blog Time Hath Found Us: April 2005

April 30, 2005

Texas Hospital Officials: Stop Treating Baby

Hospitals used to be places where the ill went to be treated with full confidence that everything possible would be done to save lives. Now, hospitals have Futility Review Commissions.

ABC13 Eyewitness News
(4/29/05 - HOUSTON) - The mother of a critically ill baby is trying to figure out where to take her child after being told by doctors at Memorial Hermann Hospital that they would stop treating her in 10 days.

The five-month-old little girl was diagnosed with leukemia just weeks after her birth. Since then, she's undergone a number of different medical treatments and contracted an infection. Doctors and her parents disagree on what should happen next.
[...]
"Her mind is fully there," said the baby's mother, Tamiko Dismuke-Howard. "She knows when we are there. I can't give up because she won't give up."

Tamiko picked up a letter from Memorial Hermann Thursday night. It says simply that doctors believe all medical treatment, other than to ease Knya's pain and suffering, would be useless. Her parents have 10 days to find another hospital for Knya or her medical care will stop.

"We will not give up," said Charles Howard, the baby's father. "We are going all the way."
[...]
"Continuing treatment at this point would entail the prolonging of this extreme pain and suffering without any hope of a benefit with prolongation of life," said Chairman of the Futility Review Commission Richard Castriotta, MD.

It seems we are much more than on the slippery slope toward institutionalized involuntary euthanasia, we have arrived. Dr. Mary L. Davenport M.D. wrote "Forcing Doctors to Kill." In her article, Dr. Davenport, sheds light on how medicine has moved from life saving to Futility Review Commissions.

A major step has already taken place, almost unnoticed by the general public. The tepid modern alternatives to the Hippocratic Oath, such the World Medical Association's Declaration of Geneva, came into widespread use in America after World War II. The now-unused original Hippocratic Oath was a covenant between the physician and patient. In addition to swearing to uphold patient confidentiality, and prohibiting sexual relations between physician and patient, the Oath specifically prohibited medical killing. Both abortion and physician-assisted suicide were violations of the Oath American physicians once affirmed. Unbeknownst to most Americans, U.S. physicians have not had to swear off medical killing for decades.

Apparently, medicine the medical industry has gone from revering Hippocrates to idolizing Margaret Sanger.

Hat Tip: BlogsForTerri and HyScience.

Update: Right Wing Nut Job (I love that name) posts on the follow-the-money-factor of Baby Knya's plight at Straight Up with Sherri.

April 29, 2005

An Idiot's Joy in Oregon

The headline: "Joy in gallery as Portland quits FBI task force."

They may not have won any new friends in Washington D.C., but Portland City Council members heard mostly kudos from their constituents Thursday as they officially ended the Portland Police Bureau's involvement in the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force.

As expected, the City Council voted 4-1 to reassign the two Portland officers serving on the local, state and federal anti-terror team back to the Police Bureau within 90 days.

The great state of Oregon was once a typical western state. A state where personal freedom and independence was cherished and there were few laws which impeded the pioneer spirit of its citizens. Not any more. It should come as no surprise that the ACLU has its nasty hands in this matter. Where the ACLU goes, the personal freedoms of average citizens are sacrificed to feed the debauchery of terrorists, criminals and Planned Parenthood.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed Freedom of Information Act requests in 10 states, including Oregon, in an attempt to discover whether task forces have been used to spy on people. Critics of the task force concept, and Portland's participation, point to examples of egregious behavior elsewhere, such as the Fresno, Calif., case in which a local sheriff's deputy went undercover to infiltrate an anti-war group.

The ACLU hopes Portland's decision sparks similar debates elsewhere. Potter invited representatives of the ACLU to sit in on his negotiations with the federal government. And for civil libertarians, Thursday's vote marked a victory after five years of work to open up the task force's files or remove Portland's officers.

"This is pretty much what we've been asking for all along," said Dan Handelman, co-founder of the police watchdog group Portland Copwatch. "Overall in taking this action, you are setting a national trend. This is a great moment in our history and in our country's history." [emphasis added: TS]

This is a pathetic display of elected public official incompetence. Beware, what is happening in Oregon will happen to all of us should good people not cry out and demand that the madness be stopped.

April 28, 2005

Valid or Not? The ABC/Washington Post on Judicial Nominees

The worst thing any of us can do is to assume that because the people we know share our point of view then most people feel the same.

Take, for example, the recent poll commissioned by ABC and the Washington Post about public attitudes regarding changing the Senate rules involved with the confirmation of judicial nominees. While I'm not saying that I believe that the poll was unbiased, I also believe that maybe, just maybe, it really reflects the opinions of average Americans.

One of my favorite resources on polling is Mark Blumenthal - the Mystery Pollster. Mark readily admits that, in addition to market research polling, he is a Democratic pollster. Nevertheless, his experience and his rational explanations of the internals of the art and science of polling make him a must read before jumping to conclusions.

Different questions may produce greater support for the Republican position, as the various results presented above imply. Understanding public opinion with respect to judicial nominees is not about not about deciding which question is best, or whether any one question alone is biased. It is about measuring all attitudes, even the ones that conflict, and coming to a greater understanding of what it all means. The answers may be contradictory, but sometimes, so is public opinion.

The Mystery Pollster's take on the judicial poll shows us that, while we may not like the results, the poll may reflect reality. If there is truth here, then it is our responsibility to do something about it, not just wring our hands and cry foul. Think about it.

News Flash: Women More Concerned About Losing Weight Than Men

I was shocked, shocked to find this out and it took more than two decades of research! Who knew?

"This study examined gender differences in satisfaction with body parts and eating disorders," said Laurie Mintz, associate professor and director of counseling psychology at MU, who conducted the study along with Susan Kashubeck-West, associate professor in the Division of Counseling and Family Therapy at the UMSL. "Results indicated that while men and women exhibit similar concerns in overall body satisfaction, women are less satisfied with specific body parts, such as the abdomen, hips and thighs."

Read the whole story here.

Blogburst: ACLU Vs. National Security

Stop The ACLU Blogburst:

Perhaps there is no other issue as fragile to the preservation of our liberties than a careful balance between civil liberties and our national security. To its credit, the ACLU recognizes the danger if the scales are tipped too far to the side of national security, however it doesn't seem to acknowledge the danger if the scales are reversed.


On July 12, 1990, Morton Halperin, who at that time was director of the Washington Office of the ACLU, testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: "The ACLU is deeply troubled by the notion that there is a national security exception to the Fourth Amendment or any part of the Bill of Rights. We regard those rights as fundamental and absolute."

"Absolute" is the key word to understanding the ACLU. Its absolutist philosophies, just as any extremist view, endangers the very civil liberties it claims to protect.

In his book "Twilight of Liberty", William Donahue compares Halperins views of liberty with that of Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson said, "A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country, by scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us: thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

"There is no doubting the ACLU's concern that there are untrustworthy public officials who will invoke national security as a cloak to cover their own wrongdoings; the pages of history are full of them. But does that mean that the only proper response is to make absolute the Bill of Rights, even in those clear-cut instances when the nation's viability is seriously called into question: It is fair to say that most who have studied the question would prefer to side with Jefferson on this matter" Twilight of Liberty pg 172

There is probably no other time that a proper balance between civil liberties and national security becomes more important than in wartime. During times of war, sometimes unusual responses are implemented, often requiring suspension of certain liberties. Of course war opens the opportunity for abuse by governments, and the ACLU are right to watch for them. However, the ACLU in its absolutist perception of freedom, only worries about one side of the equation, civil liberties. It pays no attention to the national security side of things, not only ignoring it, but in many cases working against it.

It is nothing new for the ACLU. The grew out of an organized effort to protest World War I. The only exception to their anti-war stance was World War II, and part of that is due to the investigation during this time into the theory they could be a Communist Front group.

"After 9-11, the ACLU and its leftist cohorts spearheaded a movement to depict the US in general – and the airline industry in particular – as a snake pit of bigoted vipers eager to abuse and humiliate Muslims and Middle Easterners. The statistics, however, tell quite another story. During the nine months immediately following 9-11, the ADC received a mere 60 reports of incidents where airline security personnel prevented “Arab-looking” male passengers from flying as scheduled. While this may have been an annoying inconvenience for those affected, six or seven complaints per month is hardly an epidemic – particularly in light of the fact that the most devastating attack in American history had just been carried out by nineteen men of virtually identical physical, ethnic, and religious characteristics".

"From 9-11 to the present day, the ACLU has vigorously opposed every governmental attempt to more effectively protect the American people’s security. It sued, for example, to prevent the implementation of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which was passed in November 2001 and included a citizenship requirement for airport screeners. It organized protests against a “discriminatory” Justice Department and INS registration system requiring male “temporary visitors” to the US from 25 Arab and Muslim nations to register with the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. It condemned the FBI’s “discriminatory” plan to count and document every mosque in the US. It protested when FBI and Homeland Security agents recently tried to track down illegal Iraqi immigrants they deemed dangerous. In Illinois, the ACLU actually set up a hotline designed to give free legal advice to undocumented Iraqis facing deportation. Former ACLU Executive Director Ira Glasser casually dismissed Americans’ concerns about illegal immigration, chalking such sentiments up to a “wave of anti-immigrant hysteria.”

"The ACLU further claims that the Patriot Act has created an Orwellian big government of unprecedented proportions. “Under the new Ashcroft guidelines,” reads one of its disingenuous press releases, “the FBI can freely infiltrate mosques, churches and synagogues and other houses of worship, listen in on online chat rooms and read message boards even if it has no evidence that a crime might be committed.” Curiously, the ACLU does not mention that the FBI already had the authority to take these measures long before the Bush administration took power. Nor does the ACLU point out that the FBI can wiretap only after showing a court that the suspect is affiliated with a foreign terrorist group or government – the very same requirement instituted 25 years ago by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act".

"What the ACLU is actually rebelling against is the Justice Department’s recent removal of Clinton-era intelligence-gathering restrictions that had crippled the government’s ability to fight terrorism. These restrictions prohibited intelligence investigators from conferring and sharing information with criminal investigators, even if they were both trailing the very same suspect who was plotting a terrorist act. On August 29, 2001, for instance, an FBI investigator in New York desperately pleaded for permission to initiate an intensive manhunt for al-Qaeda operative Khalid Almihdar, who was known to be planning something big. The Justice Department and the FBI deputy general counsel’s office both denied the request, explaining that because the evidence linking Almihdar to terrorism had been obtained through intelligence channels, it could not legally be used to justify or aid an FBI agent’s criminal investigation; in short, it would constitute a violation of Almihdar’s “civil rights.” “Someday, someone will die,” the agent wrote to his FBI superiors, “and the public will not understand why we were not more effective and throwing every resource we had at certain problems.” Thirteen days later, Almihdar took over the cockpit of American Airlines Flight 77 and crashed it into the Pentagon
Exerpt Front Page Magazine

One of the most revealing occurances towards the ACLU's absolutist position on national security and its recent evolution can be seen in the action the board of directors took at its Oct 1989 meeting: It dropped section (a) from its policy, "Wartime Sedition Act." Before, the ACLU held that it "would not participate (save for fundamental due process violations) in defense of any person believed to be "cooperating" with or acting on behalf of the enemy." This policy was based on the recognition that "our own military enemies are now using techniques of propaganda which may involve an attempt to prevent the Bill of Rights to serve the enemy rather than the people of the United States." In making its determination as to whether someone were cooperating with the enemy, "the Union will consider such matters as past activities and associations, sources of financial support, relations with enemy agents, the particular words and conduct involved, and all other relevant factors for informed judgement."

All of this is now omitted from the Official ACLU policy!

As these policy changes indicate, balancing national security interests and civil liberties is not a goal of the ACLU. Its only goal is the absolute pursuit of unlimited civil liberties, with no regard to any consequence or negative impact upon our security. Not only does it ignore the issue of national security, but there are many examples I have shown where they actually work against it, even to the point of defending the enemy. The absolute tragedy is that it is not only the nations's security the ACLU's absolutist philosophy puts in danger, but the very cause of liberty itself. We've also saw recently the attitude of the ACLU to securing our borders, again civil liberties trump national security.

It pursues its radical agenda with your taxdollars.
Sign The Petition To Get The ACLU Off The Taxpayer's Dole

This was a Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join please

Email Jay!

Sites Already on Board:

Stop The ACLU
Freedom Of Thought
Mad Tech
Respublica
The Wide Awakes
Angry Republican Mom
Kender's Musings
American Patriots
What Attitude Problem?
Life Trek
Gribbit's Word
Def Conservative
An American Housewife
A Tic In The Mind's Eye
Cao's Blog
Regular Ron
Freedom Of
Is This Life?
Patriots For Bush
California Conservative 4 Truth
NIF
Obiter Dictum
PBS Watch
Xtreme Right Wing
Daily Inklings
Miss Patriot
Jack Lewis.net
Conservative Dialysis
Conservative Angst
Kill Righty
American Warmonger
Birth Of A Neo-Con
The Nose On Your Face


We are trying to raise money for full page ads and eventually commercials exposing the ACLU's radical agenda. Help us out! Buy a bumper sticker!
Click Below To See Our Store!



Please stop by the ACLUBulldozer online store and pick up a bumper sticker or t-shirt. All proceeds go to advertising for a national march on state ACLU offices. Help put an end to the evils of the Most Dangerous Organization in America




Cross posted from: Stop The ACLU Blog.

April 26, 2005

More ALA Lunacy

The policies of the American Library Association are dangerous. I have written extensively about the ALA's anti-child/pro-pervert policy of resistance to internet filters, now Deroy Murdock at NRO writes that Libraries should be a key target of the Patriot Act.

As Congress considers reauthorizing the Patriot Act, it explicitly should add libraries to the locations where federal investigators may hunt terrorists. Here are five reasons why: Marwan al Shehhi; Mohand, Wail, and Waleed Alshehri; and Mohamed Atta — September 11 hijackers, all.

It seems that the ALA is willing to sacrifice not only our children but our very lives at the altar of free speech. The founders of the nation and the authors of the Constitution would be horrified to see the degree to which their intentions have been twisted. Consider this:

"We're quiet rebels," Cindy Czesak, director of New Jersey's Paterson Free Public Library, told Fox News. Her institution collects every completed computer sign-up sheet. "After that, it's removed and destroyed." She added: "We bought a nice new shredder." Paterson happens to be the Garden State town where Nawaf and Salem al Hazmi, Khalid al Mihdar, Hani Hanjour, and Majed Moqed rented an apartment in spring 2001. All five slammed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon. Death toll: 184.

These dangerously naive or clandestinely seditious librarians are beyond foolish. They potentially jeopardize the lives of American citizens.

Frankly, this attitude is not surprising to me. I have seen it again and again in regard to protecting children from pornography in PUBLIC libraries. Michael Savage is right: "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder."

H/T: Michelle Malkin

The Word Filibuster

You hear the word filibuster everywhere. Filibusters are good. Filibusters are bad. Filibuster this, filibuster that. What kind of word is filibuster?

In today's lexicon a filibuster is an "obstruction of legislation in the U.S. Senate by prolonged speechmaking." The word has its roots in the mid-nineteenth century. Back then there were roving bands of adventurers which roamed the seas of the western hemisphere generally stirring up trouble. We know them as pirates today, way back then we called them freebooters or filibusters.

The original word was Dutch. The English word came from the Spanish and the Spanish probably came from the French which got it from English. Got that? Okay so I didn't do so well. Go over to ChronWatch and figure it out for yourself... bucko.

I be a filibuster

Arrr, and when ye get back, do yer shipmate a favor and tell me what ye learn'd, cause I be mighty confused.

April 25, 2005

Misleading Scare Headline on Adult Stem Cells: "Adult Cells Cancer Threat"

Source: LifeSiteNews.com

"Cry havoc, and let slip the dogs of war!" The onslaught against the intrinsic value of human life goes on without respite. In spite of the total lack of success using embryonic stem cells the Death's Head Brigade continues to push for more experimentation using stem cells harvested from aborted babies.

To this point language has been the primary weapon used to try to convince the general public of the "importance" of the use of public funding to research embryonic stem cells. When the Death's Head Brigade talks of stem cells they conveniently omit the distinction between adult and embryonic stem cells. When they speak of stem cells it is always implied that they are talking about aborted-baby stem cells.

The tactic now seems to be to discredit the stunningly successful use of adult stem cells which are obtained from healthy adults with no danger of harm to the donors.

In research published in the New Scientist, the Spanish scientists have shown that if adult cells are cultivated long past the stage at which they are normally used for research, they can be induced to form tumours. A team at the Autonomous University of Madrid grew the cells for up to eight months and then transplanted into animals where the oldest of the cells formed cancerous growths. The BBC, a long time supporter of both cannibalistic embryo research and abortion, however, declined to mention until the middle of the story that the researchers themselves thought the threat of cancer with adult cells is only 'theoretical.'

Perhaps the following paragraph sheds some light on the reason for the Death's Head Brigade's increased level of hysteria.

While embryonic stem cells have not yielded any successful disease therapy, in the last few years, a stunning array of illnesses and injuries have been routinely treated with adult stem cells and many more are being studied with prospects of success. Some diseases that are frequently cited as justification for embryo research are now being successfully treated with adult cells including Parkinson's disease, cancer and spinal cord injuries. Research is moving forward with diabetes that uses live donors of a type of cell called 'islet' cells that will shortly make embryo stem cell research for diabetes redundant.

As always with the culture of death, follow the money.

Read the entire article here.

Hat Tip: ProLifeBlogs.com

April 24, 2005

Stand by Tom DeLay

The hypocritical leftist meat grinder is running in overdrive. House majority leader Tom DeLay is the latest in a long line of decent people served up as the Blue Plate Special. The liberal butchers count on the fact that their opposition is ethical and in many cases will resign at even a hint of the appearance of impropriety.

Today ChronWatch has published a piece by Gary Aldrich which makes the call for all people of value to support DeLay and realize that until the left acknowledges the plank in their own eye, they have no legitimacy pointing out the mote in the eyes of others.

This is how it works: If a conservative is caught breaking the speed limit, while a married Liberal man is driving drunk with his girlfriend in the car, runs off a bridge killing her - and then he runs away and hides, then lies about the entire matter - well you see, it's the same thing. Both violated traffic laws, so there!


UPDATE: Fizzled Democratic Presidential Candidate Wesley Clark has pushed the DeLay bashing to new and surreal dimensions with this statement:

"I think that people who are charged with ethics violations in Congress should be prohibited from playing golf,"

Read about this idiotic statement here.

Sunday Quote: George Patton to the US 3rd Army

Maybe it is because during this last week I have read and written about the slimy weasles of the ACLU, their snivelling sisters at the ALA, the death squads of euthanasia and the godless self worshiping Howard Dean. Whatever it is, I found myself searching for someone who represents what this country was is and once stood stands for. I thought about the usual suspects: Jefferson, Lincoln, Washington, Hamilton, Teddy Roosevelt and many others. All of them excellent leaders but none, this night, got my juices flowing.

And then I remembered Patton.

George S. Patton, born in 1885 in San Gabriel, California. Raised on a California ranch. Graduated from West Point in 1909. Participated in the 1912 Olympic Games in Stockholm. A great general. He was not afraid to speak his mind and he could lead men.

Here is the text of his famous speech to the United States 3rd. Army delivered on June 5th 1944 somewhere in England...



Men, this stuff that some sources sling around about America wanting out of this war, not wanting to fight, is a crock of bullshit. Americans love to fight, traditionally. All real Americans love the sting and clash of battle. You are here today for three reasons. First, because you are here to defend your homes and your loved ones. Second, you are here for your own self respect, because you would not want to be anywhere else. Third, you are here because you are real men and all real men like to fight. When you, here, everyone of you, were kids, you all admired the champion marble player, the fastest runner, the toughest boxer, the big league ball players, and the All-American football players. Americans love a winner. Americans will not tolerate a loser. Americans despise cowards. Americans play to win all of the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war; for the very idea of losing is hateful to an American.

You are not all going to die. Only two percent of you right here today would die in a major battle. Death must not be feared. Death, in time, comes to all men. Yes, every man is scared in his first battle. If he says he's not, he's a liar. Some men are cowards but they fight the same as the brave men or they get the hell slammed out of them watching men fight who are just as scared as they are. The real hero is the man who fights even though he is scared. Some men get over their fright in a minute under fire. For some, it takes an hour. For some, it takes days. But a real man will never let his fear of death overpower his honor, his sense of duty to his country, and his innate manhood. Battle is the most magnificent competition in which a human being can indulge. It brings out all that is best and it removes all that is base. Americans pride themselves on being He Men and they ARE He Men. Remember that the enemy is just as frightened as you are, and probably more so. They are not supermen.

All through your Army careers, you men have bitched about what you call "chicken shit drilling". That, like everything else in this Army, has a definite purpose. That purpose is alertness. Alertness must be bred into every soldier. I don't give a fuck for a man who's not always on his toes. You men are veterans or you wouldn't be here. You are ready for what's to come. A man must be alert at all times if he expects to stay alive. If you're not alert, sometime, a German son-of-an-asshole-bitch is going to sneak up behind you and beat you to death with a sockful of shit!" The men roared in agreement.

There are four hundred neatly marked graves somewhere in Sicily. All because one man went to sleep on the job. But they are German graves, because we caught the bastard asleep before they did. An Army is a team. It lives, sleeps, eats, and fights as a team. This individual heroic stuff is pure horse shit. The bilious bastards who write that kind of stuff for the Saturday Evening Post don't know any more about real fighting under fire than they know about fucking!

We have the finest food, the finest equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world. Why, by God, I actually pity those poor sons-of-bitches we're going up against. By God, I do My men don't surrender. I don't want to hear of any soldier under my command being captured unless he has been hit. Even if you are hit, you can still fight back. That's not just bull shit either. The kind of man that I want in my command is just like the lieutenant in Libya, who, with a Luger against his chest, jerked off his helmet, swept the gun aside with one hand, and busted the hell out of the Kraut with his helmet. Then he jumped on the gun and went out and killed another German before they knew what the hell was coming off. And, all of that time, this man had a bullet through a lung. There was a real man!

All of the real heroes are not storybook combat fighters, either. Every single man in this Army plays a vital role. Don't ever let up. Don't ever think that your job is unimportant. Every man has a job to do and he must do it. Every man is a vital link in the great chain. What if every truck driver suddenly decided that he didn't like the whine of those shells overhead, turned yellow, and jumped headlong into a ditch? The cowardly bastard could say, "Hell, they won't miss me, just one man in thousands". But, what if every man thought that way? Where in the hell would we be now? What would our country, our loved ones, our homes, even the world, be like? No, Goddamnit, Americans don't think like that. Every man does his job. Every man serves the whole. Every department, every unit, is important in the vast scheme of this war. The ordnance men are needed to supply the guns and machinery of war to keep us rolling. The Quartermaster is needed to bring up food and clothes because where we are going there isn't a hell of a lot to steal. Every last man on K.P. has a job to do, even the one who heats our water to keep us from getting the 'G.I. Shits'."

Each man must not think only of himself, but also of his buddy fighting beside him. We don't want yellow cowards in this Army. They should be killed off like rats. If not, they will go home after this war and breed more cowards. The brave men will breed more brave men. Kill off the Goddamned cowards and we will have a nation of brave men. One of the bravest men that I ever saw was a fellow on top of a telegraph pole in the midst of a furious fire fight in Tunisia. I stopped and asked what the hell he was doing up there at a time like that. He answered, "Fixing the wire, Sir". I asked, "Isn't that a little unhealthy right about now?" He answered, "Yes Sir, but the Goddamned wire has to be fixed". I asked, "Don't those planes strafing the road bother you?" And he answered, "No, Sir, but you sure as hell do!" Now, there was a real man. A real soldier. There was a man who devoted all he had to his duty, no matter how seemingly insignificant his duty might appear at the time, no matter how great the odds.

And you should have seen those trucks on the rode to Tunisia. Those drivers were magnificent. All day and all night they rolled over those son-of-a-bitching roads, never stopping, never faltering from their course, with shells bursting all around them all of the time. We got through on good old American guts. Many of those men drove for over forty consecutive hours. These men weren't combat men, but they were soldiers with a job to do. They did it, and in one hell of a way they did it. They were part of a team. Without team effort, without them, the fight would have been lost. All of the links in the chain pulled together and the chain became unbreakable.

Don't forget, you men don't know that I'm here. No mention of that fact is to be made in any letters. The world is not supposed to know what the hell happened to me. I'm not supposed to be commanding this Army. I'm not even supposed to be here in England. Let the first bastards to find out be the Goddamned Germans. Some day I want to see them raise up on their piss-soaked hind legs and howl, 'Jesus Christ, it's the Goddamned Third Army again and that son-of-a-fucking-bitch Patton'."

"We want to get the hell over there, the quicker we clean up this Goddamned mess, the quicker we can take a little jaunt against the purple pissing Japs and clean out their nest, too. Before the Goddamned Marines get all of the credit.

Sure, we want to go home. We want this war over with. The quickest way to get it over with is to go get the bastards who started it. The quicker they are whipped, the quicker we can go home. The shortest way home is through Berlin and Tokyo. And when we get to Berlin, I am personally going to shoot that paper hanging son-of-a-bitch Hitler. Just like I'd shoot a snake!

When a man is lying in a shell hole, if he just stays there all day, a German will get to him eventually. The hell with that idea. The hell with taking it. My men don't dig foxholes. I don't want them to. Foxholes only slow up an offensive. Keep moving. And don't give the enemy time to dig one either. We'll win this war, but we'll win it only by fighting and by showing the Germans that we've got more guts than they have; or ever will have. We're not going to just shoot the sons-of-bitches, we're going to rip out their living Goddamned guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun cocksuckers by the bushel-fucking-basket. War is a bloody, killing business. You've got to spill their blood, or they will spill yours. Rip them up the belly. Shoot them in the guts. When shells are hitting all around you and you wipe the dirt off your face and realize that instead of dirt it's the blood and guts of what once was your best friend beside you, you'll know what to do!

I don't want to get any messages saying, "I am holding my position." We are not holding a Goddamned thing. Let the Germans do that. We are advancing constantly and we are not interested in holding onto anything, except the enemy's balls. We are going to twist his balls and kick the living shit out of him all of the time. Our basic plan of operation is to advance and to keep on advancing regardless of whether we have to go over, under, or through the enemy. We are going to go through him like crap through a goose; like shit through a tin horn!

From time to time there will be some complaints that we are pushing our people too hard. I don't give a good Goddamn about such complaints. I believe in the old and sound rule that an ounce of sweat will save a gallon of blood. The harder WE push, the more Germans we will kill. The more Germans we kill, the fewer of our men will be killed. Pushing means fewer casualties. I want you all to remember that.

There is one great thing that you men will all be able to say after this war is over and you are home once again. You may be thankful that twenty years from now when you are sitting by the fireplace with your grandson on your knee and he asks you what you did in the great World War II, you WON'T have to cough, shift him to the other knee and say, "Well, your Granddaddy shoveled shit in Louisiana." No, Sir, you can look him straight in the eye and say, "Son, your Granddaddy rode with the Great Third Army and a Son-of-a-Goddamned-Bitch named Georgie Patton!

[+/-] Read More...

This is dedicated to the heroic men and women serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and around the world! Also to our noble allies who have done the right thing in the face of ridicule, we thank you.

April 22, 2005

The Devil and the ALA / ACLU

I sometimes think I should consider changing the name of this blog to Stop The American Library Association. That seditious sham of an organization has absolutely no regard for the online protection of children in the library systems of the United States. Worse, the ALA has outright contempt for responsible parents and concerned citizens who dare question their precious policy of minimally complying with the CIPA (Children's Internet Protection Act.)

Today, the ALA posted a "news" item titled: ACLU Report Finds "Troubling" Use of Filters in R.I. Libraries. The report, written by the ACLU, opens like this:

"The public library has been historically a vital instrument of democracy and opportunity in the United States.... Our history has been greatly shaped by people who read their way to opportunity and achievements in public libraries." - Arthur M. Schlesinger

"Quite simply one can smell a rat when a library blocks material already in its control, just as we do when a library removes books from its shelves for reasons having nothing to do with wear and tear, obsolescence or lack of demand." - U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter

Did you catch that? A subtle setting of moral equivalence. Schlesinger's noble praising of determination and education equated to Souter's utter cluelessness. Justice Souter's statement comes from the minority opinion of the Supreme Court's ruling to uphold the constitutionality of CIPA in June of 2003 - a case litigated and lost by the ACLU. In his statement Souter shows his profound lack of understanding of the nature of the internet. Since when is internet pornography or, for that matter, any internet content already in a public library's control? The use of the Souter quote after the Schlesinger quote also shows the deceptive tactics used by the ACLU.

The report goes on to try to discredit internet filtering software manufacturers and their products. This is a favorite tactic of the ACLU and the ALA. I suppose that they figure that we are all idiots and won't check up on their claims. I am sorry to disappoint them but not only have I checked, I have worked in the internet security arena since 1993 so I know very well what the state of filtering was and is.

A big gun of the ACLU/ALA is a piece - I can't call it a study - done by Peacefire.org. The name is a dead giveaway to this organization's agenda. Here is the header of their web site:

How to disable your blocking software Why we do this
You'll understand when you're younger

"You'll understand when you're younger" ... There is a motto which screams reason, attention to detail and objectivity. Nevertheless, the ACLU and the ALA have used this BS-passing-as-data for years in court cases, press releases and "news" stories.

I'll analyze one of the "case studies" (aka total BS) from the report. I choose WebSense since I ran their engineering department in 1997 & 1998. At that time I had the pleasure of dealing with the dweebs at peacefire so I know whereof I speak. The ACLU report says:

Websense literature touts its "master database" of "more than 6 million sites" ...
[...]
The database's accuracy, however, has been subject to question since free-speech watchdog groups began monitoring it in the late 1990s. The most recent report, re-leased in 2001 by Peacefire.org, found inexplicable blocks on, among others, an educational site about autism (blocked as "gambling"), the Jewish Federation of Northeastern Pennsylvania (blocked as "sex"), and a religious ministry site (blocked as "tasteless").
[...]
During a recent session at the Providence Public Library, the author of this report was denied access to, among other sites, the official web site of famed, if controversial, photographer Robert Mapplethorpe; a health web site for men; and an interview with actor Peter Sellers because it appeared on Playboy's web site.

Ha! I particularly like the last example. The author wanted to read Playboy online for the articles!

Kidding aside, if this is their best shot then you go, right now, and buy the WebSense product (no, I don't own any of their stock.) By my precise calculations, the best the ACLU/ALA could do in their scathing report was to prove that WebSense is 99.9999% accurate, and I gave them Mapplethorpe and the "web site for mens health" - wink, wink. Obviously nothing is that accurate but, I know for a fact that most non-homeuser grade filtering software packages are very, very accurate.

Why does the ALA/ACLU engage in this kind of deception and resist protecting children online in PUBLIC libraries? I don't know, but can you trust these people with your children? You shouldn't, and I am convinced they don't care.

April 21, 2005

PVS: Diagnosis with an Agenda

As usual, The American Thinker has an excellent article written by Carl Rossini. Rossini correctly observes that the term "Vegetative" when applied to a human being is not only a non sequitur but is also a purposeful deception designed to dehumanize a person in order to legitimize euthanasia.

The article concludes with this statement:

The crossroads are upon us, where men and women in medicine are going to be forced to choose between terminology that accurately communicates a patient’s condition, or language that facilitates the killing those patients with disorders of the brain. And the rest of us must learn to parse the science from propaganda in diagnostic language

He has much more to say so read the whole piece.

ACLU Attack Poodle: "I felt judged."

Boo Hoo.

The ACLU is now claiming that "Public libraries in Rhode Island are inconsistent in applying a federal law designed to protect children from viewing explicit material on the Internet." Sounds like they are concerned that children might be exposed to vile pornography on the computers in a PUBLIC library. We all know better than that. This is about a Rhode Island library where the ACLU attack poodle couldn't turn off the porn blocker.

The incident went as follows:

... staff denied a request by an ACLU employee for the blocking software to be removed for a search on "nudism."

"She insinuated that I was looking at porn," said Amy Myrick of the ACLU. "I felt judged."

I wonder if she did this before going into the library to work up the courage to be judged.

The ACLU and the ALA (American Library Association) are dead set against internet filters in TAX FUNDED PUBLIC libraries. On my other blog, The Lifeguard, I have written quite a bit about the intransigence of the ALA and their disdain for protecting children from the absolute worst things humanity has to offer.

Some more examples of the ALA at work can be found here, here, here, here and here.

April 20, 2005

For Motor Oil...

From blackpooltoday.co.uk:

A new "art" exhibit in Blackpool, UK has opened. Titled "Conspiracies" the exhibit claims to have proof that the 9/11 attack was actually an operation of the US government to allow the US to steal motor oil from Iraq and Afghanistan.

For Pete's sake why didn't I see that?

Read all about it here.

April 19, 2005

The Consent of the Governed

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ...
The Declaration of Independence -- 1776

There is much debate today about the judicial filibustering occurring in the Senate. Most people are, I believe, under the erroneous impression that this issue is a political issue. The belief is that it is a Republicans vs. Democrats fight. Anyone who holds a pro-life position must understand that the issue is NOT political. Many, if not most, rank and file Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians and Independents subscribe to the uniquely American proposition that "all men are created equal." Young, old, dull, smart, healthy, infirmed, able and handicapped are included. The inconvienient ones among us should not be subject to the increasingly heartless and incomprehensible decisions being made by the bench.

We have a problem in our nation. Over time and behind our backs our once honored and esteemed Judicial institutions have mutated into an unchecked oligarchy. What else could explain the Terri Schindler-Schiavo travesty? A lower tier county probate judge was able to sentence an innocent woman to death by dehydration. That is amazing in and of itself but the melodrama which played itself out later is the outrage about which we should all be concerned. That county probate judge was able to ignore and, indeed, scoff at an Act of Congress! That judge's arrogance was then upheld and approved by several other higher courts. All of this was done in the open with impunity. To date, no attempt has been made to make the said contemptuous courts answer for their brazen disregard of the the people's representatives.

What happened? Why did this happen?

A very good explanation can be found in the writing of a 19th century American lawyer, abolitionist, entrepreneur, legal theorist and political radical. His name is Lysander Spooner. The following is quoted from his essay "Trial By Jury" written in 1852.

It is plain, therefore, that if the people have invested the government with power to make laws that absolutely bind the people, and to punish the people for transgressing those laws, the people have surrendered their liberties unreservedly into the hands of the government.

It is of no avail to say, in answer to this view of the case, that in surrendering their liberties into the hands of the government, the people took an oath from the government, that it would exercise its power within certain constitutional limits; for when did oaths ever restrain a government that was otherwise unrestrained? when did a government fail to determine that all its acts were within the constitutional and authorized limits of its power, if it were permitted to determine that question for itself?

Neither is it of any avail to say, that, if the government abuse its power, and enact unjust and oppressive laws, the government may be changed by the influence of discussion, and the exercise of the right of suffrage. Discussion can do nothing to prevent the enactment, or procure the repeal, of unjust laws, unless it be understood that the discussion is to be followed by resistance. Tyrants care nothing for discussions that are to end only in discussion. Discussions, which do not interfere with the enforcement of their laws, are but idle wind to them. Suffrage is equally powerless and unreliable. It can be exercised only periodically; and the tyranny must at least be borne until the time for suffrage comes. Besides, when the suffrage is exercised, it gives no guaranty for the repeal of existing laws that are oppressive, and no security against the enactment of new ones that are equally so. The second body of legislators are liable and likely to be just as tyrannical as the first. If it be said that the second body may be chosen for their integrity, the answer is, that the first were chosen for that very reason, and yet proved tyrants. The second will be exposed to the same temptations as the first, and will be just as likely to prove tyrannical. Who ever heard that succeeding legislatures were, on the whole, more honest than those that preceded them? What is there in the nature of men or things to make them so? If it be said that the first body were chosen from motives of injustice, that fact proves that there is a portion of society who desire to establish injustice; and if they were powerful or artful enough to procure the election of their instruments to compose the first legislature, they will be likely to be powerful or artful enough to procure the election of the same or similar instruments to compose the second. The right of suffrage, therefore, and even a change of legislators, guarantees no change of legislation --- certainly no change for the better. Even if a change for the better actually comes, it comes too late, because it comes only after more or less injustice has been irreparably done.

But, at best, the right of suffrage can be exercised only periodically; and between the periods the legislators are wholly irresponsible. No despot was ever more entirely irresponsible than are republican legislators during the period for which they are chosen. They can neither be removed from their office, nor called to account while in their office, nor punished after they leave their office, be their tyranny what it may. Moreover, the judicial and executive departments of the government are equally irresponsible to the people, and are only responsible, (by impeachment, and dependence for their salaries), to these irresponsible legislators. This dependence of the judiciary and executive upon the legislature is a guaranty that they will always sanction and execute its laws, whether just or unjust. Thus the legislators hold the whole power of the government in their hands, and are at the same time utterly irresponsible for the manner in which they use it.

If, now, this government, (the three branches thus really united in one), can determine the validity of, and enforce, its own laws, it is, for the time being, entirely absolute, and wholly irresponsible to the people.

The point Spooner has made and the message to us, in America, today is that we must hold our representatives and by proxy our judiciary accountable. Party affiliations are only so much dross in the face of losing our rapidly fading power to rein in an out of touch and out of control judicial branch of government.

Trying to stack the court by subtraction must be stopped.

Hat Tip: "Mary et. al." over at BlogsForTerri.

The "Higher Powers" of the Culture of Death

Howard Dean let it slip. In his recent promise to "use" Terri Schindler-Schiavo against Republicans in 2006 and 2008, Democratic National Committee chairman Dean told us who he and, by extension, the liberal democratic party worships. It isn't the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Dean said:

"The issue is: Are we going to live in a theocracy where the highest powers tell us what to do? Or are we going to be allowed to consult our own high powers when we make very difficult decisions?'" [emphasis added]

Lets analyze what he said there. According to Dean's words he would rather "consult our own high powers" than have "the highest powers" tell us what to do.

Who are these powers he is talking about?

First, since he uses the word theocracy to describe the highest powers he must be referring to ALMIGHTY GOD, the God of the Jews and Christians, the one who said his name is "I AM THAT I AM".

Next, "our own high powers" is vague which is not surprising given the left's love of moral and philosophical relativism. An interesting word in Dean's statement is the word consult. When used with the phrase: "our own high powers," it conjures up images of psychics, necromancers, fortune tellers and demons. I immediately thought of the witch of Endor which King Saul consulted. That consultation resulted in Saul's violent death the very next day. Another interpretation of "our own high powers" could refer to one's own ego or even one's own intelligence. After all, man is the measure of all things isn't he? At least the godless left seems to think so.

Put this together and reparse what Howard Dean was actually saying. Mr. Dean does not want to take any orders from the highest power - God Almighty. Mr. Dean, and those he represents, prefer to rely on human ego, human understanding, spirits of the dead, astrologers, witches, the reading of chicken intestines, tea leaves or anything else which massages their own depravity. Anything at all except the One True God. It is no wonder that the left has embraced the culture of death.

April 13, 2005

C. Everett Koop Predicted "The Slide to Auschwitz"

Bryan Alexander has written an insightful piece on the pro-death movement posted at The American Thinker. The article cites former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop's 1977 address titled "The Slide to Auschwitz" where Koop's prescience is all too apparent.

The death of Terri Schiavo, caused by starvation and dehydration, is only the latest manifestation of a trend which has been building for a long time. In 1977, in an address entitled "The Slide to Auschwitz," given to the American Academy of Pediatrics, former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, M.D. stated that he saw "the progression from abortion to infanticide, to euthanasia, to the problems that developed in Nazi Germany..."

Alexander goes on to draw the chilling parallel between the current western "right to die" push and the German eugenics movement of the 1920's and 1930s which led to the 1939 Nazi Aktion T-4 program.

Compare these cases with pre-Nazi Germany. In 1920, well before the Nazis rose to power, German judge Karl Binding and psychiatrist Alfred Hoche wrote "The Release of the Destruction of Life Devoid of Value," a 60 page booklet which suggested that some lives were not worth living. Binding and Hoche justified euthanasia of "absolutely worthless human beings." Over time, the ideas presented by Binding and Hoche gained acceptance in German society.

The similarities are chilling, the stakes in this battle are literally life and death.

April 12, 2005

Hare Today Gone Tomorrow

File this under weird.

Draw your own conclusions.

From MSNBC:

By George Lewis
Correspondent
NBC News

Because bunnies are such adorable little critters, people are hopping mad about a Web site called savetoby.com, filled with photos and even a video of a cute rabbit named Toby, accompanied by a threat on his life.

"On June 30, 2005, Toby will die," proclaims an anonymous author on the site. "I am going to eat him. God as my witness, I will devour this little guy unless I receive $50,000 into my account."

[...]

Animal lovers, like Sue Brennan, who runs a shelter called "Rabbit Haven" in Gig Harbor, Washington, are outraged.

"I think it's purely emotional blackmail and it was all designed to get a reaction," says Brennan. "The reaction he is looking for is money."

[...]

... skeptical about the seriousness of the anonymous threat.

"To be honest we don't know if he's actually going to eat the rabbit. We don't even know if there is a rabbit."

[...]

Harebrained idea of two college students...


Truth or fiction? I'm sorry to say that the uncertainties in this story somewhat approximate the uncertainties of the Mae Magouirk saga.

Editors note: Sorry for the lame title. It's late, strange story, twilight zone parallels and my dog ate the original title...

April 11, 2005

A Gift For That Special Someone...


... or not, I was just sayin'...

April 10, 2005

The Attack of the Fetus People

Before anything else, I would like to commend Judge Donald Boyd for being fair and reasonable in the matter of Mae Magouirk. It is reassuring to see that level headedness still has a place in the court rooms of America with regard to the epivalothanasia (imposed death) of innocents.


Who, you may ask, are the Fetus People? According to the author of Mahablog, Fetus People live in Fetus People Land (which, I suppose, is congruent with JesusLand) and adhere to the laughable belief that life is precious. Furthermore, they actually have the ignorant opinion that unborn children, the elderly and the disabled (even those with disabilities which haven't been the focus of Hollywood movies) do not have the "right" to be relieved of their lives because of "incompatible with life" conditions. Experts say that most of the Fetus People are Christians or devout Jews or devout Muslims or people of moral character -- wink, wink. How crass, how ignorant, how straight-out-of-the-Ozarks-and-just-fell-off-the-turnip-truck can those Fetus People be?

Do you think that you might be one of the Fetus People? Who could it be that opposes the Fetus People?

Here is a quotation posted on an anti-Fetus People blog. I believe that this particular quote works in the other direction.

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."
Alexander Pope (1688-1744) - An Essay on Criticism

Apparently, the anti-Fetus People have drunk but a sip of the Pierian Spring, and not at all of the Spring of the Author of Life. In their own minds they are intellectual giants not unlike Ozymandias.

Read how ignorant, uneducated and unsophisticated Fetus People really are here.

April 09, 2005

Miss Mae Is Released From Hospice

From World Net Daily, Hyscience, BlogsForTerri and most pro-life bloggers:

Mae Magouirk has been airlifted from the hospice in LaGrange, Ga., to the University of Alabama-Birmingham Medical Center. Mae's nephew, Ken Mullinax, told WND:

"Because of your articles and all of the friends of Terri, my Aunt Mae Magouirk is now in the University of Alabama-Birmingham Medical Center and is receiving food, fluids, cardiac care and neurological help. We are overjoyed.

"And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done [it] unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done [it] unto me." -- Matt 25:40

April 08, 2005

Shelob's Lair

"Let him stay there, let him rot. Why should we care?"
The Return of the King -- J.R.R. Tolkien


In Tolkien's The Return of The King, an oppressively dark and stinking labyrinth of caves is inhabited by a monstrous spider named Shelob. Shelob feasts on the flesh of anything and anyone who dares venture in. It is a place of despair and death. Death there is not immediate. The victims are kept alive in a semi-conscious almost vegetative state until it is their turn to feed the monster.

The light of day is beginning to shine on America's own dark and stinking labyrinth of death. Places where people go to die. On the outside they are places of calm serenity. Outside, the signs proclaim "Enter and pass in a dignified, caring environment", but the signs behind the behind the doors read: "Abandon hope all ye who enter here." In addition to being places where the terminally ill go to die, they may have become places where the old, infirmed and disabled are put to be legally murdered. Behind closed doors and court orders, in the dark and away from prying eyes the innocent undesirables are disposed of.

Sherri of Straight Up With Sherri has done some digging and found some disturbing common threads between Terri's hospice and the hospice where Mae Magouirk is now being starved. Read what Sherri has found here.

***UPDATE***: BlogsForTerri has just posted a reprint of an article titled: "Is Hospice Care Safe?" from MichNews by Mark C. Abbott which reveals some startling details about euthenasia in the hospice industry.

H/T: BlogsForTerri

April 07, 2005

Ozymandias

Ozymandias

I met a traveler from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read,
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed,
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look upon my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Percy Bysshe Shelley
1792-1822
Read some interesting facts about Ozymandias here.

Annan Says Rights Body Harming UN

Flash! This just in from the BBC News!

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has accused the UN Human Rights Commission of failing to uphold human rights and said a new, permanent body is needed.

I think Mr. Annan has it backwards. The body isn't doing all of the damage, the UN needs a new head!

Read more here.

Words That Kill

The good folks at CURE (Citizens United Resisting Euthanasia) have some useful resources for those wanting to know more about what is really behind the euthanasia movement.

One of the resources available illuminates the Lethal Language used to hide the truth regarding euthanasia.

"Euthanasians have very subtle language," Fr. Paul Marx, O.S.B., warns us. "And they abuse language magnificently to their own ends." Years of bedside battles waged by CURE have convinced us of the wisdom that words can kill.

Many of these terms were used extensively by the press and their quasi-expert bioethicists throughout the course of the Terri Schindler-Schiavo outrage.

Here are some examples:

"artificial feeding"
a.k.a. "artificial nutrition" to make it sound medical. "A real consensus is emerging that artificial nutrition and hydration are forms of medical treatment," a euthanasia advocate advises. My father ate slenderized meats and vegetables through his stomach tube for nearly ten years, while living in coma. That's called "artificial." What about the chemical concoction my local fast-food joint calls a shake?

"Providing food and water through a nasogastric tube is not an artificial life-sustaining treatment. Removing [the tube] results in death from dehydration and starvation and is not natural' or humane,'" Jonathan Lew concluded at the California Department of Aging.

"brain dead"
Used by transplant terminators to describe a candidate for utilitarian euthanasia who has a beating heart, circulating blood, etc., i.e., who is alive. As Dr. Paul Byrne and Fr. Paul Quay, S.J., observe, "To many, organ transplantation, per se, is commendable, but removing a vital organ from one who, if he is not dead, will certainly be dead after such removal, is not acceptable."

"death with dignity"
It is a cruel irony that death with dignity, a respect-for-life phrase, has been taken over to justify killing. (original emphasis)

This "respect-for-life phrase" was coined by the German euthanasia movement in the 1920's and appears in the seminal, anti-life classic, The Destruction of Life Devoid of Value, by Binding and Hoche. True dignity lies in living each moment of life given by God united to His Will.


Go to the CURE site and learn more.

April 06, 2005

Shiavo Case Redux in Georgia

This was posted Wednesday evening on BlogsForTerri.com.

Caution, I am posting this not knowing if it is true. It is now time to practice what I've been preaching. It is better to err on the side of life.

Update: This does appear to be another case of epivalothanasia (imposed death). It is a death imposed because Mae is inconvieniently too old.

Shiavo case Redux in Georgia: Mae Magouirk…not comatose,not vegetative,not terminal, BEING STARVED AND DEHYDRATED TO DEATH

RECEIVED VIA EMAIL - EMERGENCY Please propagate throughout the Internet!

From: The Family of Mae Magouirk
To: BlogsForTerri and their readers
Subject: Family Seeking Help From BFT Bloggers and Media
April 6, 2005

Contact: Kenneth Mullinax Ph: 205-408-7598
mailto:Mockingbird@compuhelp.net

Why is Hospice LaGrange, Ga. withholding nourishment?

Mae Magouirk is being withheld nourishment and fluids and the Provisions of her Living Will are not being honored at the Hospice-LaGrange, (1510 Vernon Street, LaGrange “Troup County” Georgia, (706-845-3905) a subsidiary of the LaGrange Hospital in LaGrange Georgia.

Her family is desperately seeking to save her life before she dies of malnourishment and dehydration.

Mae Magouirk IS NOT comatose and she IS NOT vegetative. She is not terminal!

Despite these facts the Hospice and Beth Gaddy (706-668-0590), a school teacher at LaGrange’s Calloway Middle School and granddaughter of Mae Magouirk [...] have been denying her proactive nourishment or fluids (via a nose administered feeding tube or fluids via an IV) since March 28 without prior legal consent; against the wishes of her Living Will and against the wishes of Mae Magouirk’s closest living next of kin. Mae Magouirk’s next of kin are: Mr. A. B. McLeod (Her Brother 256-236-1331) and Mrs. Lonnie Ruth Mullinax (Her sister 205-408-7598) both of nearby Anniston, Alabama.

Under Georgia law, unless a medical durable power of attorney is in place, your closest living next of kin are stipulated to make all medical decisions. When Mae Magouirk’s closest living next of kin lodged a complaint with Hospice LaGrange’s in-house attorney Carol Todd (706-882-1411) last Thursday, March 31, Ms. Todd checked Mae Magouirk’s case file and upon examination of both documents discovered that Beth Gaddy DID NOT have the durable medical power of attorney for Mae Magouirk and upon closer examination of Mae Magouirk’s Living Will ascertained that fluids and nourishment were ONLY TO BE WITHHELD if she was either comatose or vegetative.

SHE IS IN NEITHER STATE!!!

Nor is Mae Magouirk terminally ill. Her local LaGrange, Ga. cardiologist, Dr. James Brennan (706-812-4308) and Dr. Raed Aqel, (205-934-9999) a highly acclaimed interventional cardiologist at the nationally renowned University of Alabama-Birmingham Medical Center have determined that Mae Magouirk’s aortic dissection is contained and not presently life threatening.

Two weeks ago, Mae Magouirk’s aorta had a dissection and she was hospitalized in the LaGrange Hospital in LaGrange, Ga. Her aortic problem was at first determined to be severe and she was admitted in the intensive care Unit. Her granddaughter, Beth Gaddy, a teacher at the Calloway Middle School in LaGrange, stated that she held Mae Magouirk’s medical power of attorney and thus invoked said powers against the wishes of Mae Magouirk’s closest living next of kin by having her moved to Hospice-LaGrange. While at Hospice-LaGrange, Beth Gaddy stated that her wishes were for no nourishment for Mae Magouirk v Probate Judge Donald Boyd (706) 883-1690)

Court CASE NUMBER: Estate 138-05

Attorney for saving Mae’s life: Jack Kirby, Kirby & Roberts, (706) 884-2992***

Thomas Jefferson on an Unchecked Judiciary

The author of "The Declaration of Independence" and the third President of the United States held no special love in his heart for the Judicial branch of the government. Some 121 years after these letters were written, we look back at these words as prophetic.

“The germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body (for impeachment is scarcely a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped.” (Letter to Charles Hammond, August 18, 1821)

“The great object of my fear is the Federal Judiciary. That body, like gravity, ever acting with noiseless foot and unalarming advance, gaining ground step by step and holding what it gains, is engulfing insidiously the special governments into the jaws of that which feeds them.” (Letter to Judge Spencer Roane, 1821)

From: ChronWatch.com "Relevant Today: Thomas Jefferson on Judicial Tyranny"

H/T: JackLewis.net

Life is of Little Value to the US Senate

Didn't I just hear the song: "Senators Huuh! What are They Good For?" Here is yet another example of the-world's-most-exclusive-club's disregard for human life. First it was majority leader Bill Frist praising the actions of the judiciary in ordering the murder of Terri Schindler Schiavo. Next, the senate voted to repeal the Reagan-era policy that blocks U.S. aid from flowing to foreign groups that perform or advocate abortion. It was a black Tuesday.

In a blow to pro-life Americans, the U.S. Senate voted 52-46 on Tuesday to repeal a Reagan-era policy that blocks U.S. aid from flowing to foreign groups that perform or advocate abortion.

[...]

The policy, imposed by President Ronald Reagan in 1984, was renewed by President George H.W. Bush, rescinded by President Bill Clinton, and reinstated by President George W. Bush.

"It is my conviction that taxpayer funds should not be used to pay for abortions or advocate or actively promote abortion, either here or abroad," Bush stated when he re-imposed the policy in 2001.

Never ones to forget to praise their minions, the Planned Parenthood Federation weighed in:

Steven W. Sinding, director-general of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, called the vote a major step in the right direction.

"Women worldwide were watching the U.S. Senate today for reassurance that the United States is on their side in their struggle for health and rights," Sinding said in a statement.

Fortunately, the bill still needs to pass the House and the President can veto should it survive. We'll see...

Read the article here.
H/T: A Face Made 4 Radio,A Voice Made 4 the Internet

Me, Myself and I

It should come as no surprise that one of the paramount "virtues" driving the pro-abortion movement is the exaltation of Self (capitalization intentional) over all else.

JivinJ at JivinJehoshaphat has a revealing post commenting on an article in World Magazine. JivinJ points to a disturbing interview within the World Magazine article of I'mNotSorry.net founder Patricia Beninato.

WORLD: There is no longer a debate about whether a fetus is a living baby. Yet, a September 2004 Salon article notes that "most abortions in America are about convenience." Morally speaking, what do you think about that?

Beninato: It doesn't bother me. I believe in the Planned Parenthood axiom "every child a wanted child." We see all too often what happens to an unwanted child, the horrors that are inflicted upon them. Yes, a fetus is alive. But weeds are life and mold is life and bugs are life and we destroy those on a regular basis. Pro-lifers want to give the impression that abortion is someone ripping a full-term baby out of a woman's womb and dashing its brains out against the nearest wall, when in actuality the average abortion -- nearly 90 percent -- is done within the first trimester.

Read JivinJehoshaphat's post here.
H/T: ProLifeBlogs

April 05, 2005

Mothra vs. Rodan

Mothra: Majority in both House and Senate + Executive Branch sounds good + spineless Senate leadership.

Rodan: Minority in Congress + Filibuster + Judiciary legislating from the bench.

My money's on Rodan!

Senators Huuh! What are They Good For?

Frist, Kennedy. Kennedy, Frist. What's the difference? Both blow hard when the cameras are on but it's back to business as usual when the cameras are off.

Speaking of the courts' actions in regard to Terri Schindler Schiavo, Senate majority leader Bill Frist says:

"I believe we have a fair and independent judiciary today, I respect that"

Compare milquetoast Frist to House majority leader Tom DeLay:

"We will look at an arrogant, out-of-control, unaccountable judiciary that thumbed their nose at the Congress and president when given jurisdiction to hear this case anew."

In a written statement, DeLay said: "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior."

Read the entire article here.

Oh, and if you're too young to remember the song from which I derived the title of this post, the answer to the question is: "Absolutely Nuthin'."
----
UPDATE 1: Picture Popeye. Bluto has beaten him up and it's time to eat some spinich. Picture Popeye, pipe whistling and twirling in his lips, saying: "That's al I can stands, I can't stands no more!" That is me right now. Film at 11.
---
UPDATE 2: "An army of sheep led by a lion will defeat an army of lions led by a sheep" - Arab Proverb
---
UPDATE 3: More on the Senate here.

April 04, 2005

Was the ABC News Poll about Terri Really a "Push Poll"?

While researching the validity certain polls for an upcoming post, I ran across a terrific resource blog. The blog is: "Mystery Pollster" edited by Mark Blumenthal, a professional pollster with more than 18 years of experience. Frankly, I regret not having found Mystery Pollster sooner, that way I could have avoided making a semi-fool of myself in a certain previous post. Don't get me wrong, I still believe that some of the wording in the ABC News poll was dubious and perhaps misleading, but I would have thought twice before I used the term "push poll." A lesson learned. As the saying goes: "Fools run in where angels fear to tread."

Mr. Blumenthal, has posted an excellent analysis of the ABC poll. First he defines some terms:

First, a plea for reporters, editors and bloggers of all ideologies: Can we please stop using the term "push poll" to describe every survey we consider objectionable? Yes, complain about bias when you see it, but the phrase push poll belongs to a higher order offense. To summarize the definitions posted online by the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), The National Council on Public Polls (NCPP) and the Council for Marketing & Opinion Research (CMOR): A push poll is not a poll at all but rather a form of fraud - an effort to spread an untrue or salacious rumor under the guise of legitimate research. "Push pollsters" are not pollsters at all. They do not care about collecting data or measuring opinions (even in a "bogus" way). They only care about calling as many people as possible to spread a false or malicious rumor without revealing their true intent. Whatever complaint one might have about the wording or reporting of the ABC poll, it was certainly not a "push poll."

End rant.

Point taken.

Writing about those who assert that the poll was unfair or biased he responds:

Do they have a point? The quick answer: The evidence of bias or deliberate untruth in the ABC poll is scant, though the issue raises some interesting questions about the appropriateness of "informed" questions.

After a very interesting and detailed analysis of this and other polls, Blumenthal concludes:

ONE LAST THOUGHT: After reflecting on the comments on this post, there is one word I wish I had written differently: "defensible" (as in, "was the language of their question defensible?"). A better word would have been "fair" or as Kaus put it, "reasonably calculated to produce an accurate poll of what people think."
...
So in that regard, I think that while far from perfect, the ABC question was fair. Others -- obviously -- disagree.

In conclusion, while I still "feel" (there is that word) the questions were not fairly worded and therefore the poll results can not be full trusted (see the April 2nd Zogby Poll), there is a possibility that America has fallen to a much deeper level of depravity than that with which I am comfortable.

You really must read the entire piece here.

Who Died and Made Bioethicists gods?

Altogether now, eugenics!

How's that spelled? B-I-O-E-T-H-I-C-I-S-T-S.

The next time you see, hear or read something in the media regarding quality of life issues and they trot out a so called expert to "clarify" matters, check out their title. It is probably bioethicist. Though they wrap themselves in a high sounding title, these loathsome creatures are no more than real life versions of Ebeneezer Scrooge or Mr. Potter from "It's a Wonderful Life." They operate from the belief the all men are created unequal and that the enlightened ones of society are obligated to purge the weak, infirmed and inferior from our ranks. Remember that!

The following is quoted from an article titled "End of the Affair" by John Leo on USNews.com.

The following candid exchange occurred on Court TV last month in a conversation between author Wesley Smith and bioethicist Bill Allen. Smith: Bill, do you think Terri is a person?" Allen: "No, I do not. I think having awareness is an essential criterion for personhood." Fetuses, babies, and Alzheimer's patients are only minimally aware and might not fit this definition of personhood, and so would have no claim on our protections. Smith points out that other bioethicists narrow protection further, requiring rationality, the capacity to experience desire, or the ability to value one's own existence. Tighter definitions of personhood expand the number of humans who can be killed without blame or harvested for their organs while still alive. On Court TV, Allen argued that the family could have removed Terri's organs while she was alive, "just as we allow people to say what they want done with their assets."
[emphasis added - TS]

April 03, 2005

Michael Schiavo hiding after death threats

Michael Schiavo is hiding because he fears for is own sorry hide. He has sought police protection which, ironically, is precisely what he refused his dear wife. Maybe, just maybe, it is actions like these which have cause poor little Mikey to run and hide:

Anger at Mr Schiavo's actions has been fuelled by the revelation that a court order from a county judge, George Greer, who repeatedly refused the Schindlers' pleas to let their daughter live, will allow him to have her cremated and her ashes interred in Pennsylvania. The Schindlers' request for a share of the ashes or even a lock of their daughter's hair has also been refused. [emphasis added - TS.]

The Schindlers, in spite of everything, are still displaying remarkable class:

"Our family abhors any violence, or any threats of violence. We ask that all those who support our family be completely kind in their words and deeds towards others," said Mrs Schiavo's sister, Suzanne Vitadamo.

Those people are saints!

Finally, in an attempt to show the "real" Michael Schiavo:

Mr Schiavo's friends and family speak of a man who honoured his wife's wishes and released her from what he perceived to be a life without hope. After cradling her in his arms as she died on Thursday morning, he placed a rose in her hand and kissed her goodbye. [emphasis added - TS.]

The text speaks for itself.

Read the entire article here.
(h/t: The Black Kettle)