Thinking in Print - Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print - Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print - Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print - Cogito Ergo BlogitoThinking in Print - Cogito Ergo Blogito
Hat tip to Mike at Mike’s America for turning me on to this video.
It comes from the great folks at The New Media Journal. Be sure and stop by there and say ‘Thanks’!
For those of you as upset as I am with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s despicable, defeatist comments recently, please visit Oppose Harry Reid, a site put together by a group of Conservative Nevadans but valued by all those who love America.
The following video is titled ‘Blood On Your Hands’. It says all there is to say about Reid’s comments.
Thinking I’d like to read that Reid has either been drummed out of office or has resigned in disgrace …
My post yesterday titled “Islam is Unconstitutional …” raised some discussion and comments here and elsewhere. Over at Digg.com, Matthew Williams responded with the following:
Wrong! Opression of religious rights is unconstitutional. Who is the author to say, “Enough is Enough”. Personally I’ve had “enough” of his spin. Advocating the reprieval of American Muslim’s right’s by citing events occuring outside of our country is pure garbage. Bulk em all together seems to be his philosophy. I find it funny that some people think only western nations have a mix of religion. This author is probably one of those who have uttered the phrase, “Nuke Iraq and turn it into a parking lot” once or twice. Not understanding that residing there besides peaceful Islamic people are Christians (Chaldean), Jewish, etc. Broad generalizations are this guy’s game.
I think the OP just wanted to up his posted article count by 1.
I started replying there but when my reply got to be post size I decided to bring it over here. Thus, my Open Response …
America is, without doubt, the greatest country on the face of the earth to date. Don’t get me wrong, we have our problems. However, compared to the rest of the world, it’s worth risking death and other minor unpleasantries just to get here. That’s gotta tell you something.
One thing I’ve always admired about our great nation is its tolerance for and inclusion of people, ideologies and organizations diametrically opposed to everything we stand for.
For example, there has been an active Communist Party in the US for many years. Years during which Soviet Socialists and Chinese Communists were enemies of the US. Yet Communists had a platform and a voice here. It is, after all, the American Way. It was bought and paid for with the lives and blood of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines and guaranteed by our Constitution.
Recently, I was reflecting on this same tolerance as it concerns Islam. Imams and mosques right here in the US preach the same hatred and intolerance flowing from the Middle East. We allow them to do so and our Constitution protects them. That is how it should be - or so I have always been taught. That line of thought took me to a very unexpected question, “When is enough going to be enough?”
Evidently, “It’s Hard Out Here for a (Terrorist With So Many Sides to) Pimp”. YNET reports there are, “Palestinian forces suffering from emotional issues”.
In the Muslim world, it used to be “Me against my brother - my brother and I against my cousin!” But the strain of killing other Muslims is taking its toll and Muslims may give their relatives a break to unite against the rest of us.
Palestinian security forces have been seeking emotional counseling, following “internal infighting in Gaza”. Dr. Riad al-Aqra, the director for the Gaza hospital for mental health, said that “although the occupation is a major cause for emotional depression for Gaza residents.Palestinian infighting plays a striking role in the increase of shock, tension and depression, present in previously unseen amounts.”
“One member of the Hamas security force came to me suffering from high tension, which was causing physical problems. He said he felt fear from the fact that he would burn in hell forever if he fired even one bullet at someone,” the doctor said.
1. Theoretical Ideal Candidate (100%)
2. Duncan Hunter (78%) Click here for info
3. Chuck Hagel (74%) Click here for info
4. Tom Tancredo (72%) Click here for info
5. Sam Brownback (67%) Click here for info
6. Newt Gingrich (67%) Click here for info
7. John McCain (65%) Click here for info
8. Mitt Romney (63%) Click here for info
9. Fred Thompson (58%) Click here for info
10. Jim Gilmore (54%) Click here for info
11. Mike Huckabee (54%) Click here for info
12. Rudolph Giuliani (52%) Click here for info
13. Ron Paul (50%) Click here for info
14. Kent McManigal (47%) Click here for info
15. Tommy Thompson (36%) Click here for info
16. Joseph Biden (29%) Click here for info
17. Hillary Clinton (27%) Click here for info
18. Bill Richardson (26%) Click here for info
19. Al Gore (24%) Click here for info
20. John Edwards (24%) Click here for info
21. Christopher Dodd (23%) Click here for info
22. Wesley Clark (22%) Click here for info
23. Dennis Kucinich (21%) Click here for info
24. Barack Obama (17%) Click here for info
25. Mike Gravel (12%) Click here for info
26. Elaine Brown (4%) Click here for info
I’m pleased to note that the best any Democrat did in my poll was Joe Biden at 16th with 29%. Although I have to admit it’s a bit scary to think that I’m almost 1/3 compatible with ANYone on the Left.
Wondering how many ‘Blue Dog’ Democrats would find themself voting for the other guys if the results of this poll were binding …
Politics is not for the faint of heart. It is a long, difficult and brutally Darwinian process from filing your paperwork, to the campaign trail, to the primary and finally to election day. As in nature, it is only the strong that survive. But stating that some might survive implies others may not.
For a variety of reasons, we are beginning to see some of the more prominent names in the national political herd stumble and slow down a bit. Again, the nature metaphor springs to mind as I recall what happens to slow or sick herd animals in the wild that fall behind. Let’s just say it isn’t a sight for those with weak stomachs.
The first to falter was John McCain. After a disastrous miscalculation in siding with the ‘Gang of 14′ over the issue of the President’s judicial nominees, the good Senator saw fit to snub Conservatives last month at CPAC. As the kids on the court say, “Not a good career move, Senator!” It is unlikely any GOP candidate can win without appealing to the Conservatives in and out of the party.
I wondered who would be next. I didn’t think it would be Rudy but this isn’t the first time I’ve been wrong. America’s Mayor has gone from ‘Hizz’oner’ to dishonor in just a few words. While first spoken to warn about the consequences of careless speech during WWII, the phrase ‘Loose Lips Sink Ships’ is just as applicable to the shark infested waters of today’s campaign trail.
After getting national attention last week with comments supporting taxpayer funding abortions and calling the funding a “right,” Rudy Giuliani thumbed his nose at the pro-life movement further over the weekend telling them to get over the issue of abortion.
Though merely admitting to a disagreement on the issue before, Giuliani went further this weekend, telling an Iowa newspaper that pro-life advocates should get over the contentious issue.
“Our party has to get beyond issues like that,” he told the Des Moines Register newspaper.
He also appeared to indicate that the Republican Party won’t gain supporters if it retains its pro-life position.
“Our party is going to grow, and we are going to win in 2008 if we are a party characterized by what we’re for, not if we’re a party that’s known for what we’re against,” he said.
It is hard to imagine just how badly this could hurt the Mayor.
We are not against abortion as if it were simply one of several morally neutral menu options at a burger joint. Perhaps Rudy missed the ‘pro’ part of ‘pro-life’. We are passionately FOR life because we believe abortion is the murder of a human being. We believe what happened at Virginia Tech is horrible. But we also believe that horror is played out by an increased factor of over 100 each and every day in America’s abortion mills.
Those of us who are pro-life react to Rudy’s statements as you might imagine the public would if Rudy were to suggest the Virginia Tech community just ‘get over’ their massacre and stop being against things like bringing the term ‘killer exam’ to life.
This blunt talk by Rudy may be an attempt to identify himself for the electorate. It may be a ploy to get attention as he sees his momentum slipping away in Fred Thompson’s direction. It may be simply what he really believes coming out at an inopportune moment.
One thing is for sure, regardless of why he said it. Just like McCain cannot win without Conservatives, Rudy can’t win without Evangelicals and other pro-lifers. Up until yesterday, many on the Right were content to support Rudy, even knowing he was pro-abortion (Hey - he wants to talk about what he’s for - I’ll let him). It was the Conservative equivalent of ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’. But to openly criticize and impugn pro-lifers crosses a line that one doesn’t just hop back across while calling out “Do over!”
I think Rudy has talked and revealed the direction in which he intends to sail. His enemies now know just where he’ll be so they can torpedo him. He may make it back to port to be repaired and sail another day. But he’s out of this fight and he has no one to blame but himself.
Thinking that Bible statement about being “Slow to speak …” might have some merit after all …
Everywhere I went today, people were talking about the evil that decided to visit Virginia Tech (VPI) yesterday. Predictably, fingers are being pointed and blame assessed. Parents, still numbed by their loss or at what could have been their loss are calling for the heads of the heads of VPI.
Larry King played ghoul all evening, interviewing any student that had stopped running trying to find someone to say something salacious or gory. Today there was a convocation to begin the healing process. I have to agree with Dennis Prager on this one. Healing process?? We haven’t even begun the GRIEVING process yet, it’s a bit premature to be talking about healing. Again, predictably, we’ll all yearn for closure together and awash in ‘Kum Ba Yah’ we’ll go on about our lives.
I have a problem with this. Because the issue here isn’t what to do about the survivors. It’s about deciding what to do about the dead. It’s about deciding what we’ll do to make sure there aren’t more of them. As long as we only televise our mourning and refuse to give our justifiable and understandable anger and outrage an outlet, the best we can hope for is a weak, victim mentality response to what ought to be a real wake up call.
Horrified people around the country are asking, “How can we stop this from happening again?” as if there was some magic, ‘Psychopath Stopping Pixie Dust’ they can sprinkle on their schools and businesses to protect themselves. The truth of the matter is blunt and distasteful. There will be more incidents like this one in the future. It is inevitable. We cannot stop it from happening again. We can only decide what we’ll do when it does.
Some attacks may be prevented by persons recognizing warning signs and intervening. But that safeguard failed in the VPI case. World Net Daily reports a VPI professor warned about the killer to no avail. And while we may be able to point to successful interventions, we must ask the honest question, ‘Successful at doing what?’
If we intervene in a person’s life and they never grab a gun and kill 30 people did we stop a murderer? Or did we merely help a troubled person through a difficult period in their life? It is impossible to say. But that seems to be the extent of our official response to these sorts of incidents. Counseling, intervention, diversity training, understanding and so on. Surprisingly, I agree. We should do all those things. We may very well stop a killer before he starts.
But we didn’t stop this one and we won’t stop all future ones either. So we have to stop asking “How can we stop this from happening again?” and start asking “What do we do when it does?”
It’s a two part answer. #1) Be aware of your surroundings. Understand the next store, school, church, bus, ballpark or office building you enter could be the scene of the next guy we didn’t catch. #2) Decide NOW what you are going to do THEN should you be so statistically unfortunate.
Be prepared! Think about these things. We get emails warning our women about parking lot security. Emails advise them not to answer the door if they think hear a baby crying outside. We’re told NEVER get into a bad guy’s vehicle regardless of what he threatens you with. But we stop short of advising the women and men in our lives to think about what they’d do if an armed psychopath with murder on his mind stands up at the next table over in Denny’s. But we’d better start.
A wise response to the question ‘What will I do then?’ would be, “I’d pull my own gun out and defend myself and those around me. The bad guy may get me but at least I go out giving myself and those around me the BEST chance to survive.”
That’s another unpleasant truth we must face. We can ask, “But what about the police? Won’t they protect us?” Unfortunately, the answer is, “No, they won’t.” Not because they don’t want to. Cops are first responders. They ran INTO the WTC while others ran out. But they never confronted a 9/11 hijacker and they never confronted the shooters at Columbine or VPI or most other mass killings. By the time cops got to the VPI killer, he was already dead. And he’d invited 32 others along for the ride. While this was happening, the cops were OUTSIDE following procedures that have been tested and proven wise. If anyone was going to stop the madness, it was going to be someone INSIDE with the killer.
Don’t believe me? Check out the opening paragraph of my post ‘A Tale of Two Atrocities’ It was an ARMED, OFF-DUTY police officer that contained the killer until the on-duty cops got there. His chief guaranteed he saved lives. If he could do it, why not an armed citizen?
So what if, for the sake of argument, there had been an armed student in the dorm when the killer started his spree? What if there had been an armed professor in the Engineering building? Is it not possible that the killer might have been stopped after killing only 2 people? What about after 5? 10? 15? And wouldn’t that have been a better outcome than 32?
We know some on the inside were brave enough in the face of evil. WND links to a London Times article about a 76 year old professor, a holocaust survivor, who blocked the door to his classroom with his body allowing students to escape out a window. It cost him his life. What if he had been armed as well and able to do more than just defend his students passively?
Perhaps he found guns distasteful. I have no idea. But if he did, I would not have insisted that he carry one. However, others might not share that distaste. One VPI student a year ago did not. He applied to be able to carry his weapon on campus. He had a concealed carry permit. But the Virginia State Legislature chose to deny him, not his 2nd Ammendment right to carry a weapon, but his God given right to defend himself that is recognized BY the 2nd Ammendment.
If VPI instituted a concealed carry program, would it have stopped yesterday’s carnage. I cannot say that it would have. But neither can I say it would not have. I can say it would have given VPI a better chance to minimize its loss. Because instead of focusing on making VPI staff, faculty, students and visitors FEEL safe. They would have been doing something to help them actually BE safe. That’s the only thing that matters.
Thinking we’ve all got some thinking to do in the days ahead …
UPDATE: The good folks over at Webloggin’ have an update on this case. After the Dukies were cleared, DA Mike Nifong was charged and tried. Looks like he’ll be disbarred and likely face additional civil suits. Not to worry, after all, isn’t Terry Moran’s point that white guys in this situation can’t really be hurt all that much. This will all blow over soon and Mike Nifong can get back to his privileged life …
After more than a year of legal wrangling in the Duke University men’s lacrosse team rape case, David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligman were more than just cleared. They were ‘declared innocent’ which is far different from being ‘found not guilty’.
You’d think people would rejoice that the system worked. You’d think they’d point to the outcome and use it to create confidence in the system. You’d think it impossible for anyone to find fault with this victory. But you’d be wrong.
Who is raining on the parade and why? No lesser luminary than ABC News Nightline co-anchor, Terry Moran, on the faulty premise that until everyone gets justice no one should get it.
His blog advises us not to “feel too sorry for the Dukies”. After all, they are white, rich and they have contacts we don’t. Thus this unfortunate episode is a minor bump in the road and will all blow over as if nothing ever happened. That’s the way life is when you’re wealthy and white. In other cases like this, minorities who don’t have the advantages the Dukies do get sent to prison instead of being feted in the media.
… perhaps the outpouring of sympathy for Reade Seligman, Collin Finnerty and David Evans is just a bit misplaced.
So as we rightly cover the vindication of these young men and focus on the genuine ordeal they have endured, let us also remember a few other things …
As students of Duke University or other elite institutions, these young men will get on with their privileged lives. … They are very differently situated in life from, say, the young women of the Rutgers University women’s basketball team.
You can read Moran’s disapproval between every line. The system is rigged so that if you’re white you get a pass. There is no rejoicing for the victory of truth. There is only distaste for the exoneration because they are horrible young men to begin with who used resources unavailable to the rest of us to clear their names.
Just when I was beginning to think the MSM was not beyond redemption, Mr. Moran stuffs his blog in his mouth.
Misrepresenting the nature of the case and focusing on unimportant details while implying that your actions are for the good of people who were truly wronged is disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst.
The holes in Mr. Moran’s position are numerous and huge.
He contrasts the ‘Dukies’ with people whose cases didn’t get so much MSM attention The idea is if the MSM paid as much attention to wrongly accused blacks and latinos more of them might also be exonerated. But Mr. Moran is the MSM guy, not the Dukies. If media coverage helps, why hasn’t Mr. Moran flooded the airwaves exposing these injustices? If he can’t or won’t, how does that invalidate the Dukies’ exoneration?
The Dukies, on the other hand, got lots of MSM attention. Little of it was helpful. Outside of talk radio, the MSM sided with the Dukies’ accuser. Is that what Mr. Moran wants for the innocents he champions?
Mr. Moran seems to make the argument that bad things happening to wealthy whites aren’t really bad. It’s only bad if you are a poor minority. Not only is that blatant class warfare but it is, as my teenage daughters would say, “Wrong on SO many levels!”. Perhaps Mr. Moran classifies 13 months of living in a MSM fishbowl, expending tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, the loss of jobs and careers and the ever popular mental anguish, pain and suffering as ‘not really bad’ but he’s in the minority if he does.
Finally, despite Terry Moran’s claims about MSM power, only the Dukies and their families are actually doing something to fight prosecutorial misconduct. Because they were able to resist Mike Nifong he may be disbarred. At a minimum he has been tainted by this affair. He will either be unable or hesitant to do something like this to anyone else regardless of social status thanks to the Dukies and few others.
The lesson we should take from this is that anyone can fall victim to this sort of tragedy, rich and white or poor and black. We must fight it whenever happens, not just when it happens to the poor and black. Finally, we must be truthful concerning the crime, its context and its consequences. Anything else, regardless of how high minded and proper it sounds, is a lie told by white people, trying to purge their guilt for not having done the right thing earlier. But white lies will not help black victims. As has been said elsewhere, only the truth that can set you free!
Wanting to believe the Left is honorable but having read too many stories like this one …
More and more hospitals and medical practices are reducing or eliminating any sort of care or treatment for pregnancy and childbirth. We have Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards and his fellow trial lawyers to thank for that.
The maternity care crisis could be getting worse in the Philadelphia area. … because yet another Philadelphia hospital - Chestnut Hill Hospital … is reviewing whether it can afford to keep its obstetrics program.
While the C-E-O says no decision on the future of the maternity unit has been made yet, the suggestion that it will close is causing worries in an area that many say is already facing a crisis, with fewer & fewer places left to deliver their babies.
14 hospitals have already closed, or are closing, their obstetrics units over the past decade.
That will leave Northeast Philadelphia, one of the most populous areas of the city, without any hospitals delivering babies.
Brooks Turkel, Chestnut Hill’s C-E-O (said), “Low reimbursement, high cost to deliver the services the women of this community deserve and then the layer of malpractice on top, makes it difficult. And just adding more patients often isn’t enough,” he said.
Turkel says it cost about 10 times more for the hospital to provide liability insurance for an obstetrician than a family practice doctor.
This illustrates an important truth. We can have many service providers and keep prices down. This means we give doctors more room to be fallible now and then. Or we can have expensive, limited access to medical professionals by holding doctors to unrealistic standards. Unfortunately, wish as we might, we cannot have it both ways.
John Edwards specialized in OB/GYN malpractice cases. Critics contend his courtroom victories were based on bad medical science and have come at a price. Edwards’ most celebrated case argued poor response to, or faulty interpretation of, fetal heart monitor information led to oxygen starvation during a delivery in North Carolina. The infant later developed Cerebral Palsy requiring extensive, lifetime care. Edwards convinced a jury the doctor was at fault and won a huge monetary award. But the doctor may not have been at fault.
Electronic fetal heart monitoring was introduced in the 1960’s … Advocates thought it would prevent most cerebral palsy by providing continuous immediate data on how babies were weathering labor and delivery.
But in the 1980’s, scientists began to challenge the premise that medical care during delivery had much to do with cerebral palsy. Studies concluded that 10 percent or fewer of cases could be traced to an oxygen shortage at birth. The vast majority of children who developed cerebral palsy were damaged long before labor, the studies found.
Then a series of randomized trials challenged the notion that faster delivery could prevent cerebral palsy. Reviewing data from nine countries, two researchers reported last year that the rate of the disorder had remained stable despite a fivefold increase in Caesarean deliveries.
Dr. Karin B. Nelson, a child neurologist with the National Institutes of Health, says the notion that paying greater heed to electronic monitoring will prevent brain injuries remains just that, a notion.
“Evidence of high medical quality contradicts the assumption that the use of electronic fetal monitoring during labor can prevent brain damage,” Dr. Nelson said.
The bill for the lawsuits is now due and payable in Philadelphia and elsewhere as medical malpractice insurance premiums force hospitals and doctors to discontinue service. While Edwards claims he is helping people, his cure may be worse than the condition he is fixing.
Costs faced by OB/GYNs are real. That is to say, real high! A friend, studying to be an OB/GYN, claims malpractice insurance could cost as much as $40,000 per year. Further, if she joins a practice and later leaves she must also leave cash behind to cover future premiums. She and/or the practice could be sued years down the road by patients claiming something during delivery caused problems later. Her window of liability runs to about 18 years - per child delivered!
Trial lawyers like John Edwards work for a percentage of the award or settlement their client receives. So, if a family gets $2 million dollars from a jury they don’t REALLY get the $2 million. They get $2 million minus attorney fees which can be a third or more of the award.
Citizens need services but cannot get them. Doctors decide between serving patients and risking bankruptcy. Attorneys salivate playing ‘What if?’. The cycle repeats while government refuses to bring common sense to the process. ‘We The People’ are not much better. Philadelphia citizens had this to say about how the problem should be solved.
JoAnne Fisher, executive director of the Maternity Care Coalition is very disturbed by present state regulations which require hospitals to seek official permission to add units and services, but not when it comes to closing them.
“There needs to be some measure of accountability,” Fisher argued.
Many officials who spoke with Action News say its time for Harrisburg to get involved and help bring malpractice insurance costs down, before the 8 Philadelphia hospitals still delivering babies shrinks even more.
It is unclear what Ms. Fisher means by ‘accountability’. It is scary to contemplate that she would consider requiring hospitals to ignore financial considerations when making decisions. It is also unclear what those speaking with Action News think Harrisburg can do to bring down the cost of malpractice insurance down.
In the real world, where words mean things and actions have consequences, accountability means those responsible for the problem answer for their actions. John Edwards and the families who profit with him from large settlements should be held accountable for their parts in reducing the amount of OB/GYN healthcare available. Perhaps they should be required to give back all or part of the money they made from the case.
Bringing costs down is relatively simple for those with the courage to act. Despite the tragedy of a child’s suffering or death, multi million dollar awards are excessive and do more harm than good. Awarding damages based on actual loss or cost and eliminating or capping ‘pain and suffering’ awards will help curb excess.
Limiting attorney fees to fixed amounts or a lower percentage would also help. Attorneys like John Edwards only take high dollar, high profile cases as these are the most personally beneficial. Lesser cases with lower awards get little or no representation as there’s no incentive for attorneys to take those cases. Smaller payments would restrict plaintiffs and attorneys to cases with real merit, not just real possibilities of hitting the jackpot.
Better yet, require attorneys suing doctors and hospitals for millions to pay the defendant’s legal fees if they lose. That solves the accountability problem and the reducing costs problem in one step. Of course, it would raise costs for attorneys to do business since they would have to insure against loss, too. Think of it as justice being done.
Entries (RSS)