Sutherland: The Intellectual Roots of Trumpism

UnknownThere has been next to no explanation of where the Trump Phenomenon has come from as far as its ideological provenance goes…

We have seen some commentators dismiss it as a classic anti-intellectual right-wing populist movement, akin to the George Wallace and Pat Buchanan campaigns. However, Trump’s actual political antecedents are more complex and interesting, if no less disturbing, than the aforementioned rabble rousers.

I’m thinking of another colorful billionaire with an unconventional personal life, who retired from the business world to take on elites pushing political and economic globalization.

Twenty years before Brexit, Anglo-French tycoon sir James (“Jimmy”) Goldsmith founded a one issue political movement. The purpose of his “Referendum Party” was to force the British government to allow a referendum on whether to cede power over their economy to the European Union, in particular to replace the pound with the euro. Even though Goldsmith and his party were not successful in that election, they crystalized the whole “Euro-skeptic” movement, which culminated in the vote to leave the EU this summer.

Goldsmith at the time wrote a book that reflected his thinking on a variety of issues, “The Trap.”

In it, he particularly focuses on free trade and the costs it imposes on the developed world. He begins the book by explaining how the fall of the Soviet Union and the shift of China to a form of state capitalism meant that four billion people entered the world economy for the first time.

With the ability to shift capital (and the jobs it creates) around the world instantaneously, business will shift production of goods and services to places where wages are lowest. When 47 Vietnamese or Filipinos can be employed for the cost of one person in a developed country like France or the U.S., how could it be otherwise?

Screen Shot 2016-07-27 at 4.04.39 PMAnother point in Goldsmith’s book that I had really not thought about was an unintended consequence of the “Green Revolution” of high- yield crops. This “intensive” agriculture had untold social costs as millions of displaced farm workers fled to urban areas, to say nothing of its impact on the environment. This is what has led to huge sprawling urban centers like Sao Paolo and Johannesburg, as well as the 15 Chinese cities with populations in excess of ten million people each.

I’m not claiming that The Donald has thought through these difficult issues, first raised by Goldsmith in a lecture at the Sorbonne (!) in 1992. However I would not be surprised if Trump’s one man brain trust, young policy wonk/speech writer Stephen Miller, had studied Goldsmith’s platform. (One such prediction,of huge migrations of impoverished people from the chaos and poverty of the Third World, was uncannily prescient.)

Miller was the drafter of Trump’s convention speech, sounding themes that Miller himself had test marketed by working them into warm up speeches he’d made to the audiences at Trump rallies over the last year. Interestingly, Goldsmith’s son Zachary, a Conservative M.P., ran for mayor of London this year. When Zach had the temerity to point out his opponent’s ties to radical Islam, many Left-wing critics said he was a bigot like Donald Trump! Maybe Trump is unwittingly repaying Zach’s late father for giving him some winning issues!

Screen Shot 2016-07-27 at 4.08.44 PMStranger things have happened!  

I was also surprised at the virulence of the criticism directed toward Trump in such traditional conservative publications like The National Review and The Weekly Standard.

It then occurred to me that this is just the latest round in the internecine feud between neo-conservatives and paleo-conservatives, with the latter squarely in Trump’s camp.

Any doubt on this point was resolved by going to the Wikipedia entry for “Paleo-cons.” They now include in their number “Republican nominee “(that’s how current it is!)”Donald Trump” who has embraced the classic paleo-con positions on “rebuilding infrastructure, protective tariffs, securing borders and stopping immigration, . . . and isolationism.” Bruce Wilson, Salon Magazine, 7-16-2016, Nothing happens in a vacuum in politics.

This entry was posted in Dwight D. Sutherland, Jr. and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

92 Responses to Sutherland: The Intellectual Roots of Trumpism

  1. CFPCowboy says:

    On the money. What most people do not understand is that the technology associated with the means of production are owned by the producers, not government. As a result, the plans to a new manufacturing plant can be anywhere in tbe world in 10 minutes. Even countries have to compete.

    • the dude says:

      So the government and NASA had nothing to do with us going to the moon? The internet? You seem to have some selective memory.

  2. chuck says:

    Interesting article. I hope you are right and there is actually a plan, a scheme, an attempt at strategy other than the extemporaneous insults and ad hoc commentary we have seen to this point. The guy (Trump) seems uncoachable. If Mr. Miller borrowed some context from Goldsmith and persuaded Trump to use it, that is a good sign.

    “I was also surprised at the virulence of the criticism directed toward Trump in such traditional conservation publications like The National Review and The Weekly Standard.”

    Sanders and Trump exposed the internecine struggles within both major parties and the efforts of the elites (Politicians and the 4th Estate) at the top to maintain sinecure and power. Ilana Mercer, in her latest tome, “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Construction Deconstructed” sounds, to some extent, like a palimpsest over the writings of Goldsmith. I gotta check it out.

    The recent email revelations afforded us by way of WikiLeaks should surprise no one with even a cursory interest in politics. No doubt, had the Republicans been hacked some of the same chicanery and malfeasance would be assigned to politicians on the right at equivalent levels with the exception of the “Pay For Play” Clinton Foundation. If WikiLeaks unloads emails which expose, what at least I think, are categorical Pay Offs To The Clintons for favors in return from terrorist countries, that is treason. The absurdity of claims from the Clinton Camp of Trump’s transgressions with regards to “National Security” should have been tweeted by Rod Serling.

    My bet, is that those 30,000 deleted emails would disclose indictable offenses serious enough to end Clinton’s quest for the Oval Office and place her in custody.

    • Nick says:

      Jeez…talk about being outta touch!

      First, it wasn’t 30,000 emails; it was more like two or three thousand.

      Second, they aren’t missing, and haven’t been since last September Don’t get out much, huh?

      Third, DoJ is sending these recovered emails to State, who will –per FOIA– will make the work-related emails available to the public. And then, when none of them meet the standard for criminal prosecution, per FBI and DoJ standards, you can start another inaccurate conspiracy theory…

      Fun times!

      • Frank says:

        “Are you so blindly partisan that you can’t admire a good election ground game by someone you don’t agree with politically?”

        It’s not being blindly partisan. It’s having one’s eyes and ears open and being partisan based on what is said and heard. I know people don’t like it when the H-bomb is dropped, but based on your statement, I could say that there were simply blindly partisan people who couldn’t admire Hitler’s good election ground game. There’s nothing to admire about Trump’s ground game and he basically laid that out to everybody when he gushed that he really liked his uneducated base.

        • chuck says:

          ” It’s having one’s eyes and ears open and being partisan based on what is said and heard.”

          Al Franken, you didn’t finish the sentence. Lemme help you out.

          ” It’s having one’s eyes and ears open and being partisan based on what is said and heard in an echo chamber full of my peeps on MSNBC and drowning ourselves in confirmation bias, virtue signaling, self congratulatory bullsh*t and then invoking Hitler for the coda!”

          Godwin’s Law. You are done.

        • Speaking of coherence,what was your point about Hitler and the H-bomb? You kind of lost me there, old sport.

  3. Nick says:

    If you cast your gaze further back in our history, you can find precedent for Trump’s demagoguery: The Fire-Eaters. They might have been the first group of American orators to perfect what has become Trump’s personal style of politics – stirring up class warfare, blatant racism and prejudice, numerous insults and constant innuendo, cheap misogyny and commingling the personal with politics, all of these were first popularly used by the Fire-Eaters.

    Trump and the Fire-Eaters both used those tactics to further divide already fragmented & partisan cultures and press.

    Miller’s personal take on Goldsmith aside, you ascribe far more intellect to Trump than he has ever displayed; he’s barely able to coherently deliver his own thoughts, much less those scripted for him.

    • Dwight D. Sutherland, Jr. says:

      I’m interested in your comments on the “The Fire Eaters”and will read about them because the parallels are striking. On your second point, you confuse intellectualism(i.e.celebration of the intellect) and intelligence. The latter may take the guise of a low,animal cunning but it is intelligence nonetheless. Also, Joe McCarthy had Bill Buckley,Goldwater had Brent Bozell,and John and Robert Kennedy had Arthur Schlesinger,Ted Sorenson,and Richard Goodwin,plus the entire Harvard faculty,as front men,writing speeches and developing policy. Do you think Ted Kennedy ever had an original thought in his life,aside from,”What
      time does the bar open?”Sadly,ideas and eloquence can be purchased.As for Trump’s acceptance speech,it got a seventy-five percent favorable rating according to CNN, borne out by the startling shift in the polls after the Republican Convention. You may have found everything about it repellant in terms of tone and substance,but it was well crafted,well delivered,and(apparently)well received.

      • Nick says:

        Per your response “On your second point, you confuse intellectualism(i.e.celebration of the intellect) and intelligence“… Well, not so much:

        noun: intellectualism
        the exercise of the intellect at the expense of the emotions.
        the theory that knowledge is wholly or mainly derived from pure reason; rationalism.

        See, what you did was to make up whole cloth a definition that fits in with the anti-intellectualism bias of certain right-wing and conservative Republican groups, but has no basis in reality.

        As for…”You may have found everything about it repellant in terms of tone and substance, but it was well crafted and well delivered.”

        And therein lies (a goodly portion of) America’s problem; its acceptance, nay, gleeful celebration and encouragement of, “style” over substance. Seen in that light there is negligible difference between Trump and Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.

        • Dwight D. Sutherland, Jr. says:

          My dictionary(Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary)defines “intellectualism”as “devotion to the exercise of intellect or to intellectual pursuits.” I said it meant the celebration of the intellect.Not much daylight there,Hoss! Are you so blindly partisan that you can’t admire a good election ground game played by someone you don’t agree with politically? Or that someone whose views you find repugnant might,in fact,be mentally competent? For years people like you said Eisenhower was a fool,Reagan was a fool,Bush was a fool,etc.,which raises the interesting question of how they managed to beat you guys in elections if they were such half wits and you were such braniacs?

          • Frank says:

            “Are you so blindly partisan that you can’t admire a good election ground game played by someone you don’t agree with politically?”

            Agreed. A good election ground game will certainly beat any undesired result or solution (can I say solution, Hearne?)

      • Frank says:

        I could place a well crafted, well delivered crap on your doorstep. It would still smell bad and attract flies. Trump placed a well crafted, well delivered crap on your television screen. It sounds to me like what you are saying is the Ted Kennedy’s and Barack Obama’s who give polished speeches are only doing so through good speech writers and that they would speak “Trump” otherwise. You’re full of shi* and you don’t know it. Their speeches might not be as polished without speech writers, but the tone would still be civilized and coherent because they are civilized and coherent. You can pine for the good old days of the grunting cave man all you want. There’s plenty of partially elevated rocks in Utah, Colorado and other areas of the country you can find shelter under

        • Dwight D. Sutherland, Jr. says:

          Given his well known reliance on a Teleprompter and the echoes of Governor Deval Patrick’s words in some of his most highly touted speeches, BHO may not be quite the silver tongued orator you claim.Still, he’s undoubtedly a very bright and well spoken person.Re the late senior senator from Massachusetts,no such claim could be made.Some one who knows the Kennedy family quite well told me there is indeed a Kennedy curse-they’re all morons

          • Frank says:

            Can you explain how the Kennedy Curse is even remotely equal to Donald Trump? I’m not sure you even know what events the Kennedy Curse refers to.

          • Dwight Sutherland,Jr. says:

            The “Kennedy curse” is usually understood to mean all the unfortunate things that have happened to members of the extended Kennedy family. My friend flipped the meaning to point out that the curse is really that their collective reckless and destructive behavior has caught up with them. You can be dumb but can get through life if you have humility. If you combine arrogance and stupidity,however,like the current generation of Kennedys, nemesis will surely follow.

        • Stomper says:

          Dwight, I can easily understand your dislike of Ted Kennedy, the “Liberal Lion” based on your strong conservative leanings. However it would be difficult to rationally question his effectiveness as a legislator. He had an inate ability to reach across the aisle to forge compromise and move the ball down the field. Just a cursory look at laws passed during his years in the Senate would bring you to Kennedy-Hatch, Kennedy-Kassebaum, Kennedy-McCain, and on and on. Yeah, he had serious character flaws but his constituents as well as his colleagues across the aisle respected him and worked with him to forge compromise and legislative progress. Certainly more respect for Kennedy with Republican Senators than respect for, say Ted Cruz with Republican Senators. Orrin Hatch, a staunch conservative, called Kennedy one of the most effective lawmakers in the history of the Senate.

          Interesting piece.

          • Dwight D. Sutherland, Jr. says:

            No doubt about it,there was nobody you’d rather party with than Ted Kennedy! He also was serious about his work. However,with the exception of health care,which he was passionate about(entirely to his credit!),he was incapable of debating the issues. The guy simply wasn’t very bright. See the Roger Mudd interview in 1979,when he announced his challenge to Carter but couldn’t give a cogent reason of why he was running. Look back to the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas hearings,which he completely blew for your side,in no small part because he kept ducking back into the Senate cloakroom for a snort(in the more traditional sense!).Truly the last and the least. Speaking of inviting foreign interference in our elections,what about the Sage of Chappaquiddick’s overture to Yuri Andropov in 1983,through John Tunney (another mental giant!)to get the Russians to help defeat Reagan in the 1984 elections? (A letter confirming this was found in the Kremlin archives in 2009.) Who is the traitor now?

          • Stomper says:

            A wise man once wrote “are you so blindly partisan that you can’t admire a good ground game by someone you don’t agree with politically? Or someone whose views” (or life style) “you find repugnant might in fact be mentally competent?”

  4. chuck says:

    Thanks Nick for your valuable input on those “two or three thousand” emails. maybe you are spending so much time “getting out” you missed the Director of the FBI, when he addressed the nation.

    “The lawyers doing the sorting for Secretary Clinton in 2014 did not individually read the content of all of her e-mails, as we did for those available to us; instead, they relied on header information and used search terms to try to find all work-related e-mails among the reportedly more than 60,000 total e-mails remaining on Secretary Clinton’s personal system in 2014. It is highly likely their search terms missed some work-related e-mails, and that we later found them, for example, in the mailboxes of other officials or in the slack space of a server.

    It is also likely that there are other work-related e-mails that they did not produce to State and that we did not find elsewhere, and that are now gone because they deleted all e-mails they did not return to State, and the lawyers cleaned their devices in such a way as to preclude complete forensic recovery.”

    If you want to believe that the there were only 30,000 or so to begin with they were all “Yoga Class Appointments” and the Tooth Fairy accidentally erased them while Hillary was dodging sniper fire in Bosnia, than that’s ok with me.

    Hillary erased those emails, NOT because they were personal, but because they were indictable evidence of self aggrandizing malfeasance that would remand her into custody.

    By the way, there is no Santa. Sorry to break it to ya.c

    • Nick says:

      Dude – everything you just wrote is inference and innuendo – not a fact in the whole mess. And you put it forth like it means something.

      That’s the Trump mentality in a nutshell.

      Why do you bother?

      • chuck says:

        The Rock that the Liberal church is built on, is WILLFULL IMPERCIPIENCE. It is the sine qua non of Liberal thought. That ability to deny your “Lying eyes and ears” is essential when confronted with actual facts in the real time world that run counter to your emotional attachment to the Liberal Narrative.

        Here, in a country where MSN reports that 56% of Americans (Some, of whom, must be Liberal.), think Hilary should have been indicted for her actions regarding the email scandal, Nick, gives us a perspicuous, yet preposterous answer to the FBI Investigation and the certainty that, indeed, there were over 60,000 emails to begin with.

        My comment was not “inference” it was implication and extrapolation based on the FACTS discovered by the FBI.

        Here is what I “infer”. I think Nick, when confronted with facts he doesn’t like, clicks his heels together and says three times, “Lena Dunham is really hot. Lena Dunham is really hot. Lena Dunham is really hot.” Then, he can forget about the FBI and move on to Climate Change.


        • long time listener first time caller says:

          Au contraire, homme fou. Nick comes across as a rational observer.

          Apparatchuck, when confronted by facts that don’t fit your lock-step narrative, you click your heels together and say three times, WILLFULL IMPERCIPIENCE, WILLFULL IMPERCIPIENCE, WILLFULL IMPERCIPIENCE.

          Then you can move on with your mental masterbations and spew your tired racist venom all over us again and again.

          • James Comey says:

            Hey, Nick and long time listener, listen up dumbazzes, there were over 60,000 emails and just because you can attack the messenger in lieu of verifiable evidence to the contrary, doesn’t mean your right, it means you are both stupid.

            Again, there were over 60,000 emails and Clinton and her lawyers, erased around 30,000.

            If your wrong, just admit it, or, continue to look like idiots in the public square.

            If we put the paddles on Jim Jones and he came back to life and told you to drink the kool aid, you guys would dive into the barrel.

          • Stomper says:

            Says the guy with sugar stained lips and tongue.

          • Stomper says:

            Chuck/James, I can’t speak for Nick or long time guy but I’m not contesting that there were 60k total and 30k erased. I’m just questioning your leap of faith that the existence of erased emails is de facto proof that mere erasure translates to hiding criminal intent.

  5. chuck says:

    The Democrat claim that Trump’s rhetoric is divisive, coming after 8 years of “gas on the fire” rhetoric from the Liar In Chief is a hell of a stretch. Cities have burned, cops killed, innocents tried unjustly and the motive for all this acrimony, is exciting the base in an effort to continue the insanity.

    The rhetoric on the left, has inspired violence at Trump rallies, filmed again and again. It is the Left that sends thugs into the streets to intimidate and violently assault those with the temerity to disagree with Liberal/Fascist policy and initiatives. The tip of the spear, for the de facto brown-shirt-thugs is BLM.

    If in fact, taken out of context, your opinion of divisive rhetoric from those who would defend the 1st amendment, the right to assembly and the Constitution that would be one thing, but Trump is entirely the creation of the Left and his rhetoric is an ad hoc answer to the coming Progressive Hieronymus Bosch painting we will all be living in, if we keep putting Fascists in the White House.

    • Nick says:

      Again – all opinion on your part, no facts; just your basic trolling.

      Enjoy yourself now – when Hillary takes the WH and appoints 2-3 more moderate to liberal SCOTUS seats you’ll probably gork out.

      Can hardly wait.

      • Dwight Sutherland says:

        I wondered where Harley was this week. Apparently he’s now into identity theft and has appropriated poor Nick’s online identity to put forward his message.

        • chuck says:

          Brutal. Just brutal…

        • Harley Lies for FREE When the Truth Pays $1,000,000 says:

          No, I think you’re wrong. Even though Nick doesn’t come across well, he still sounds like a MENSA compared to Harley!
          And you know where Harley is; he’s busy running his international conglomerates.

        • Harley says:

          No southy….the campaign is going great.
          Hillary is a solid winner in Colorado (thought to be
          a battleground state) and is moving ad dollars to
          other states.
          She will carry that state by 7 points which is huge.
          No I’m not nick…hahahaha….he writes pretty good and as you know if hearne knew it was me he would either
          censure or hold franks comments.
          I’m just sitting back and watch the old guys on kcc
          fight it out.
          Didn’t read your article…too much old stuff. Things that happened before the world changed.
          So Harley will make his few comments (time is important…I have bigger blogs with 10x the audience
          of kcc (all 10 of the readers) so I understand politics
          and understand that you/glaze/chuck/kerowacky will
          be voting for the loser in this campaign.
          After the incredible DNC convention and the speeches
          that were praised by many many republicans from the bush teams especially the speech by Mr. Kahn I will
          just plan on working on the dem campaign to get
          Hillary into the white house.
          Also,I’m starting to see mr. dump breaking down.
          He’s got 100 days of unscripted speeches to dig himself into a bigger ditch. And that should be enough to give
          Hillary her win.
          Read my preconventions predictions…all occurred.
          And donalds preoccupation with our adversary, although thank god theres no hot war, mr. putin could
          be the one who wins it for Hillary.
          Just sitting back…enjoying the fun election but knowing that again Hillary wins.
          As far as polling, Hillary is going to beat dump in the
          Midwest (mich/Wisconsin/ohio/penn/etc).
          And southy, as a campaign guy was that not a brilliant strategy by the dems at the convention how they unraveled trump in 4 days. Brilliant way to make his
          convention look sloppy and dark.
          BAD CONVENTION”.
          nOW I WOULD PAY TO EVEN SEE THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
          Add insult to injury…pence said cigarettes don’t
          cause cancer. Find me a doctor who agrees with that statement…Please!
          Looking good.
          Oh..Hillary pulled campaign money out of Colorado.
          They feel they have that state won and are moving’
          700K to other state.
          Notice Hillary is only 4 points down in Georgia…a state Romney won by 50 points in 2016.
          Portends really bad things for repubs.
          I’ll be checking in but it’s stupid to waste time on
          a bunch of hair pieced old men.
          I have better things to do old men.
          But I will still check in.
          Hillary 2016.
          And god bless the young muslim Mr. Kahn who gave
          his life for America and received a medal for his
          heroic actions while glaze and wislon and southy
          and hearne ducked the war never sighned up to
          protect our nation. Good luck. Headed to chiefs
          day at practice facility.
          take care.
          the great Harley

  6. Harley says:

    southy….10K is lunch money for you.
    Ready to make your bet real?
    We can go back to 1800 slave days….but what matters is today…right now…andal
    your b.s. is old and dusty.
    Get updated old people. Who cares about the 80’s.
    Your heros have been pedophiles and loved hookers and young boys……
    Lets getthis bet on slowpoke!

  7. chuck says:


    “Sugar stained lips and tongue”?

    Just in this thread alone, I have readily admitted that Trump seems “uncoachable” and that if hackers attacked Republican servers, they would find the same type of skullduggery as was found on Democrat servers. I have consistently trashed and I mean TRASHED Bush-Cheney for that administration’s galactic blunder in the Mid East, which to this day, we suffer the consequences. I have pulled no punches for any politician, public or private figure, whom I though deserved some unwanted attention. Your comment, in my opinion, says more about you than me, or, you just havn’t read my comments. That’s fine, but again, even here, where you can see what I posted, you’re inclination is to generalize and disregard prima facie evidence which refutes the “stained lips” comment. I am not offended in any way, but facts are important and I have in the past, expected more from you than flat liners like Nick, Harley and Frank.

    “I’m just questioning your leap of faith that the existence of erased emails is de facto proof that mere erasure translates to hiding criminal intent.”

    Destroying material evidence during an ongoing Federal Investigation is Obstruction of Justice. period. I stated above, that I believe, that she erased those 30,000 emails, NOT because they were of a personal nature, but, because they were evidence of indictable offenses. She absolutely committed a crime when she erased the emails, why is it such a stretch to believe that that same action was in defense of more criminal activity?

    The Clinton Foundation is a pay for play cover for political favors, self aggrandizement, and distribution of power. This is the real issue in my opinion and my opinion is based on the volcanic amount of smoke coming produced by the Foundation. There is fire in there, burning hot and burning hard. The Clintons are consummate politicians with connections no one but Bernie Sanders probably understands. Can the Clintons put out the fire, before the smoke clears?

    We will see.

    As to the

    • chuck says:

      Sorry, a couple of typos, gotta go work.

    • Stomper says:

      Thanks Chuck, Glad you understood that the “stained lips” was relative to drinking your own kool-aid and nothing more. You admitted that you “believe” that erasing emails is evidence of an indictable offense but what either of us may “believe” is fact is often not. What your opinion of “prima facie” is here was clearly not shared by the FBI. Actions in hindsight, or even going forward, that appear less than rational are not the equivalent of criminal. Was maintaining a private server dumb? Yep. Was her intent criminal? IMHO, absolutely not. If doing something dumb was an excluder for the office, nobody could run.

      Yeah, I get it that many, most on your side of the aisle but many on my side as well, feel Hillary appears dishonest and for that reason is undeserving of the office. As she said last night, with regards to “public service” , she was/is better with the “service” part than the “public” part. Perception is usually the reality for voters. In my opinion her entire life has been an example of service to the country. In my opinion she is far, far better qualified for the office than any president, certainly in my lifetime. I thought Ike, and maybe HW Bush, going in, were the best qualified for the office in my lifetime and Johnson was up there as well ( whether or not either of us favor their politics) but she surpasses them all, imho.

      As I’ve written before, we all should define what we see as the role of government and then vote on principles and not personalities. Do you like small government, low taxes, and feel that the private sector/marketplace should determine all outcomes? Or do you feel that government has a critical role and responsibility to play in key aspects of American life? I subscribe to the latter. My example for principles versus personalities would be the 2000 election between Gore and Bush. I thought, and still think, that Gore is a pompous a$$hole. From a personality standpoint, Bush was a far more appealing guy to me. If I was selecting a roommate, co-worker, or spouse for one of my kids ( as if I would be allowed any input) between those two, Bush would be far more acceptable than would Gore. But for someone in the Oval Office to exercise political policy for the country, the moment he got the nomination, Gore was my guy. Government, its’ administration, and application of policy is way too important to make a selection based on personality. All politicians are dishonest but I don’t believe for a minute that Hillary is criminal.

      Chuck, I look forward to debating with you, Cowboy, Dwight, and others for the next three plus months on the election and I’ll try to respect that you hold me to a higher standard than you do Harley. I do have to say however that while he is bombastic and insulting in his style, Harley nails his politics.


      • chuck says:

        Fair enough.

        One final thing, I am no lawyer and I don’t play one on TV, but, if in fact, Hillary and her camp are under investigation for misuse of her email server and emails that might be a risk to National Security and she knowingly erases evidence material to that same investigation, is that not Obstruction Of Justice?

        Maybe some sharp legal mind can enlighten me as to my misreading of the law.

        When the cops are kicking in a coke dealers door while he flushes his product down the toilet, is that action prosecutable? Now I get it, that the cops wouldn’t be busting down the door if they didn’t have other evidence, but, if the DA wanted to, can he not indict that coke dealer for destruction of evidence?

        No sarcasm, honest question.

        I don’t disagree that the Fed has a role to play, but it has become an out of control, behemoth that is in need of much correction. Much correction.

    • Harley says:

      Ditch digger: The dems already have trumps taxes and his emails.
      This is politics. Don’t think they didn’t know they’d be hacked.
      But a single phone call and all of dumps info becomes public.
      And we’ll see how he’s tied into the communists!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  8. chuck lowe says:

    Here is an incontrovertible premise in my opinion.

    The New Amerika hates white people.

    I am not mad, but, an honest review is in order Stomper.

    Lets find our way to the truth.

    Let us pony up stats and opinions.

    Let us review the information from both sides.

    Stomper, let me be clear, in my opinion, America Hates White People.

    At this point, I would like to let the word go forth from this time and place that the lies and legerdemain will not go unchallenged.

    Cool? You can find me some KKK killers of the Mockingbird and I can, go find a watchman.

    Best wishes.

    One more time, the new America, HATES WHITE PEOPLE.

    • chuck lowe says:

      Hating white people is the lubrication that fires the engine of discontent.

      On display, at the DNC, that Hate for the Judeo/Christian ethos is a badge that gets Child-Molesting-rape-hoax-“I fucked my little sister” scum like Lena Dunham a priority spot on the podium.

      Like Michael Brown, the scum bag f*ck, the thug piece of Shi*t, whose mother, who raised a thug – this is the Democrat party.

      The Party that elevates the mother of a low life puke, who was implicated in 2 murders BEFORE he was shot, trying to take a gun from a cop, our new American hero.

      Me, personally, I am totally cool with Lewis Farrakhan. He tells the truth. He hates America. He hates white people and I am sure he is joyous over the dead cops, the assaulted, the raped, the murdered and will continue to tell ethnomasochistic idiots that they should die with a smile on their faces, you know……, slavery.

      I respect, on a cellular level, Black Violence. I have been the recipient of that violence many times. It is no joke. I am lucky to be alive.

      Here is the thing. Will YOU, respect your executioners?

      Neitche counts in real time blood.

    • Stomper says:

      Well, my initial thought is that after having complete control of the system for 240 years, white people now find that their once exclusive rights now have to be shared with non whites. It started out with only white male landowners. Up until very recently in terms the entire history of the country, white males used to elect the political elites. No so anymore. If that’s what you call America hating white people, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion.

      • chuck lowe says:

        That is cool and relevant Stomper. But, in my opinion, there are poor boys like me, so disenfranchised by the Fed, disrespected and laughed at by the ruling elite, who are supposed to disregard the racial hate for whites, endemic from the Fed and the Oval Office, those folks, who see cops die, who see the end of the Rule Of Law, replaced by a tyrant, elected by way of illegal immigration and legerdemain.

        So here is the thing Stomper.

        Me, I don’t give a fu&k about slavery and white privilege. It is all bullsh8t talking points for the Fascist Fu(cks that now are in charge.

        If I had money, I would burn it.

        Your nominee hates the Judeo/Christian ethos.

        Again, let us make sure, that we are clear. The entire world, operates on the invention of White people.

        Or, we can all live in Detroit, or Johannesburg, or, Selma, or, East St. Louis etc etc etc.

        God bless White people and the invention, the energy, the accomplishments afforded to Black Lives Matter, the entire sum of that effort that IQ, that might produce a lemonade stand on a good day.

    • chuck lowe says:

      America HATES, HATES white people.

      It is what it is.

  9. chuck lowe says:

    Let us make sure, we are categorically clear.

    The new America, hates white people.

    It is what it is.

    • Frank says:

      Let us make sure we are categorically clear. That comma you put between, sure, and, we, changed the meaning you were trying to convey. So I don’t believe you were clear, unless you are saying we are a white or “categorically clear” nation.

      • chuck says:

        Get back home to Louis Farrakhanville where the bulls##t and the antelope play. Hanging off of black ball sacks is so comme il faut for you ethnomasochistically motivated poseurs.

  10. chuck lowe says:

    Talk is cheap, one more time, the new America, HATES white people.

  11. chuck lowe says:




    • the dude says:

      Jesus Drumpf, don’t you have some dead soldier’s families or Fire Marshalls to harass?

  12. Frank says:

    Damn Hearne! I guess my Hitler comparison comment that you deleted was on the money.

  13. chuck says:

    Thank a White Male

    Do you like internal combustion engines?

    Thank a few white men. (Jean Lenoir, Nikolaus Otto, Karl Benz, Rudolf Diesel, Gottlieb Daimler, Emil Jellinek, Henry Ford among others.)

    Are you a fan of flush toilets and indoor plumbing?

    Thank white males Alexander Cumming, Thomas Twyford, and Isaiah Rogers

    Toilet paper?

    Thank Joseph Gayetty, W.M.

    How about washing machines and dryers?

    Thank white males Alva Fisher and J. Ross Moore.

    “When you’ve got your health, you’ve got just about everything” ran the tag-line in a famous Geritol commercial from the 1970s, and the guys we most have reason to be grateful for are undoubtedly those who’ve developed the medical practices and the drugs and devices that have transformed our lives over the past hundred fifty years.

    Before the turkey gets carved, it’s worth taking a moment to remember a few of these brilliant, persistent, and lucky men, and recall their accomplishments. Even when they’ve won Nobel Prizes in Medicine, their names are virtually unknown. They’re not mentioned in the Core Curriculum or celebrated by Google on their birthdays.

    If you ever had surgery, did you opt for anesthesia?

    If so, thank a few more white males, beginning with William Clarke in New York and Crawford Long in Georgia who both used chloroform in minor surgeries in 1842. A paper published four years later by William Morton, after his own work in Boston, spread the word. Ether replaced chloroform during the next decade. There are now scores of general and regional anesthetics and sedatives and muscle relaxants, administered in tandem. The first local anesthetic has also been superseded. It was cocaine, pioneered by a Viennese ophthalmologist, Carl Koller, in 1884.

    Ever take an analgesic?

    Next time you pop an aspirin, remember Felix Hoffmann of Bayer. In 1897, he converted salicylic acid to acetylsalicylic acid, much easier on the stomach. Aspirin remains the most popular and arguably the most effective drug on the market. In 1948 two New York biochemists, Bernard Brodie and Julius Axelrod, documented the effect that acetaminophen (Tylenol), synthesized by Harmon Morse in 1878, had on pain and fever. Gastroenterologist James Roth persuaded McNeil Labs to market the analgesic in 1953.

    Infectious Diseases

    Most Americans today die of heart disease or cancer, but before the twentieth century, it was infectious diseases that struck people down, and children were the primary victims. In pre-industrial England, still with the most developed economy in the world in the late 17th century, 50% of all children didn’t survive the age of 15. With the phenomenal growth of cities during the 19th century, cholera, typhoid fever, and tuberculosis became the leading killers.

    In 1854, a London medical inspector, John Snow, proved that a cholera epidemic in Soho was caused by infected sewage seeping into the water supply. Until then it was thought the disease spread through the air. The sanitary disposal of sewage and the provision of clean water, possible thanks to mostly anonymous metallurgists and engineers — an exception is the famous Thomas Crapper, who pioneered the u-shaped trap and improved, though he didn’t invent, the flush toilet — has saved more lives than any drug or surgical innovation.

    Dramatic improvements in food supply have also had an incalculable effect on health. Agricultural innovations, beginning with those introduced in England in the 18th century, were disseminated globally by the end of the 20th century — the “Green Revolution.” Famines struck Europe as recently as the late 1860s. (The man-made famines of the 20th century are another story.) A transportation revolution made possible the provision of more than sufficient protein, calories, and nutrients worldwide. Needless to say, it was white males who designed and built the roads, canals, railroads, and ports and airports, and the ships, trains, planes, and trucks that used them, and the mines, and then wells, pipelines, and tankers that supplied the fuel they ran on.

    Whatever the merits of taking vitamins and supplements today, no one has to take vitamin C to prevent scurvy, or vitamin B to prevent pellagra, or vitamin D and calcium to prevent rickets. And, for the time being, we all live in a post-Malthusian world. The global population was about 800 million to 1 billion when the gloomy parson wrote his famous book in 1798. It’s now over 7 billion.

  14. chuck says:

    Dr. Snow had no idea what was actually causing cholera. It was Louis Pasteur who gave the world the germ theory of disease, as every schoolchild once knew. Studying the fermentation of wine, he concluded that this was caused by the metabolic activity of microorganisms, as was the souring of milk. The critters were responsible for disease, too, he recognized, and identified three killer bacteria: staphylococcus, streptococcus, and pneumococcus. Nasty microorganisms could be killed or rendered harmless by heat and oxygenation, Pasteur discovered, and would then prevent the disease in those who were inoculated. He went on to develop vaccines for chicken cholera, anthrax, and rabies. Edward Jenner had demonstrated in in the late 1790s that the dreaded smallpox could be prevented by injecting patients with material from the pustules of cowpox victims, a much milder disease. (The word vaccine comes from vaca, one of the Latin words for cow.) Pasteur, however, was the first to immunize patients by modifying bacteria rather than through cross-vaccination.

    A parade of vaccines followed. People in their mid-60s and older can remember two of the most famous: the Salk and Sabin vaccines against poliomyelitis, a paralyzing disease that had panicked American parents in the late ‘40s and early ‘50s. Children preferred Albert Sabin’s 1962 version: the attenuated virus was administered on a sugar cube. Jonas Salk’s inactivated vaccine, available in 1955, was injected.

  15. chuck says:

    In 1847, more than a decade before Pasteur disclosed his germ theory, the Viennese obstetrician Ignaz Semmelweis documented the effectiveness of hand washing with chlorinated water before entering a maternity ward. He brought mortality rates from puerperal fever down from 8% to 1.3%. Two decades later, having read a paper by Pasteur, Joseph Lister demonstrated the effectiveness of carbolic acid to sterilize wounds and surgical instruments. Mortality rates fell from around 50% to about 15%. The efforts of both men, especially Semmelweis, were met with ridicule and disdain.

    Pasteur’s German rivals Robert Koch and Paul Ehrlich made monumental contributions to biochemistry, bacteriology, and hematology, but left the world no “magic bullet” (Ehrlich’s term). Koch identified the organism causing tuberculosis, the leading killer of the 19th century, but his attempts at finding a vaccine failed. His purified protein derivative from the bacteria, tuberculin, could be used to diagnose the disease, however. It was two French researchers, Albert Calmette and Camille Guerin, who developed a successful vaccine, first administered in 1921, though it was not widely used until after World War II.

    Ehrlich joined the search for antibacterial drugs that were not denatured bacteria or viruses. He synthesized neoarsphenamine (Neo-Salvarsan), effective against syphilis, a scourge since the late15th century, but which had toxic side effects. It was not until the 1930s that first generation of antibiotics appeared. These were the sulfa drugs, derived from dyes with sulfa-nitrogen chains. The first was a red dye synthesized by Joseph Klarer and Fritz Mietzsch. In 1935, Gerhard Domagk at I. G. Farben demonstrated its effectiveness in cases of blood poisoning.

    The anti-bacterial properties of Penicillium had already been discovered at this point by Alexander Fleming. The Scottish bacteriologist had famously left a window open in his lab when he went on vacation in 1928, and returned to find that a mold had destroyed the staphylococcus colony in one of his petri dishes. But it’s one thing to make a fortuitous discovery and another thing to cultivate and purify a promising organic compound and conduct persuasive trials. This was not done until 1941. Thank Oxford biochemists Howard Florey and Ernst Chain. A Pfizer chemist, Joseph Kane, figured out how to mass-produce penicillin and by 1943 it was available to American troops. The wonder drug of the 20th century, penicillin killed the Gram-positive bacteria that caused meningitis, diphtheria, rheumatic fever, tonsillitis, syphilis, and gonorrhea. New generations of antibiotics followed, as bacteria rapidly developed resistance: among them, streptomycin in 1943 (thank Selman Waksman), tetracycline in 1955 (thank Lloyd Conover), and, the most widely prescribed today, amoxicillin.

  16. chuck says:

    Microscope: While the Delft draper Antonie van Leeuwenhoek didn’t invent the compound microscope, he improved it, beginning in the 1660s, increasing the curvature of the lenses, and so became the first person to see and describe blood corpuscles, bacteria, protozoa, and sperm.

    Electron microscope: Physicist Ernst Ruska and electrical engineer Max Kroll constructed the prototype in Berlin in 1933, using a lens by Hans Busch. Eventually, electron microscopes would be designed with two-million power magnification. Leeuwenhoek’s had about two hundred.

    Stethoscope: Thank the French physician René Laennec, who introduced what he called a microphone in 1816. British nephrologist Golding Bird substituted a flexible tube for Laennec’s wooden cylinder in 1840, and the Irish physician Arthur Leared added a second earpiece in 1851. Notable improvements were made by Americans Howard Sprague, a cardiologist, and electrical engineer Maurice Rappaport in the 1960s (a double-sided head), and Harvard cardiologist David Littmann in the same decade (enhancing the acoustics). The device undoubtedly transformed medicine, and with good reason became the symbol of the health care professional.

    Sphygmograph: The first machine to measure blood pressure was created by a German physiologist, Karl von Vierordt in 1854.

    X-rays: Discovered by Karl Wilhelm Röntgen, at Wurzberg in 1895, this was probably the single most important diagnostic breakthrough in medical history. Before Röntgen noticed that cathode rays, electrons emitted from a cathode tube, traveled through objects and created images on a fluorescent screen, physicians could only listen, palpitate, examine stools, and drink urine.

    PET scans: James Robertson designed the first machine in 1961, based on the work of number of American men at Penn, Wash U., and Mass General, designed the first machine. The scanner provides an image from the positron emissions coming from a radioactive isotope injected into the patient, and is particularly useful for mapping activity in the brain.

    • Harley says:

      nice comment frank.
      For those of you who don’t know hearne doesn’t allow
      my pieces to be printed on kcc. Many comments on the
      southy stories never show up.
      He stops them from being printed and then puts them
      up 2 days later.

      • Frank says:

        Everything has a sponsor now. We’ll call this the “Stormfront comments section” Hey Glaze, watch out! Your boy’s on the attack.

  17. chuck says:

    MRI: Raymond Damadian, a SUNY professor of medicine with a degree in math, performed the first full-body scan 1977. His design was anticipated by theoretical work by Felix Bloch and Edward Purcell in the 1930s, and, later, Paul Lauterbur. MRIs map the radio waves given off by hydrogen atoms exposed to energy from magnets, and are particularly useful in imaging tissue — and without exposing the patient to ionizing radiation.

    Ultrasound: Ian Donald, a Glasgow obstetrician, in the mid-1950s adopted a device already used in industry that generated inaudible, high frequency sound waves. The machine quickly and cheaply displays images of soft tissue, and now provides most American parents with the first photo of their baby.

    Endoscopes: Georg Wolf produced the first flexible gastroscope in Berlin in 1911, and this was improved by Karl Storz in the late ‘40s. The first fiber optic endoscope was introduced in 1957 by Basil Hirschowitz, a South African gastroenterologist, drawing on the work of British physicist Harold Hopkins. The scope is indispensible in diagnosing GI abnormalities.

    Angiogram: Werner Forssmann performed the first cardiac catherisation — on himself — in Eberswald in 1929. He inserted a catheter into his lower left arm, walked downstairs to a fluoroscope, threaded the catheter to his right atrium and injected a radioptic dye. The technique was further developed by Dickson Richards and André Courmand at Columbia in the ‘40s, and then extended to coronary arteries, initially accidentally, by Frank Sones at the Cleveland Clinic in 1958.

  18. chuck says:

    X-rays and scopes were quickly used in treatment as well diagnosis. Roentgen himself used his machines to burn off warts. Similarly, in 1964, Charles Dotter and Marvin Judkins used a catheter to open a blocked artery, improving the technique in 1967. Andreas Gruentzig then introduced balloon angioplasty in 1975, an inflated balloon opening the narrowed or blocked artery. In 1986, Jacques Puel implanted the first coronary stent at U. of Toulouse, and soon afterwards a Swiss cardiologist, Ulrich Sigwart, developed the first drug-eluding stent.

  19. chuck says:

    In the late ‘30s, two Mayo Clinic biochemists hoping to cure rheumatoid arthritis, Philip Hench and Edward Kendall, isolated four steroids extracted from the cortex of the adrenal gland atop the kidneys. The fourth, “E,” was very difficult to synthesize, but Merck chemist Lewis Sarrett succeeded, and in 1948, the hormone was injected into fourteen patients crippled by arthritis. Cortisone relieved the symptoms. Mass produced, with much difficulty, by Upjohn chemists in 1952, it was refined by their rivals at Schering three years later into a compound five times as strong, prednisone. In addition to arthritis, corticosteroids are used in the treatment of other inflammatory diseases, like colitis and Crohn’s, and in dermatitis, asthma, hepatitis, and lupus.

    Anyone over fifty can remember peptic ulcers, extremely painful lesions on the stomach wall or duodenum. They were thought to be brought on by stress. “You’re giving me an ulcer!” was a common expression. Women were especially affected, and a bland diet was the only treatment, other than surgery. The lesions were caused by gastric acid, and two British pharmacologists and a biochemist, George Paget, James Black, and William Duncan, investigated compounds that would block the stomach’s histamine receptors, reducing the secretion of acid. There were endless difficulties. Over 200 compounds were synthesized, and the most promising, metiamide, proved toxic. Tweaking the molecule, replacing a sulfur atom with two nitrogen atoms, yielded cimetidine in 1976. As Tagamet, it revolutionized gastroenterology. It was also the first drug to generate over $1 billion in annual sales. Its successors, the proton pump inhibitors Prilosec and its near-twin Nexium, more than doubling the acid reduction, have also been blockbuster drugs

  20. chuck says:

    Cimetidine was the culmination of one line of research that began in 1910, when a London physiologist, Henry Dale, isolated a uterine stimulant he called “histamine.” Unfortunately, when it was given to patients, it caused something like anaphylactic shock. The search began for an “antagonist” that would block its production, even before it was recognized as the culprit in hay fever (allergic rhinitis). The most successful antagonist was one was developed in 1943 by a young chemist in Cincinnati, Geroge Rieveschl, diphenhydramine, marketed as Benadryl. Ten to thirty percent of the world’s population suffers from seasonal allergies, so this was hailed as miracle drug. In the early ‘80s a second generation of antihistamines appeared that didn’t cross the brain-blood barrier and thus didn’t sedate the user. Loratadine (Claritin), the first, was generating over $2 billion in annual sales before it went generic.

    Diabetes, resulting in high blood glucose levels (hyperglycemia), has been known for two millennia. It was a deadly disease, type 1 rapidly fatal, type 2, adult onset, debilitating and eventually lethal. By the end of the 19th century, the Islets of Langerhans in the pancreas had been identified as the source of a substance that prevented it, insulin, but this turned out to be a fragile peptide hormone, broken down by an enzyme in the pancreas during attempts to extract it. In 1921, Canadian surgeon Frederick Banting and medical student Charles Best determined a way to disable the production of the enzyme, trypsin. Injected in a teenager with type 1 diabetes, insulin was immediately effective. There is still no cure for diabetes, but today the 380 million sufferers globally can live normal lives thanks to Banting and Best.

  21. chuck says:

    Finally, millions of men and their wives and girlfriends owe a big debt to British chemists Peter Dunn and Albert Wood, and Americans Andrew Bell, David Brown, and Nicholas Terrett. They developed sildenafil, intended to treat angina. It works by suppressing an enzyme that degrades a molecule that relaxes smooth muscle tissue, increasing blood flow. Ian Osterloh, running the clinical trials for Pfizer, observed that the drug induced erections, and it was marketed for ED. Viagra made the cover of Time Magazine after it was approved in March 1998. The blue pill still generates about $2 billion annually in sales, despite competition, and is prescribed for 11 million men.

    • Harley says:

      what’s the matter. You become an expert on Viagra. Can’t getit up
      huh…..fantasizea you’re doing one of glazes girls. that might work! hahahahahah

  22. chuck says:

    Two incredible machines build in the mid-20th century revolutionized the practice of medicine. Both remove blood from the body.

    During World War II, the Dutch physician Willem Kolff constructed a machine to cleanse the blood of patients suffering from renal failure by filtering out urea and creatine. Over 400,000 Americans are on dialysis today.

    In 1953, after 18 years of work, John Gibbon, a cardiologist at the University of Pennsylvania, produced a machine that oxygenated blood and pumped it around the body, permitting operations on the heart, like those performed a decade later by Michael DeBakey in Houston and René Favaloro in Cleveland. The two surgeons pioneered coronary bypass grafts, using a blood vessel in the leg or chest to re-route blood around a blocked artery. About 200,000 operations are performed each year, down from about 400,000 at the turn of the century, thanks to stents. Gibbon’s machine enabled the most widely covered operation in history, the heart transplant, first performed by South African surgeon Christian Barnard in 1967, based on research by Norman Shumway and others. Over 2,000 Americans receive heart transplants each year.

    The cardiac device Americans are most likely to encounter is the defibrillator, now in airports, stadiums, supermarkets, and other public places. Thank two Swiss professors, Louis Prévost and Frédéric Batelli, who, in 1899, induced ventricle fibrillation, abnormal heartbeat, in dogs with a small electrical shock, and restored normal rhythm with a larger one. It was not until the 1940s that a defibrillator was used in heart surgery, by Claude Beck in Cleveland. A Russian researcher during World War II, Naum Gurvich, discovered that biphasic waves, a large positive jolt followed by a small negative pulse, was more effective, and a machine was constructed on this basis by an American cardiologist, Bernard Lown. Improvements by electrical engineers William Kouwenhoven and Guy Knickerbocker, and cardiologist James Jude at Hopkins in 1957, and subsequently by Karl and Mark Kroll, and Byron Gilman in the ‘90s made the device much smaller and portable.

  23. chuck says:

    Over three million people worldwide don’t have to worry about defibrillators or face open-heart surgery. These are the recipients of pacemakers, and can thank a Canadian electrical engineer, John Hopps. Predecessors were deterred by negative publicity about their experiments, which were believed to be machines to revive the dead. Gurvich had faced this as well. Hopps’ 1950 device used a vacuum tube. With the invention of the transistor, a wearable pacemaker became possible, and Earl Bakken designed one in 1958. Not long afterward, two Swedish engineers, Rune Elmquist and Åke Senning created an implantable pacemaker. The first recipient eventually received 26 and lived to age 86. Lithium batteries, introduced in 1976, enabled the creation of devices with a much longer life.

  24. chuck says:

    Cardiac stimulants have been around since the late 18th century. Thank William Withering, who published his experiments with the folk-remedy digitalis (from foxglove) in 1785.

    Anti-anginal drugs were introduced a century later, also in Britain: amyl nitrite in the mid-1860s and nitroglycerin a decade later. Both compounds had been synthesized by French chemists. Thank Thomas Bruton and William Murrell.

    The first diuretics, to reduce edema (swelling) and lower blood pressure, were alkaloids derived from coffee and tea. These were not very effective, but better than leeches. Mercury compounds were pioneered by the Viennese physician Arthur Vogel in 1919. These worked, but were tough on the kidneys and liver. The first modern diuretics, carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, were developed in the 1940s, with the American Karl Beyer playing a leading role.

    The first anti-coagulants date from the ‘20s. A Johns Hopkins physiologist, William Howell, extracted a phospholipid from dog livers that he called heparin and that appeared to prevent blood clots. The first modern anti-coagulant, and still the most widely prescribed, was warfarin (Coumadin), developed as a rat-poison by Karl Link in Wisconsin in 1948. Its effectiveness, and lack of toxicity, was revealed when an army recruit took it in a suicide attempt.

  25. chuck says:

    Anti-arrhythmic drugs, to stabilize the heartbeat, were introduced in the opening decade of the 20th century. The first was derived from quinine. The big breakthrough occurred in 1962. Thank, once again, the Scotsman James Black, who synthesized propranolol in that year, the first beta-blocker. What they block are the receptors of epinephrine and norepinephrine. These two chemicals (catecholamines) increase the heart rate, blood pressure, and blood glucose levels, useful for many purposes, but not a good thing in patients with cardiac arrhythmia, irregular heartbeats. Beta-blockers are also prescribed to lower blood pressure.

    ACE inhibitors lower the levels of an enzyme secreted by the kidneys and lungs that constricts blood vessels. The unpromising source for the first inhibitor was the venom of the Brazilian pit-viper. It was extracted, purified, and tested by three Squibb scientists in 1975, David Cushman, Miguel Ondetti, and Bernard Rubin. It’s still widely prescribed, though many other ACE inhibitors have since been designed. They are used for patients with congestive heart failure or who have had a heart attack, as well as those with hypertension.

    Finally, mention must be made of the statins, which, though over-hyped and over-prescribed, lower serum cholesterol and reduce the risks of a second heart attack. A Japanese microbiologist, Akira Endo, derived, from a species of Penicillium, a substance that inhibited the synthesis of cholesterol, but it was too toxic to use on humans. In 1978, a team at Merck under Alfred Alberts had better luck with another fungus, and called the compound lovastatin. Statins work by inhibiting the activity of an enzyme called HMGR.

  26. chuck says:

    Cancer Drugs

    In the forty-three years since Richard Nixon’s “war on cancer” was launched, the disease has received the lion’s share of government, foundation, and pharmaceutical industry funding, though heart disease kills more people — 596,577 Americans last year to 576,691 for cancer, according to the most recent data. This makes it particularly difficult, and invidious, to single out individual researchers.

    There is still, of course, nothing close to a magic bullet, though cancer deaths have dropped about 20% since their peak in 1991. Around 27% of cancer deaths this year will be from lung cancer, so the rate will continue to fall as more people stop smoking.

    The originators of a few therapies with good five-year survival rates ought to be singled out and thanked.

    Seattle oncologist Donnall Thomas performed the first successful bone marrow transplant in 1956. The donor was an identical twin of the leukemia patient. With the development of drugs to suppress the immune system’s response to foreign marrow, Thomas was able to perform a successful transplant from a non-twin relative in 1969. About 18,000 are now performed each year.

    One of the more notable successes of chemotherapy has been in the treatment of the childhood cancer acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Sidney Farber in the late ‘40s carried out clinical trials with the antifolate aminopterin, synthesized at Lederle by the Indian biochemist Yellapragada Subbarow. This proved the first effective compound in treating the disease. It was superseded by methotrexate, and now, as in all chemo treatments, a combination of agents is used. The five-year survival rate for ALL has jumped from near zero to 85%.

  27. chuck says:

    Early detection is the key to successful treatment in all cancers, and survivors of breast cancer can thank at least four men who pioneered and popularized mammography over a fifty-year period beginning in 1913: Albert Salman, Stafford Warren, Raul Leborgne, and Jacob Gershon-Cohen.

    A second key to the comparatively high survival rates for women with breast cancer is tamoxifen. First produced in the late ‘50s by British endocrinologist Arthur Walpole, it was intended as a “morning-after” birth control pill because it blocked the effects of estrogen. However, it failed to terminate pregnancy. Researchers had meanwhile discovered that some, though not all, women with breast cancer recovered when their ovaries were removed. Walpole thought tamoxifen might block breast cancer estrogen receptor cells, inhibiting their reproduction, and persuaded a professor of pharmacology, Craig Jordan, to conduct experiments. These demonstrated the drug’s efficacy, and after clinical trials it was approved and marketed in 1973. Think of Arthur W. the next time you see one of those ubiquitous pink ribbons.

    Most chemo agents are cytotoxic metal-based compounds that do not distinguish between abnormal cells and healthy cells that also divide rapidly. The nasty side effects range from hair-loss and nausea to decreased production of red blood cells, nerve and organ damage, osteoporosis and bone fusion, and loss of memory and cognition. More selective drugs, monoclonal antibodies, have been used for some time. These were first produced by Georges Köhler and César Millstein in 1975 and “humanized” by Greg Winter in 1988, that is, made more effective by using recombinant DNA from mammals. Over 30 “mab” drugs have been approved, about half for cancer.

  28. chuck says:

    Research has also been underway for years into delivery systems using “nano-particles” that will target tumors exclusively. Another approach, pioneered by Jonah Folkman, has been to find drugs that will attack the blood supply of tumors, angiogenesis inhibitors. This turned out not to be the magic bullet Folkman hoped for, but more than fifty of these drugs are in clinical trials, and a number are effective owing to other mechanisms, and are currently used.

  29. chuck says:

    Psychiatric medicine

    Drugs have revolutionized the practice of psychiatry since the 1950s, and brought relief to millions suffering from depression, anxiety, and psychoses. For obvious reasons, these are some of the most highly addictive and widely abused drugs.

    A few men to thank:

    Adolph von Baeyer, Emil Fischer, Joseph von Mering: barbiturates, synthesized in 1865, but not marketed until 1903. The most commonly prescribed today are phenobarbital sodium (Nembutal) and mephobarbital (Membaral).

    Bernard Ludwig and Frank Berger: meprobamate, the tranquilizer Miltown. By the end of the ‘50s, a third of all prescriptions in America were for this drug

    Leo Steinberg: the anxiolytic (anti-anxiety) benzodiazepines, first synthesized in 1955. The most successful initially was diazepam, Valium, marketed in 1963. The most widely prescribed benzodiazepine today is alprazolam, Xanax. It’s also the most widely prescribed psychiatric drug, with nearly 50 million prescriptions. It increases concentrations of dopamine and suppresses stress-inducing activity of the hypothalamus.

    Leandro Panizzon: methylphenidate (Ritalin). The Swiss chemist developed it in 1944 as a stimulant, and named it after his wife, whose tennis game it helped improve. Until the early ‘60s amphetamines were used, counter-intuitively, to treat hyperactive children. Thirty years after its patent expired, the controversial dopamine reuptake inhibitor is still the most widely prescribed medication for the 11% of children who’ve been diagnosed with ADHD.

  30. chuck says:

    Klaus Schmiegel and Bryan Malloy: the anti-depressant fluoxetine, the first SSRI, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, increasing serotonin levels. Marketed as Prozac in 1988, it made the cover of Newsweek and is still prescribed for over 25 million patients.

    Paul Janssen: risperdone (Risperdal), the mostly widely prescribed antipsychotic drug worldwide. The Belgian researcher developed many other drugs as well, including loperamide HCL (Imodium). When commenters on web articles advise trolls to take their meds, they might want to specify risperdone.

    Seiji Sato, Yasuo Oshiro, and Nobuyuki Kurahashi: aripiprazole (Abilify) which blocks dopamine receptors, and was the top selling drug at the end of 2013, grossing $1.6 billion in Q4.

  31. chuck says:

    A few observations.

    Japanese and Indian researchers will make important contributions to future drugs, as the trio responsible for Abilify reminds us.

    And, naturally, some women have played roles in the advances that have been summarized. Mary Gibbon, a technician, assisted her husband on the heart-lung machine. Lina Stern did important research on the blood-brain barrier, and it was in her lab that Guravich improved the defibrillator. Jane Wright conducted early trials of methotrexate that helped demonstrate its efficacy. Lucy Wills did pioneering work on anemia in India. Roslyn Yalow helped develop radioimmunoassay, which measures concentrations of antigens in the blood. Anne-Marie Staub did interesting work on antihistamines, though her compounds proved toxic.

    They are exceptions. Our benefactors have not only been overwhelmingly European males, but are mostly from England and Scotland, Germany, France, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, as well as Americans and Canadians whose families emigrated from those countries. And, of course, Jews, who’ve won 28% of the Nobel Prizes in Medicine.

    Some of the beneficiaries in particular might want to think about this.

    Muslims boast that their faith has over 2 billion followers throughout the world. If this number is accurate, it has far less to do with the appeal of Islam or with Arab or Turkish conquests than with the work of some Northern Europeans and Jews, along with the “imperialists” who built roads, canals, and ports and the vehicles that use them, as well as schools and hospitals – like the traveling eye clinics in Egypt funded by the Jewish banker Ernest Cassel, which nearly eliminated blinding trachoma, then endemic.

    The fact that we in the U.S. idolize our entertainers as no society has before is not going to cut off the supply of outstanding medical researchers. Very bright and inquisitive people usually don’t pay much attention to popular culture. But it diminishes us.

    It’s the ingratitude, though, not the indifference, that’s more troubling.

    Biting the hand that feeds is a core principle of Leftists. For 150 years, they’ve sought to concentrate power in their own hands by exploiting the resentment of ignorant people against a system that has finally enabled mankind to spring the Malthusian trap.

    Multiculturalism, with its simple-minded relativism, has broadened the scope of the party line. Not only shadowy “capitalists” are vilified, but whites and males. Ignorant people can now think well of themselves by opposing “racism” and “the patriarchy” — and by voting for an unqualified and deceptive poseur because, though a male, he is not white.

    The first step parents can take to help spare America from being “fundamentally transformed” is to insist that history be properly taught. This means, among other things, recognizing the accomplishments of a few men who’ve found cures for or relieved the symptoms of diseases that have killed and tortured humans for millennia.

  32. chuck says:

    Talk is cheap.

    Facts are facts.

  33. chuck says:

    Here is something that will send a “thrill” up a liberal leg. White people make up .08% of the world’s population.

    It is not just America that hates White People, it is an endemic, world wide, cellular, granular, “aren’t we all so cool” movement, that assaults a center that will not hold.

    • Frank says:

      Here’s something that might send “fright” up your conservative leg, Chuck. The land you get to live on is only 29% of the Earth’s surface. THE REST IS THAT DROWNY CAUSING WET STUFF. RUN FOR THE HILLS. Take a geography class Apparatchuck

  34. long time listener first time caller says:

    Wow, just wow.

    Chuck, do you think education and access to institutions of higher learning played a role in the scientific foundation of any of the individuals you listed above? I wonder if the white European males from the countries you listed in the time frames you referred to had any classmates other than mirror images of themselves. It’s a little difficult to compete in a game when you are not even permitted entrance to the arena.

    Your blatant anti-black bias without attempt to scratch the surface for deeper analyses is, frankly a little scary. I wonder if one day I see your name in the news with tragic outcome after you take an automatic weapon to a BLM rally.

    Do you recall the Gary Larson comic titled “How Nature Says Do Not Touch”? Is that you in the lower right hand corner?

  35. Frank says:

    Hey hearne, where is Chuck in the featured article lineup? He’s providing some “bullet” commentary

  36. Harley says:

    oh stomper and frank…don’t worry.
    Chucks up at 5:30 on a Saturday spewing hate and vile b.s.
    these long posts arenothing but cut and paste jobs from some militia handbook
    or neo Nazi propaganda.
    Next Saturday he cuts and pastes Mein Kampf for us at 5:30 then goes to dig
    a hole.

  37. Henry L Menken says:

    All government, in its essence, is a conspiracy against the superior man; its one permanent object is to oppress him and cripple him. If it be aristocratic in organisation, then it seeks to protect the man who is superior only in law against the man who is superior in fact; if it be democratic, then it seeks to protect the man who is inferior in every way against both. One of its primary functions is to regiment men by force, to make them as much alike as possible and as dependent upon one another as possible, to search out and combat originality among them. All it can see in an original idea is potential change, and hence an invasion of its prerogatives. The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent among those who are …

    What lies behind all this, I believe, is a deep sense of the fundamental antagonism between the government and the people it governs. It is apprehended, not as a committee of citizens chosen to carry on the communal business of the whole population, but as a separate and autonomous corporation, mainly devoted to exploiting the population for the benefit of its own members … When a private citizen is robbed a worthy man is deprived of the fruits of his industry and thrift; when the government is robbed the worst that happens is that certain rogues and loafers have less money to play with than they had before. The notion that they have earned that money is never entertained; to most sensible men it would seem ludicrous. They are simply rascals who, by accidents of law, have a somewhat dubious right to a share in the earnings of their fellow men.

    This gang is well-nigh immune to punishment. Its worst extortions, even when they are baldly for private profit, carry no certain penalties under our laws. Since the first days of the Republic, less than a dozen of its members have been impeached, and only a few obscure understrappers have ever been put into prison. The number of men sitting at Atlanta and Leavenworth for revolting against the extortions of government is always ten times as great as the number of government officials condemned for oppressing the taxpayers to their own gain … There are no longer any citizens in the world; there are only subjects. They work day in and day out for their masters; they are bound to die for their masters at call … On some bright tomorrow, a geological epoch or two hence, they will come to the end of their endurance …

  38. Harry Stone says:

    Guys remember, I’m still dead.

    Killed in a black on white hate crime that was solved no thanks to the media ignoring it like it never happened.

    • the dude says:

      Loved you in Night Court. Had no idea you croaked.

      • Frank says:

        You obviously didn’t hear about the blockbuster trade where Heaven traded H.L. Mencken to Earth for Harry Stone. I was disappointed, Harry still had some life left in him and H.L.s arm was dead. Get with the times Your Dudeness.

  39. Harley says:

    When do we get you to write a book on kcc about the landslide of Clinton over
    Dumpster. Now that would be interesting. I’d love to hear your thoughts!!!!!!!!!!

    • Stomper says:

      Huelskamp, the Tea Party zombie from western Kansas, losing was a national story.

      Maybe there is still hope for Kansas.

Comments are closed.