken healthcare system here in the United States, I felt like it was time for me to weigh in. (Particularly to honor the recently deceased Ted Kennedy in this case, an admirable politician with high ideals who fought hard for healthcare reform up until his death to brain cancer the better part of a week ago. A sad, troubling time in which to pass on, but his funeral on Saturday was a fitting tribute to in many ways the most important Kennedy family member in American politics.)

Let's start by looking at the heart of the basic problem of healthcare reform. What's wrong with this country? The insurance industry, of course. Even I grew up thinking the basic concept was screwed up. "Really? We pay other people for the promise of helping us with our healthcare, and they do everything they can to avoid paying out? Why are we trying to make money on going to the doctor?" Legally, we place more importance on making sure everybody has to buy CAR insurance than we do making sure people have access to healthcare. We place more value on liability insurance for our vehicles than we do our own national health. (In fact, you can't even be legally issued a Driver's License here in North Carolina without car insurance.) Yes, it's safe to say that our priorities are more than a little screwed up. Here in America, we have a $400 billion industry standing as a giant barricade between the people and the healthcare that the rest of the developed world deemed a human right quite some time ago. When faced with a money-wall that dauntingly dense, corporations that have indeed placed prices on human lives - lobbying Congress like there's no tomorrow, keeping as many politicians as deeply in their pockets as possible from both parties - those of us fighting for reform face a seemingly unbeatable beast. And it's imperative that we - not only as moral creatures who care about others than ourselves, but as human beings in general - defeat this monster birthed by our greed.

Back in 2007, documentary filmmaker Michael Moore's Sicko highlighted the serious problems of this corrupt industry and made a strong argument for public healthcare. Over 40 million Americans are uninsured. Moore covered this, along with the focus on profits for shareholders at insurance companies - talking with former employees, who discussed the cost-cutting lengths they'd go to in denying service. (In short, even having insurance is no guarantee of actual healthcare. Their end goal is to take your money and give you as little back as possible for it - ideally nothing at all. It's a crooked system in its very conception.) He also looked at the right's framing their opposition of healthcare reform and nationalization as a Cold War era style battle against Communism, appealing to the Baby Boomer generation that actually responds to this kind of fear propaganda. Two years later, here we are seriously fighting for healthcare reform with a historic moderate president in office keen on mopping up long-term right-wing political mistakes, and the right's attacking reform through exactly the means Moore brought up. He even found that the origins of the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973 were rooted in a conversation between John Ehrlichman and Richard Nixon (President at the time) in which Ehrlichman spoke of the HMO system being expanded in a way to focus on profit for insurance companies through giving the public as little care as possible. Nixon - in this, one of the many obviously regrettable conversations he taped - remarked that it sounded just fine to him. He also looked at the healthcare systems in Canada, France, and the UK - all of which are far better than the US's, and far less expensive than this bloated mess our love affair with unregulated capitalism has wrought. (Despite what Libertarians often espouse, the "Free Market" will not "take care of everybody." In fact, from what we've seen repeatedly here when deregulation occurs - and in this case, when we try building a for-profit industry on an essential service - the "Free Market" will screw everybody it possibly can given the opportunity.) And this description is merely the tip of the iceberg - Moore addresses the problem in his documentary far better than I can in a blog post, but I'm taking a crack at it regardless. Typically, the far right has written the contents of the documentary off, as they're not exactly shy about their hatred of Moore - in particular because he tends to back up his arguments with facts they can't exactly counter. When you get to the bottom of the matter, the big issue is that healthcare itself is an essential service - the sort of services that the government has socialized virtually all of for a very long time. No essential service should ever be a for-profit industry. We could not run the post office, police, or fire departments as for-profit industries without shutting out a dauntingly large portion of the nation. This is exactly what we are doing with our healthcare system.

The Republicans, Michael Steele's proclaimed "Party of No," have NO interest in the future of this country or the quality of life for the average American. (No reform, No empathy, No intellectual honesty. We're seeing a veritable "Let's run this shit into the ground!" mentality blossom in this George W. Bush/Sarah Palin era where incredibly ignorant fringe politics are considered mainstream. Opposition for opposition's sake.) This is a point that they have both established and hammered to death since this administration took power earlier this year. And with the extremely high deficits forecast for the future, they'd like now more than ever to shut down all nonmilitary government spending (And the military takes up an inordinately large part of our spending as a result of the travesties the previous administration pushed us into abroad. There absolutely shouldn't be any of the buzz we still hear here and there about a potential war with Iran, either. If the chaos around the recent stolen election there shows anything, it's that their leadership is definitely corrupt, but the people? Absolutely not. And if we attack Iran, it's the people who suffer the most. They are not our enemies, but we will be making them into them and giving them every reason to hate us if we attack them.) in the name of reducing the deficit. (An issue they curiously didn't care about with our trainwreck of a previous president, who cast us headfirst into a deep fiscal well as a nation. They'd rather put all the focus and blame on Obama as though he were responsible for the numerous terrible decisions made by the Bush administration.) Of course, this is also a completely unrealistic concept that they like to cling to because a government that cannot spend money is a crippled, ineffective government. And if they could shut down the Obama administration's spending, that would ensure the collapse of their support and give the insanely far right another opening to pursue election as their party's disturbing ideologies continue to slide further from mainstream acceptance. They talk about "reform" every now and then, but offer up nothing of value, deeper in the pockets of the insurance companies than even the Democrats. For them, this is all about "defeating" Obama with dangerous fringe politics and the inciting of fear, with the incredibly ignorant Sarah Palin (Who seems to lower the glass ceiling another inch every time she opens her mouth.), hateful Rush Limbaugh, and openly deceitful Fox News (Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly as standouts) at the forefront. If these people win with their politics of hate, fear, ethnocentrism, incitement of violence, and class warfare (With the rich deified and the poor vilified - after all, "If you're not rich, you're just lazy!"), this country has no future.

While numerous lies have been told about healthcare reform - all by people who haven't actually read the bill, and tend to come up with "It's too long to read!" as the best of their flimsy excuses - one in particular has stood out in recent weeks, made especially popular by Sarah "Dingoes/gubmint/Good healthcare ate/tried to eat/might eat in the future/does a concept have an appetite? my political prop/grandpa/baby with Down's Syndrome/normal baby that I also use as a political prop!" Palin. She claimed in a Facebook post (The real blogging outlet for all serious politicians who resign halfway through their only term in elected office out of personal narcissism. The same page has been full of all kinds of ugliness toward the Kennedy's since Ted Kennedy's death as well - representative again of how low her followers' political discourse is, if you can even really call it that.) that the government would begin forming these so-called "Death Panels" to determine who would live or die, and suggested rather blatantly that she would be forced to stand before one in order to justify her child with Down's Syndrome's existence. This, of course, is based in this meme-like claim from the right that universal healthcare will take away our freedoms and choice in regard to our healthcare, that not only will we not be able to choose our own physicians, but that there will be forced abortions and mass killings of the elderly once it's no longer "cost effective" to keep them alive on things like life support or to pay for expensive medical equipment in general. The thing is, that's the exact opposite of universal, socialized healthcare - specifically because it's a program designed to operate at a loss, funded by taxpayer dollars like all other essential services, because the private sector can't do a better job providing these services. In fact, the "Death Panels" spoken of already exist in many capacities - sure, they're not forcing anybody to abort their Down's babies, but they sure as hell are looking for every excuse they can to abandon their clients, citing any "preexisting condition" they can to drop coverage and justify not paying for things as so to avoid taking losses. There may not be a "bureaucrat between us and our doctors" like they claim with nationalized healthcare, but we've certainly got businessmen with profit incentives behind denying healthcare coverage between us.

Who put all this "Death Panel" talk in Sarah Palin's head? None other than Betsy McCaughey. On the last Daily Show, Jon Stewart took her to task on her criticism of end-of-life counseling and claims that the healthcare bill makes it mandatory. She had the bill right there in front of her on the show, and still could not back up her claims with anything in the bill. The claims she's made stemmed from her twisting her own misinterpretation of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel's writings on making the most ethical medical decisions about organ transplants when supplies are low into claiming that he was advocating the rationing of healthcare based on age and disability. (And from there, Sarah Palin took that to a whole new level of stupid, and ta-da! Death Panels.) Ultimately, McCaughey's proven herself to be a very unreliable source of commentary on the issue of healthcare reform, writing from a perspective well established as being in no way rational or objective - geared instead toward giving the Republicans ammunition with which to sink legislation aimed at improving the American people's quality of life.

Even when McCain made some halfhearted efforts to defend Obama and the administration at a town hall meeting last week, we saw an audience ultimately filled with the kinds of daunting ignorance and hate that Palin spent their campaign last fall whipping up. And with things like that Facebook post intended to incite, she continues to do so alongside with Fox News. These are the kind of dangerously radical far right wing people that actual conservatives should have stepped up to and quieted as they started to get rowdy instead of gorging themselves on the adulation of the racist and ignorant. A political party that now builds itself on ignorance and hate has no future and is no better than the enemies it claims exist around the world seeking to destroy us. Their platforms these days are largely constructed in an unsustainable manner to cater to the last people who need the government looking after their interests, while shutting out those who need assistance the most, with the usual "bootstrap" excuses, as though every problem in this country can be solved by "hard work." (And accusations of "laziness.") A very popular right-wing myth that they - in all their corporate love - have helped to successfully make a myth.

Also getting media attention as of late is the stepping up of comparisons between Obama and Hitler. While you'd think this might have come from the same crowd shrieking about "socialism" (See: Surrogate terminology for racism-derived anger in no way socially accepted as a form of expression anymore, like the constant focus on Obama's "Hussein" middle name throughout the election, in many of these cases.) and "Getting government out of my Medicare!" (Despite Medicare being a government program and nothing but.), it didn't. (Not that they don't enjoy seeing that kind of rhetoric, of course.) Rather the blatant Hitler comparisons come from a cult of personality of sorts around a man named Lyndon LaRouche. He's a creep, a criminal, a fascist (The actual kind - not what the Republicans mean by the word here.), and a crook, with a long-established history of fixation on linking everything he can to Hitler and the Nazis. Basically, he's the worst kind of cult internet celebrity. There's no sanity or value behind the "contributions" to discourse we get from his followers. (Not to mention people outright shouting "Heil Hitler!" at Jewish people over the healthcare reform issue now. It's both a little scary and beyond ridiculous how the extreme right is trying to label those fighting for a better healthcare system - for that all-important first part of "Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" - as Nazis while themselves invoking the Holocaust in the name of their own brand of ignorance and fear-driven political oppression. For all the talk of "fascism" from the left, while we're seeing fascist mentalities publicly expressed in this country out of fear and ignorance, the left's the last place it's coming from.) Hitler comparisons add nothing of value to a political debate, when you get down to it. All they do is serve to insult all who died in the Holocaust. We've certainly had some terrible people in power over the past few decades - Obama and Clinton are not amongst them - but even as bad as things got under Bush, he didn't deserve Hitler comparisons either. In fact, while we've had quite a few terrible presidents, none of them have anything on Hitler's brand of "terrible." But the Hitler image isn't about a comparison with any kind of basis. It's all about manipulation through McCarthy-esque fear mongering - not unlike what the Bush administration used throughout their years in power following the September 11th attacks in 2001. It's the lowest of the political tactics, the most effective way to counter facts and rationality - with emotion and irrationality. If you can't win on facts or anything reflected by reality or human empathy, you shift gears to focus on bringing out the worst in humanity in the name of your cause.

There are people fighting against healthcare reform saying that so many people don't "deserve" healthcare because they can't afford it in our current broken system. This is downright sociopathic - however, most people who say this have no idea what they're actually saying and lack actual understanding of our problem at its root. There are people worth tearing into over this issue - those who knowingly spread deceit and sow the seeds of rage and fear - but those being deceived by these individuals gain nothing by having their anger met by anger. They may have lost sight of reality after listening to twisted, lying individuals with their own anti-reform agendas to push in their opposition to this administration - elected in the very name of reform - but odds are for all those who won't listen, there are still undoubtedly a few whom reason has a shot at reaching. Antagonizing these people achieves nothing, and antagonizing those who refuse to listen doesn't achieve anything either - rather than acknowledging them, we should remain steadfast in keeping our focus on making our voices heard far more clearly as the masses we are. The right's whipped up a potentially dangerous, vocal minority, but what they amount to is hot air - sound and fury lacking substance and significance. It's with empathy and reason that we can stand against an enraged fringe - in standing against what they do with the methods they use, all they do is serve to vilify themselves.

Another real problem we face is that we're enamored with the myth that "America is this way, it's the way we're SUPPOSED to be, this is the pinnacle of civilization, those who succeed do so by their power and their power alone, all those who fail are lazy and should pull themselves up by their bootstraps, change is bad." Naturally, it's a myth the far right continues to try to sell, drifting further and further from reality. (Frankly, you'd have to fairly out of your mind to think that consumer capitalism is the pinnacle of human civilization. It's insane to think that there's any permanence to where we are now, given that the entirety of history has shown us that there is no such thing as permanence - nor is there such a thing as perfection, though some Republicans seem to take offense to the idea of America's imperfection. Part of the whole narcissistic "patriotism" shtick.) There are some things in this nation we should not uphold - like the insurance system. Its existence is an obstacle to obtaining the kind of humanistic healthcare the rest of the developed world provides their people. We're absurdly obsessed with the concept of an individual's power and the idea that free market capitalism can save everyone and everything, while relying heavily on government-provided services and opportunities on a day to day basis - there's a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance on the part of the conservative "bootstraps" crowd that lives to pat themselves on their back and insist that their every accomplishment was achieved solely because they "worked hard." It's utter nonsense in a society ruled by corporate interest. There is no level playing field - hell, the whole existence experience itself is pretty damn rocky unless you were born into wealth and privilege. (And yet we can't get enough of trying to make dramas about how hard it is to be a rich white teenager on TV here. Pretty hilarious.) It's in their interest that this "free market" delusion remain popular, since it makes it easier for them to avoid proper regulation and more effectively fight off competition. Even the insurance industry itself has no real competition, and there isn't much inter-company competition, as they're all focused on the same goal - not one that results in healthcare being treated like the human right it is.

What does all this say about us? We on the left (Or frankly, all of us left of dangerously far right on our arbitrary political spectrum) got plenty ugly when Bush was in the White House. But we played NICE compared to the far right now. Since Obama made it to the general election and even more since his successful election to the office of the president, the racists have come out of the woodwork in this country, reminding that despite how far we've come, we haven't really come anywhere near as far as we should have. We have prominent political thought in a major political party that still harbors and feeds racist thought, all in an era where we've seen Republicans claim for years that we have a "post-racism" society where we no longer need important programs like Affirmative Action. (Naturally, they're completely wrong and they've only proven just how wrong they are to a scary degree in the past year.) But while racism is absolutely a big factor in all of this, it isn't the whole picture. Our conservative-leaning media (Fox News now terribly being the most popular 24-hours news network in America, they have no room to claim there's a "liberal media" in any sense. Their accusations only played a big part in further drifting away from objective journalism and into profit, sensationalism, and fear-based territory where there were always "two sides" to every story, and where the "left" and "right" had pundits being dragged onto TV to duke it out over every issue with zero real journalistic regard for where the actual truth lies. This is the kind of journalism that led to Walter Cronkite passing on deeply saddened by the pathetic state our newsmedia has sunk to.) openly works to keep the public misinformed now, with their owners (In Fox's case, the openly crazy-far-right Rupert Murdoch) having their own narratives they want to press upon the public. The newsmedia has failed us and helped to break this country.

As much rage as we get over "socialism," these McCarthy-esque claims are being made by people who have no idea what actual socialism is - and those who do are simply lying to manipulate older generations with whom McCarthy style paranoia strikes a nerve. The Republicans and their cable news network took this nation in a very dangerous direction with Bush, and now that they're out of power, they're hellbent on doing whatever they can to tear down whatever hope we have left of real change and reform away from the terrible things they represent. Unfortunately, we have no real leftist, progressive political presence on the national stage in this country. (Dennis Kucinich is probably the most progressive Congressman we've got, and even he's just one representative in the House.) Instead, we have a somewhat moderate right-leaning party in the Democrats, in which corporate lobbyists have taken a depressing amount of control, and then we have a dangerously far-right fringe party in the Republicans, completely in the pockets of the interests of corporations and the wealthy.

As for real healthcare reform, however you look at it, unless the Democrats stop trying to court the Republicans - who've made it clear that they want no part in real reform - and fight to push through a major overhaul of the system with a strong public option, we're not going to get anywhere near as much change as we need. (Though I would absolutely love to be wrong. PLEASE prove me wrong, Congress.) At this point, even something incremental and some real regulation of the corrupt insurance industry would be welcome, but until we start to study the healthcare systems in Canada, the UK, France, Scandinavia, and most of Europe in general, we're not going to get the real overhaul that we need. During the Bush years, "bipartisanship" meant pushing Democrats to vote for Republican legislation. Now during the Obama years, the very concept of bipartisanship is sadly essentially dead thanks to terrible, ignorant individuals leading the Republican party. When they cannot win on logic, rationale, and honesty - and they even tried to make "empathy" into a dirty word during Sonia Sotomayor's historic Supreme Court confirmation hearings (Implicit was that her sympathies should lie solely with the rich, white, and conservative, serving the same function as Bush's Supreme Court justices, Roberts and Alito. The conservatives seem keen on the Supreme Court being a last stop to forcibly ensuring a backwards status quo, rather than making the difficult decisions without a blatant right-wing slant.) - all they have left is fear and threat of violence. This is a political party encouraging oppressive values, and whipping up the absolute worst in America in what - in any sane reality - should be the beginning of the end of the party's political viability. It's time we start using our hearts and brains and move toward a more empathetic - and less greedy - national philosophy, toward a future with stronger left-wing and moderate politics, away from the right, which hasn't served this nation well. And away from the corporate kings who essentially rule the nation in so many ways and have broken our political system. A great first step would be in continuing to push for public healthcare for the masses - competition and regulation the corrupt insurance industry has long needed. For the good of the people.

Healthcare reform was a major theme at Ted Kennedy's funeral on Saturday. The Lion of the Senate was known for fighting the good fight for the right causes and not backing down. Once he died, the most disgusting people in this country began to verbally dance on his grave across the internet, and Republicans who respected him - including John McCain - began to try to politicize his death in their favor, claiming that in this one case, he would have backed down, given in, and compromised with them. Despite the fact that this is not what he was known for, and the last thing he would have done - and they know this. They knew his death would be politicized - and as one of our most important politicians of the 20th and early 21st centuries, that's only natural - but not in the direction they wanted it. (Rather, his death deserves to be politicized as he wanted it to be politicized - in fighting all the harder in his name to achieve his life's goal. He may not be on the Senate floor to cast his vote when the time comes this fall, but he'll be there in spirit.) So instead of being honest, they went on to disrespect him, claiming that were he still alive, he would have done exactly what he wouldn't have, just to continue their push against his own proclaimed life's cause. A worthy cause for one of our most important and respectable politicians. But the way the right's handled his death in trying to use it in a push against healthcare is downright sleazy. You'd think that out of respect, they'd avoid addressing Kennedy's passion for it, knowing that he was an opponent who wouldn't back down in the face of their fear mongering. But instead, they chose to go to another low.

This is where we are as a nation. Over one of the most important human rights. You're sorely missed, Ted.

Double-Edged Optimism

Hey, look! Two and a half weeks later and another blog post! TWO posts in ONE month? Now that's something to celebrate. (On the upside, despite my lack of regular posting, I added an update to my novel info on the right column here to at least provide more of an indicator of progress. And I HAVE been productive despite how slow I've been here lately. Last ten chapters and epilogue, and then it's time to start chucking bricks through agents' windows. (Metaphorically, of course.))

At any rate, we're less than a month from the autumnal equinox, so we've arrived at last in the final weeks of summer! Summer has a track record of being a slower blogging period for me, so I should be getting back to business on this front more soon. (Especially once I've begun the agent querying process, since I'll effectively be laying the groundwork for my second novel at that time, and that tends to take longer and is generally less intensive than the main writing and editing work.) Plus, with the new TV season beginning next month, that always provides some decent pop culture babbling fodder.

Getting down to business, as some may recall, I blogged about optimism and its seeming apparent health benefits not quite half a year ago. You've all developed an appetite for my science posts by now, haven't you? Of course you have. (YOU DON'T GET A CHOICE.) Anyway, the short of it is that optimists lead longer, healthier lives than pessimists, according to University of Pittsburgh researchers. As a cynic, I was a smug jerk about the whole thing. (It's contractual.) HOWEVER! Nearly half a year later, I get to enjoy contradicting that last post (Implicitly smugly) courtesy of a recent study by Canadian psychologists.

The power of positive thinking, you say? NOT SO! The power of frustrating failure to delude one's self! We all knew that self-affirmation is a pretty weak concept to base self-improvement around - it doesn't matter how much time you invest in complimenting yourself if you don't think much of yourself, and frankly, all you're doing then is lying to yourself since you don't really believe what you're saying. The root of the problem is being ignored. But hey, who's to say you have to love yourself? You can be a real jerk sometimes, y'know. If anything, the world's far too full of people infatuated with themselves. (America's especially guilty of this problem.) It might just be better, I postulate, not to worry about loving or hating yourself, but rather finding a comfortable neutral ground: you are who you are, and self-improvement is all well and good as a concept, but if it doesn't come naturally and organically - if you force it - it's not exactly genuine, is it? Nobody's perfect.

Now that I've gone off on it (in)appropriately, the study found the long-recommended practice of self-affirmation to be flawed. For some people, forcing themselves to be positive about their undertakings or who they are doesn't make them feel any better. (Words are empty if you don't mean them, after all. Nobody can really lie to themselves, at least, barring serious mental illness.) They asked people with high and low self-esteem to repeat "I am a lovable person" to themselves, and those who started with low self-esteem came out feeling worse after having said it. Again, something that obviously stems from their immediately thinking the opposite when pushed to make a statement like that, because it's not what they really believe. And, of course, some of them probably just thought, "This is stupid." (Can you blame them?)

Of course, positive thinking is still thought to be effective when part of a broader therapy program, but the quick cure-all it's been presented as on daytime talk shows, in self-improvement books, magazines, and such? It's useless. Of course, if you already have high self-esteem, you don't need positive self-affirmations and shouldn't be feeding your ego on them. (Cut it out already. You're annoying the rest of us.)

That's it for today - I'll try to get another something up here before September crashes down on us next week. In the meantime, what you should take away from this is that we're not all Stuart Smalley. (And after months of recounts and legal jousting, he's a sitting Senator now.)

An Evolutionary Snapshot of Wizardry

So, it's the dead of summer and it's not always easy to come up with compelling blog material. Naturally, I don't have this problem (Ignore the month-long break I just conveniently took and my generally slower blogging pace in recent months. Those are all optical illusions - all of them.), and that's cause for celebration. (You over there, that jig isn't merry enough! JIG MERRIER!)

Summer's generally the biggest movie season of the year, of course. Blockbuster after blockbuster crams itself into the box office roaring "HEY WATCH ME I'VE GOT EXPLOSIONS YOU LIKE EXPLOSIONS DON'T YOU?" Of course, they're lying, and instead of bringing your childhood to the big screen, they're redesigning the robots and snuffing them out while trying to convince you that Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox can act (Or that we're supposed to care about them because the tabloids are obsessed) or simply making a generic action flick (I'm looking at you, G.I. Joe. Joseph Gordon Levitt gets a pass for his involvement in both having one of the best roles, and for Brick and 500 Days of Summer, the latter of which I'm looking forward to seeing whether in a theater this summer or by DVD release.).

Personally, all I've gone to see so far this summer are Star Trek (Basically classic Star Trek meets big budget Hollywood action. Doesn't live up to the previous works at their best, but it certainly beats their worst and makes for a fun popcorn flick, so it gets my recommendation for some geeky fun.) and Up (While not flawless unless you're wearing the Pixar blinders that many do, still a thoroughly enjoyable and at times genuinely evocative family adventure. The talking dogs were epic.). But the next film I'll undoubtedly be catching yet this summer just hit theaters a few weeks ago: Harry Potter and the Wicked Headcheese. I mean, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. As longtime Spiral Reverie readers (All 3 and 2/3rds of you) know, I've already addressed everything you need to know about the adventures of the always-popular boy wizard. (Particularly in juxtaposition to another popular fictional character presumed to have some super powers of his own. Subpar powers are more like it. Even Aquaman could kick that guy's ass, and all he does is talk to fish!) But this time, speaking as an expert on the subject (No, you can't see my credentials.), I'll be taking you on a guided tour through the evolutionary history of WIZARDRY ITSELF! (No, not the classic PC games. You'll have to go elsewhere for that.) There's a lot people don't know, you see.

"Why should I care?" you ask? Why should you care, indeed. It's only a matter of national security, after all. So why should you care about some pithy little thing like the imminent threat of MAGIC TERRORISTS on US soil!? That got your attention, didn't it? Good, now vote for everybody I tell you to, otherwise you're all doomed. Also taxes are bad, no matter what. Don't stop to think - let alone think critically - where do you think you are, Iraqistan?

Ahem.

We begin our tour of MAGIC HISTORY back where it began: at the DAWN OF TIME! (After the Earth developed an oxygen-based breathable atmosphere and fish began to crawl onto land and evolve. The giant bugs that dominated the globe beforehand had no imagination, the philistines, so let's not even acknowledge them.)

The first wizards were, oh, let's say they were essentially primitive amphibians. But their little three-toed appendages had just enough gripping power for them to pick up pine needles and bits of twigs and wave them around while shouting things like "Bippity Boppity Boop!" The other animals would only pick on them for this, as no matter how you look at it, it wasn't a particularly cool thing to do, even back then. I mean, what were those spazzes thinking? (Do not confuse this with "Bippity Boppity Bacon!" That results in much greater things.)

It wasn't until they found a hidden passage under rock ungh - they didn't have numerical systems back then - that they discovered the convenient fantasy-fulfillment parallel world of MAGIC Savannah. Or at least, that's what they would have called it if language existed back then. But it didn't. This is merely the scientific term retroactively ascribed to the locale. Don't argue with science.

At any rate, Magic Savannah was a pretty gnarly place where the amphib-wiz-kids could LARP in peace until Newt "Newtie" Ginger-itch stumbled upon the entrance in a drunken stupor and invited all his friends. (Interestingly, every era of life on Earth seems to have been ruined by a "Newtie" of some form or another. Funny how that worked out.) By the time they were done with Magic Savannah, the whole place was littered with empty beer cans and excrement. (Don't ask me where the beer cans came from. THESE ARE FACTS.) After that, our poor magical amphibian friends became pretty despondent and gave up on everything that made life enjoyable to become mid-level corporate executives trapped in the dead-end hell of materialistic careerist middle class primitive life. Sure, they eventually got to reproduce in swarms, but without MAGIC what was the point?

Skipping ahead to the next important era, we come to the dinosaur wizards. Unfortunately, dinosaur wizardry continued this wizarding low point for another few million years. Nobody was really interested save for the Ankylosaurs, and even then, nobody talked to them anyway. A couple of Tyrannosaurus Rexes gave it a shot once, but they couldn't very well hold a wand in their little vestigial arms, and that only infuriated them, much to the Ankylosaurs' dismay.

Most other dinosaurs were too busy doing cool things like smoking to take up nerdy pursuits like magic and games like Caves & Carcasses. The latter dinosaurs never even got to reproduce. Whether on Pangaea, Gondwana, Laurasia, or any of the other supercontinents, magic-using dinosaurs were never widely accepted. They couldn't even fit through the entrance to Magic Savannah, which had really begun to stink by then and some of the excrement had begun to develop consciousness. That's never a good sign.

Hit the fast forward button again on that time distortion device of yours and we arrive at the Ice Age(s). (So technically it looks like there were several. At least four major ones, in fact. Ignore your cute children's movies. THEY ONLY LIE TO YOU. You also might want to ignore anything Year One tried to teach you. The box office certainly did.) Watch out, things were a wee bit nippy back then. As such, the mighty mammoths - the ONLY CREATURE OF NOTE at the time(s) - were too busy surviving the harsh conditions to focus on magic. Sure, magic could have helped, or perhaps even transformed the Earth at the time, but technically, the occurrence of ice ages at all could be blamed entirely on the wizards of the time - mammoths who DUAL-WIELDED their magic-wand-tusks and caused quite a few historical disasters. Which ones? None of your business - THOSE ONES.

Time to leap forward again. The rest of history? That's just filler. Boring, dull filler. You can't make explosion-filled movies out of that. Early humans would beat each other to death with massive wooden clubs in mockery of the nerds with their magic powers. Granted, back then, "nerd" was a hard word to pronounce, but cut them some slack, phonetics was a new concept. And let's be honest, fire's only impressive when created through rocks and kindling without any of that fancy shmancy twinkly magic crap. And who needed to fly on those specialized stick bundles then there was that wheel to roll around? That thing was round. Round was a big thing back then too.

By the 18th century, some humans - mostly groups of young women - decided that it was time for them to see what that magic hoopla was all about for themselves. They'd start fires and pronounce words in tones before unthought of, moving their feet in ways deeply wholly unchristian. In fact, they were better dancers than Jesus himself - every single one of them. His envious rage moved the peasantry to burn these magical goody-two-shoes. In America's early days, fun was expressly forbidden, mostly because people with poor imaginations had a hard time figuring out the predecessor to The Hustle. (Doot-doot doot-doot doot-doot doot-doot-doot doot-doot doot-doot doot-doot doot-doot-doot~)

In the 1950s, popular cartoon character Felix the Cat returned to prominence with a "Magic Bag of Tricks." Exactly how you can fill a bag with such an abstract concept dumbfounded audiences across the globe and caused seizures in those overthinking the concept only matched since by a "Pokemon" cartoon in 1997. (Which incidentally also has something to do with a MAGIC RAT. Coincidence? THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THAT THAT COULD BE THE CASE.) Felix's popularity was not to last, of course, but despite that, America's fixation on bags sustained, as James Brown would go on to famously exploit in 1965.

The '80s were relevant only in what a disgraceful era they were for all of humanity, wizards included. While you could dance if you wanted to, you probably would end up leaving your friends behind. (Though some argued that if they did not dance - yes, in fact did not dance - they were probably not your friends to begin with.) Conservative Christian America panicked as its young people sold their souls to the devil over a game of Dungeons & Dragons, the wizardry it involved destroying even a young Tom Hanks. The era also suffered from the fact that Ronald Reagan wasn't a wizard (And this was an era where wizards were only just starting to be socially accepted - allowed to leave the MAGIC closet, so to speak.), but frankly, he probably could've used a wizard in his cabinet to manipulate him like a puppet into making BETTER policy decisions. (Reaganomics? Only a 'muggle' would think that was a good idea.) Sadly, conservative forces have conspired to deny the existence of the recently deceased John Hughes' mid-'80s wizardry teen angst classic, Nedrick McGee, Teen Wizard to the point of purging all evidence of its existence from the internet by the early 2000s. That film was a major step forward in humanizing our wizards the public eye, and there were a bunch of memorable cauldron jokes too, all now lost to the ages. When will you learn, America?

WIZARDS ARE PEOPLE TOO.

BOOSH. (That's the latest time travel sound effect. Learn to live with it, perhaps someday even come to love it.) Now everyone's waving wands about willy-nilly, even non-wizards - wizard-wannabes. (Wizabees, if you're particularly bigoted, but you didn't hear that from me.) The Harry Potter literary craze (WHAT DO YOU MEAN PEOPLE ARE STILL LITERATE) of this past decade helped wizardry to finally achieve full mainstream cultural acceptance in most parts of the globe. Canada made history in 2002 when their parliament voted to finally extend suffrage to their growing Yukon wizard populace. (They live in a tree up there. A MAGIC TREE.) But unfortunately, with growing wizard acceptance has also come an increasing rate of before unheard-of enslavement of "house-elves." At this point, no government has gone as far as to recognize these scrawny little creatures that have an odd habit of abruptly disappearing from movies to never be seen again as humanoid creatures deserving of any particular civil rights or protections. So for now, keep beating those house-elves of yours halfway to death if they don't get the starch in your work coat just right, I guess. (WHY DO I FEEL SO DIRTY WRITING THIS) Otherwise, things still aren't quite peachy-keen for the wizards just yet. Texas and Oklahoma are presently attempting to enact legislation to deport the wizards from their states - keeping their eye on Massachusetts and New Hampshire as their ideal places to ship "these goddamn lib'rul magic freaks." Once again, the bulging veins of angry-Jesus have reared their ugly head. Former presidential candidate and internet libertarian icon Ron Paul has openly supported these efforts, citing, "States' rights. Yep. Let's be 50 different little countries instead of one big one. States can decide if bigotry's okay." Getting back to summer season pop culture, reports indicate that he has yet to recover from his recent appearance in Sasha Baron Cohen's Bruno.

With that, we seem to have come full circle. (Full MAGIC CIRCLE, even. HAR HAR HAR why did I write this joke.) I hope that this has been enlightening for you, because if it hasn't, you just wasted your time reading this. If you take nothing else away from this, it's that we're only a few years away from our first MAGIC world leaders. So you'd best work on overcoming any prejudice you have as so to prepare yourself to vote for our first MAGIC presidential candidate in 2016. Because if you don't, you're probably going to end up being turned into a newt or something. You might not necessary get better after that.