No Mercy, No Justice: "Justice and mercy work beautifully together, and make no sense apart. Justice leads up to mercy, and mercy picks up where justice ends. Justice that does not allow for mercy is cold and inhuman. Mercy that does not presume justice is irresponsible and sentimental."Thomas Aquinas said that mercy "does not destroy justice, but is a certain kind of fulfillment of justice. ..Mercy without justice is the mother of dissolution; (and) justice without mercy is cruelty."
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Justice, Mercy and the Law
Throughout these past dying weeks of Theresa Schindler-Schiavo, the legal scholars have reiterated that the courts were following the law when they sentenced her to death by dehydration. They told us that there was no legal way, for the courts, to show mercy for those who wanted to save the life of a mentally disabled person. If it is true, as the scholars say, that the law can show no mercy, how can it be justice? The answer is, there is no justice, for "Justice without mercy is cruelty," taught Saint Thomas Aquinas.
[Schiavo, justice, law]
Terri's Choice
Long, long ago when Terri was a young woman, she made the choice to die by the slow and "seemingly" painful process of starvation and dehydration. We know she made that choice, because, under oath, her former spouse and two of her former in-laws declared that she did, and the court of Judge Greer, found it to be true.
We know that Terri rejected the beliefs of the religion she professed, she rejected the beliefs of her parents and siblings. We know that her friends who testified that she viewed the sanctity of life in accord with her church, were mistaken. We know these things, because Judge Greer ruled them to be true.
We know that the majority of Americans believe that this was Terri's choice, with which no one, including the federal government, should interfere. We know the majority of the public would also want to die the same type of death as Terri is now dying, if they were in her same disabled condition. We know this because the MSM, including CBS News has reported the polling that has been done.
As a nation we watch her slow, slow death by starvation knowing that this was her choice, and knowing that she feels no pain, and knowing that she looks peaceful and beautiful, because that is being reported by those that the court has declared to be truth tellers. Still, one has to wonder, if Terri wanted to die this way, why does she not die? Why has she lingered with life for almost two weeks?
We know that Terri rejected the beliefs of the religion she professed, she rejected the beliefs of her parents and siblings. We know that her friends who testified that she viewed the sanctity of life in accord with her church, were mistaken. We know these things, because Judge Greer ruled them to be true.
We know that the majority of Americans believe that this was Terri's choice, with which no one, including the federal government, should interfere. We know the majority of the public would also want to die the same type of death as Terri is now dying, if they were in her same disabled condition. We know this because the MSM, including CBS News has reported the polling that has been done.
As a nation we watch her slow, slow death by starvation knowing that this was her choice, and knowing that she feels no pain, and knowing that she looks peaceful and beautiful, because that is being reported by those that the court has declared to be truth tellers. Still, one has to wonder, if Terri wanted to die this way, why does she not die? Why has she lingered with life for almost two weeks?
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Judicial Murder
is how Nat Hentoff in "The Village Voice" describes the death by dehydration of Terri Schiavo. As the world watches, "a 41-year-old woman, who has committed no crime, will die of dehydration and starvation in the longest public execution in American history".
[death, Schiavo]
"The courts . . . have [also] ordered that no attempts be made to provide her water or food by mouth. Terri swallows her own saliva. Spoon feeding is not medical treatment. This outrageous order proves that the courts are not merely permitting medical treatment to be withheld, they have ordered her to be made dead." ~~from the Ralph Nader-Wesley Smith Report
Terri's Exit Protocol
On October 27, 2003, Michael Schiavo explained to Larry King why he was fighting to remove his wife’s feeding tube. He insisted that he wanted to help his wife “die with dignity,” saying “It’s painless, and probably the most natural way to die. It is a very easy way to die — probably the second best way to die, the first being an aneurysm.” At the exact time he was exulting death, in Terri’s medical file there existed a document prescribing a slow and painful death by starvation and dehydration for her. The document was labeled “Exit Protocol,” and was discovered by Cheryl Ford, R.N., who was reviewing Terri’s medical file at the request of the Schindler family. In order to explain this document in detail, the actual protocol is in bold print, and is followed by Nurse Ford’s comments.
The cruelty Cheryl Ford has seen Terri endure is “not even believable,” she said. “In this case, Dr. Kevorkian would be more humane than what they intend to do to Terri.” Terri's Exit Protocol
The cruelty Cheryl Ford has seen Terri endure is “not even believable,” she said. “In this case, Dr. Kevorkian would be more humane than what they intend to do to Terri.” Terri's Exit Protocol
No Hydration - No Nutrition
"Vex not his ghost - Oh let him pass; he hates him that would upon the rack of this tough world stretch him out longer." ~~William Shakespeare, "King Lear", Act V, Scene 111, Kent speaking of the dying King Lear.
What happens when you withdraw food and hydration? Ethical Issues in Hydration and Nutrition
What happens when you withdraw food and hydration? Ethical Issues in Hydration and Nutrition
Monday, March 28, 2005
A Duty to Die
Recently I wrote about the "right to die" and my belief that because each life is a gift from our Creator, we have no “right to die”. In the Culture of Death, which does believe in a person’s “right to die”, there is a movement which posits that the sick and/or their families are not the best judges of when it is their time to die. The Culture of Death believes that doctors and/or ethicists should decide when it is our time to give up our lives.
In 2002, the ethics committee of the University of Pennsylvania Hospital approved new guidelines which stated, "intensive care would not routinely be given to patients in a persistent vegetative or minimally conscious state. Only patients who had explicitly requested such care would get it." It decided that the “exclusion from rehabilitative or other forms of life-enhancing treatment” would apply to "patients with severe brain damage." Hopeless patients would not be admitted to an ICU (intensive care unit).
“Doctor Knows Best” in The Culture of Death. As the medical community husbands its expensive resources, it now positions itself to decide which of our lives are worth living and are therefore worthy of medical treatment. It becomes the judge of which of us is unworthy of life-saving procedures. When the hospital rules that your life is not worth living, then you have "a duty to die", according to the ethics of the Culture of Death. This nationwide movement has already convinced many Americans to endorse legal euthanasia for those who would be "better off dead", rather than continue keeping them alive with extraordinary means. We would not want to live as miserably as they live, therefore, they should die.
With this new theory that some lives are not worth living, American hospitals have begun implementing 'futile care' policies, which offer death as the only “choice”. What began with a 'right to die' has now become a 'duty to die'. When a patient is given a poor prognosis by a medical practitioner, no matter whether it is accurate or not, it will become a death sentence for that patient, as in the Culture of Death, when care is “futile”, the patient has a duty to die. There are no beliefs in prayer or miracles; "Doctor is always right", and there are no misdiagnoses.
Nancy Valko, an experienced Registered Nurse and activist for the disabled, says "Just a generation ago, doctors and nurses were ethically prohibited from hastening or causing death. Family disputes and ethically gray situations occurred, but certain actions such as withdrawing medically assisted food and water from a severely brain-damaged but non-dying person were considered illegitimate no matter who was making the decision. But with the rise of the modern bioethics movement, life is no longer assumed to have the intrinsic value it once did, and 'quality of life' has become the overriding consideration. Over time, the ethical question, 'what is right?' became 'who decides', which now has devolved into 'what is legally allowed?'"
It has been reported that physicians, hospital administrators and bioethicists of the Culture of Death find it worrisome to always have to ask "what is legally allowed?" They fear that they can lose a lawsuit when denying care to a disabled patient, therefore they are demanding more case law to enable them to end lives they consider "futile." The handicapped, when needing hospital care, such as routine operations, are increasingly at risk of being labeled “Do Not Resusitate”.
In 2002, the ethics committee of the University of Pennsylvania Hospital approved new guidelines which stated, "intensive care would not routinely be given to patients in a persistent vegetative or minimally conscious state. Only patients who had explicitly requested such care would get it." It decided that the “exclusion from rehabilitative or other forms of life-enhancing treatment” would apply to "patients with severe brain damage." Hopeless patients would not be admitted to an ICU (intensive care unit).
“Doctor Knows Best” in The Culture of Death. As the medical community husbands its expensive resources, it now positions itself to decide which of our lives are worth living and are therefore worthy of medical treatment. It becomes the judge of which of us is unworthy of life-saving procedures. When the hospital rules that your life is not worth living, then you have "a duty to die", according to the ethics of the Culture of Death. This nationwide movement has already convinced many Americans to endorse legal euthanasia for those who would be "better off dead", rather than continue keeping them alive with extraordinary means. We would not want to live as miserably as they live, therefore, they should die.
With this new theory that some lives are not worth living, American hospitals have begun implementing 'futile care' policies, which offer death as the only “choice”. What began with a 'right to die' has now become a 'duty to die'. When a patient is given a poor prognosis by a medical practitioner, no matter whether it is accurate or not, it will become a death sentence for that patient, as in the Culture of Death, when care is “futile”, the patient has a duty to die. There are no beliefs in prayer or miracles; "Doctor is always right", and there are no misdiagnoses.
Nancy Valko, an experienced Registered Nurse and activist for the disabled, says "Just a generation ago, doctors and nurses were ethically prohibited from hastening or causing death. Family disputes and ethically gray situations occurred, but certain actions such as withdrawing medically assisted food and water from a severely brain-damaged but non-dying person were considered illegitimate no matter who was making the decision. But with the rise of the modern bioethics movement, life is no longer assumed to have the intrinsic value it once did, and 'quality of life' has become the overriding consideration. Over time, the ethical question, 'what is right?' became 'who decides', which now has devolved into 'what is legally allowed?'"
It has been reported that physicians, hospital administrators and bioethicists of the Culture of Death find it worrisome to always have to ask "what is legally allowed?" They fear that they can lose a lawsuit when denying care to a disabled patient, therefore they are demanding more case law to enable them to end lives they consider "futile." The handicapped, when needing hospital care, such as routine operations, are increasingly at risk of being labeled “Do Not Resusitate”.
Euthansia "It is one of the tragedies of our lives that someone who wants very much to live can nevertheless have a duty to die." John Hardwig,
"IS THERE A DUTY TO DIE?"
"Such human weeds clog up the path....We must clear the way for a better world; we must cultivate our garden." ~~ Margaret Sanger (1883-1966), Founder, Planned Parenthood, "Slouching Towards a Duty to Die"
Lamm's 'duty to die' Message Lives On, Former governor feels vindicated in his stance against futile prolongation of life.
The Duty To Die
The Duty To Die, by Thomas Sowell, 2001
Is There a Duty to Die ? (Biomedical Ethics Reviews)
Book Review
No Mercy for the Schindlers
When the soul of Terri Schiavo leaves her body, I for one, shall not want to witness the Schindler family fight with Michael Schiavo over her mortal remains. The family valiantly tried to save her from court-ordered starvation, but were not successful, as Judge Greer had appointed the ex-husband of their daughter as her legal guardian. According to law, Michael speaks for Terri. The Schindlers could not overcome the Culture of Death team of lawyers, physicians, hospice care, and courts that Michael Schiavo was able to purchase, using Terri's own insurance settlement. There is no hope that they can have a say in her burial, unless their erstwhile son-in-law were to find a drop of mercy in his heart, which seems very unlikely.
Who Is George J. Felos
Litigation As Spiritual Practice" by George J. Felos
Who Is George J. Felos
Litigation As Spiritual Practice" by George J. Felos
Sunday, March 27, 2005
Ralph Nader: 'Save Terri'
"In a joint statement, Nader and Wesley J. Smith, author of the book 'Culture of Death: The Assault on Medical Ethics in America,' enumerated what they see as the many injustices in the Schiavo case.
They said the courts, under 'color of law,' have imposed a slow death by dehydration on Terri, giving every benefit of the doubt to her death, rather than her continued life. Not only has Terri's feeding tube been removed -- but no attempt has been made to let her try drinking by mouth. 'Terri swallows her own saliva,' Nader and Smith said. 'Spoon-feeding is not medical treatment. This outrageous order proves that the courts are not merely permitting medical treatment to be withheld, it has ordered her to be made dead,' Nader and Smith said."
Saturday, March 26, 2005
A Beautiful Death, by Paul Felos
"She looked beautiful . . . In all the years I've seen Mrs. Schiavo, I've never seen such a look of peace and beauty upon her."Florida leads us to the new way of death. We see the new culture; the culture of beauty, the culture of perfection, the culture of youth. It is a culture of narcissism, a culture of ego, a culture liberated from Christian mores and prohibitions. It is as prophesied, the Culture of Death.
Noted "right-to-die" attorney, author and activist Paul Felos waxed into euphoria as he described the dehydration and starvation death of a mentally disabled woman. In all the years he had known her, Terri Schiavo had never looked more peaceful and beautiful than after eight days upon her death bed. In the Culture of Death it is indeed a beautiful thing to see such an imperfect creature take leave of this world. Or perhaps Mr. Felos was contemplating the now empty malpractice pot of gold.
Only the perfect and productive are wanted. Grandmother who requires spoon feeding has no value and is naught but a hindrance in the Culture of Death. An accident victim must be restored to full capabilities, or else. No mentally deficient humans are allowed to exist when the world is in a state of perfection, otherwise known as The Culture of Death.
Michael Schiavo, his brothers and his lawyers have condemned the Schindler family for releasing pictures of his wife to the public, saying that Terry would have never wanted her privacy violated. Is her privacy what they were really concerned about or was it something else? Is it because they do not want the world to see a handicapped person? Is it that they believe the likenesses of imperfect humans should not be viewed? Should parents hide their disabled children from public view? The Schindler family has demonstrated that they loved Terri the way she was and that she brought them great joy whenever her face lit up in their presence. They understood Terri's spoken language, although others could not and Terri understood spoken English. Such simple pleasures were not enough to deserve life in the Culture of Death. Life is no longer a mysterious gift from our Creator. Life becomes a choice, an option in the Culture of Death.
From The strange death of the liberal West By Mark SteynAfter exhibiting the Culture of Death to our children, we will still wonder how it can happen that a youngster on the plains of America's heartland will embark upon a murderous rampage and kill himself afterwards.
"America this Holy Week is following the frenzied efforts to halt the court-enforced starvation of a brain-damaged woman for no reason other than that her continued existence is an inconvenience to her husband. In Britain, two doctors escape prosecution for aborting an otherwise healthy baby with a treatable cleft palate because the authorities are satisfied they acted "in good faith". You can read similar stories in almost any corner of the developed world, except perhaps the Netherlands, where discretionary euthanasia is so advanced it's news if the kid makes it out of the maternity ward.
"In practice, a culture that thinks Terri Schiavo's life in Florida or the cleft-lipped baby's in Herefordshire has no value winds up ascribing no value to life in general."
Seeing Signs of Life
Dr. William Hammesfahr
Dr. William Hammesfahr is a board certified neurologist who claims to be able to rehabilitate Terri Schiavo. He is a controversial physician, as is Dr. Ronald Crandall, also known as "Dr. Humane Death", who is Michael Schiavo's physician of choice for his disabled wife. There are charges that Dr. Hammesfahr has padded his resume by claiming to be a Nobel Prize Nominee, which charges seem to have validity. Dr. Crandall is known as a professional "expert witness". Both of these physicians have had their day in court in the Schiavo case, along with three others. Unless they could convince the court that Terri's mental health could be improved, there was no hope for the parents to stop her guardian from removing the tube. Terri Schiavo was in essence, condemned to death by a "jury" of five physicians. Unfortunately for her, this was not a real jury, for only three of the five doctors concluded her life to be not worth living. Even though two doctors believed her life of value, she is dying by the court's fiat. If only she had committed a capital crime! In such a case, she would have needed a unanimous jury of twelve to be condemned to death. The Schiavo case revolves around her legal guardianship, which, as her blood family has seen, is impossible to change. Snippets of that hearing, Schiavo III, 800 So. 2d, are at 645, are at HealthLawProf Blog.
In this case, the Florida courts can show no mercy to the family of Terri Schindler Schiavo, who cannot prove that their daughter can be rehabilitated. They claim she has not been given a chance to improve, but they want to care for her as she is. The only one who could bestow mercy upon them, is the "so-called" husband of their daughter, and he will not, even during Passion Week. NewsDay.com 15 Apr 2003
Dr. William Hammesfahr spoke for Terri after examining her and is hopeful of improvement. The video is from Hannity.com. You may Watch Here!
This is audio from New York's Christian Radio WMCA 570 & 970
Dr. William Hammesfahr - Segment One, Segment Two, Segment Three
Dr. William Hammesfahr - Written analysis of Terri
In this case, the Florida courts can show no mercy to the family of Terri Schindler Schiavo, who cannot prove that their daughter can be rehabilitated. They claim she has not been given a chance to improve, but they want to care for her as she is. The only one who could bestow mercy upon them, is the "so-called" husband of their daughter, and he will not, even during Passion Week. NewsDay.com 15 Apr 2003
Dr. William Hammesfahr spoke for Terri after examining her and is hopeful of improvement. The video is from Hannity.com. You may Watch Here!
This is audio from New York's Christian Radio WMCA 570 & 970
Dr. William Hammesfahr - Segment One, Segment Two, Segment Three
Dr. William Hammesfahr - Written analysis of Terri
Where Stand the Feminists?
The Feminists stand with estranged husband, Michael Schiavo! Bonnie Erbe of PBS and Susan Estrich of CNN both support Michael's right to starve his disabled former wife. Feminists support a husband's right to choose Dr. Humane Death, aka Dr. Ronald Cranford, to give medical evaluation of an incapacitated woman.
Where stands NOW, the National Organization for Women? Who knows? No one has seen them standing for Terry against the male tyranny of her husband, Dr. Kevorkian's acolytes, and the courts. No one has seen NOW standing for Terri's female nurses and friends, who believe she should be allowed to live.
Where are defenders of women’s rights? "... it’s no one else’s business if Michael Schiavo, Terri’s husband, wants to kill her. The National Organization for Women is AWOL on this case. The American Civil Liberties Union is actually working with Michael Schiavo to end Terri’s life."
The Martyrdom of Terri Schiavo by Father Jacobse was written while Terri was recuperating from a previous court-ordered starvation. "Terri lies mute and helpless, but nevertheless an eloquent witness for the inherent sacredness and dignity of life. Terri does not deserve to die. She recognizes and responds to life in ways entirely appropriate to her injuries."
No Guts, No Glory
Feminists for Life
Where stands NOW, the National Organization for Women? Who knows? No one has seen them standing for Terry against the male tyranny of her husband, Dr. Kevorkian's acolytes, and the courts. No one has seen NOW standing for Terri's female nurses and friends, who believe she should be allowed to live.
Where are defenders of women’s rights? "... it’s no one else’s business if Michael Schiavo, Terri’s husband, wants to kill her. The National Organization for Women is AWOL on this case. The American Civil Liberties Union is actually working with Michael Schiavo to end Terri’s life."
The Martyrdom of Terri Schiavo by Father Jacobse was written while Terri was recuperating from a previous court-ordered starvation. "Terri lies mute and helpless, but nevertheless an eloquent witness for the inherent sacredness and dignity of life. Terri does not deserve to die. She recognizes and responds to life in ways entirely appropriate to her injuries."
No Guts, No Glory
Feminists for Life
Holy Saturday 2000
Have we forgotten the events of Holy Saturday, five years ago? We should be praying that our leaders of today do not repeat this scene. We supporters of the sanctity of life should not demand that they break our laws.
Respect the Rule of Law
Respect the Rule of Law
Friday, March 25, 2005
Why No Mercy?
In The Merchant of Venice, William Shakespeare told us "The quality of mercy is not strained; It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath. It is twice blessed - It blesseth him that gives, and him that takes."
There has been no mercy displayed by the Florida courts for the blood family of a brain-damaged woman who is dying during this Easter Weekend. One wonders why the courts have snubbed the Schindler family's every petition. I believe that these rebuffs from the judiciary may not really be about saving the life of a handicapped woman. The following happenings have me believing that the courts are resentful of what they consider to be intrusion from the legislative branches of the government. Can it be that Terri will die, because the judiciary fears a power grab by the people's representatives, the Florida and U.S. legislatures?
The Schindlers and their son-in-law, Michael Schiavo, were on good terms and in accord with Terri's medical treatment until 1993 when they had a falling-out, after a large sum of money was awarded in a medical mal-practice suit. As a consequence, the court appointed an attorney, Richard Pearse Jr., as guardian ad litem for Terri Schiavo, from the middle of 1998 to 1999. His job was to represent the young woman's interests in one of the hearings where her husband sought to remove her feeding tube and to recommend a solution in the case. Mr. Pearse investigated her case, interviewed her relatives, and read the medical records. Afterwards, Mr. Pearse filed a report recommending that Terri Schiavo be kept on the feeding tube. He also questioned Michael Schiavo's credibility, considering that therapy for his wife stopped after he received the money. The attorney for Mr. Schiavo, George Felos, said: "that Pearse is biased and should not have been appointed because he personally is opposed to feeding tubes being removed." Pearse made his recommendations in January 2000, and Pinellas Circuit Judge George Greer drew other conclusions. Judge Greer ruled Terri Schiavo to be in a persistent vegetative state and that her feeding tube could be removed. Five years later, Mr. Pearse has reversed his views and believes that the feeding tube should now be removed. Why? According to the Saint Petersburg Times, one reason he gives is that Governor Bush and the Florida Legislature were wrong to interfere with the courts by pushing through Terri's Law. Mr. Pearse called the law stunningly bad policy and the law was later declared unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court.
Paul O'Donnell, a Franciscan monk and friend of the Schindlers, attended the court hearing yesterday when the Schindlers petitioned for Terri's life. Father O'Donnell described the presiding Judge James Whittemore as becoming "testy" whenever the legislation for a review of Terri's case from the U.S. Congress was referenced.
Terry Schindler Schiavo is Dying for Our Sins
15 Years of Struggle
There has been no mercy displayed by the Florida courts for the blood family of a brain-damaged woman who is dying during this Easter Weekend. One wonders why the courts have snubbed the Schindler family's every petition. I believe that these rebuffs from the judiciary may not really be about saving the life of a handicapped woman. The following happenings have me believing that the courts are resentful of what they consider to be intrusion from the legislative branches of the government. Can it be that Terri will die, because the judiciary fears a power grab by the people's representatives, the Florida and U.S. legislatures?
The Schindlers and their son-in-law, Michael Schiavo, were on good terms and in accord with Terri's medical treatment until 1993 when they had a falling-out, after a large sum of money was awarded in a medical mal-practice suit. As a consequence, the court appointed an attorney, Richard Pearse Jr., as guardian ad litem for Terri Schiavo, from the middle of 1998 to 1999. His job was to represent the young woman's interests in one of the hearings where her husband sought to remove her feeding tube and to recommend a solution in the case. Mr. Pearse investigated her case, interviewed her relatives, and read the medical records. Afterwards, Mr. Pearse filed a report recommending that Terri Schiavo be kept on the feeding tube. He also questioned Michael Schiavo's credibility, considering that therapy for his wife stopped after he received the money. The attorney for Mr. Schiavo, George Felos, said: "that Pearse is biased and should not have been appointed because he personally is opposed to feeding tubes being removed." Pearse made his recommendations in January 2000, and Pinellas Circuit Judge George Greer drew other conclusions. Judge Greer ruled Terri Schiavo to be in a persistent vegetative state and that her feeding tube could be removed. Five years later, Mr. Pearse has reversed his views and believes that the feeding tube should now be removed. Why? According to the Saint Petersburg Times, one reason he gives is that Governor Bush and the Florida Legislature were wrong to interfere with the courts by pushing through Terri's Law. Mr. Pearse called the law stunningly bad policy and the law was later declared unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court.
Paul O'Donnell, a Franciscan monk and friend of the Schindlers, attended the court hearing yesterday when the Schindlers petitioned for Terri's life. Father O'Donnell described the presiding Judge James Whittemore as becoming "testy" whenever the legislation for a review of Terri's case from the U.S. Congress was referenced.
Terry Schindler Schiavo is Dying for Our Sins
15 Years of Struggle
More Schiavo Videos
These videos are from Trey Jackson.
Update III: WATCH - Joe Scarborough makes a passionate plea for Terri.
WATCH NOW- Carla Sauer Iyer, a former caregiver of Terri Schiavo.
Update II: WATCH- Interview with Terri's former nurse Heidi Law.Update III: WATCH - Joe Scarborough makes a passionate plea for Terri.
Respect the Rule of Law
We are a blessed people to live under laws which were bequeathed to us by our forebears. Terry Schiavo's family are following these laws in their attempts to save their daughter from starvation. However, some of their followers are in danger of falling into mob rule, which would compound the tragedy of Terri's death. Prominent Christian leaders are urging the Florida governor to flagrantly disregard the law. This is wrong and would be a sad legacy for Terri. The government abduction of child refugee, Elian Gonzalez , by armed guns of Bill Clinton's Attorney General, has apparently faded from memory. For Governor Jeb Bush to abduct a dying woman would be just as wrong. Do not condemn those who have worked so hard for the sanctity of life. Although we are losing, the spotlight has been shone upon the lack of mercy of the judicial branch of our government. We can change that with our votes at the polls. It is certainly an injustice for a handicapped woman to be starved to death because her guardian has the resources to obtain superior consul. A greater injustice would be to destroy the road that exists to rectify those injustices. Do not allow the mob to rule. On the first Good Friday, Jesus, following the law of His day, carried a cross to a mount and and was put to death. Throughout history, many innocent people have died at the hand of the law. We who powerlessly witness injustice are charged with changing the future for those who follow us.
When the child refugee, Elian Gonzalez, was forcefully abducted, Laurence Tribe, a Harvard professor of constitutional law and apologist for Bill Clinton warned, "Miss Reno's decision to take the law as well as the child into her own hands, seems worse than a political blunder. Even if well intended, her decision strikes at the heart of constitutional government and shakes the safeguards of liberty."
Is this, from the World Socialist Website, any different from what Christian leaders are urging upon Governor Bush?
Leftists Urge President Clinton To Break the Law
The Abduction of Elian Gonzalez on Holy Saturday
When the child refugee, Elian Gonzalez, was forcefully abducted, Laurence Tribe, a Harvard professor of constitutional law and apologist for Bill Clinton warned, "Miss Reno's decision to take the law as well as the child into her own hands, seems worse than a political blunder. Even if well intended, her decision strikes at the heart of constitutional government and shakes the safeguards of liberty."
Is this, from the World Socialist Website, any different from what Christian leaders are urging upon Governor Bush?
Leftists Urge President Clinton To Break the Law
The Abduction of Elian Gonzalez on Holy Saturday
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Holy Week USA, 2005
Christians are now celebrating Easter, and the national events of this early arriving Holy Week have been quite mysterious and nothing short of breathtaking. Passion Week comprises the very last week of the earthly life of Jesus. It began on Palm Sunday and concluded on the morning of Easter Sunday.
The First Day in Passion Week is Palm Sunday
There was a great crowd that went to Bethany to see Jesus (John 12:9-11).
Jesus made His triumphal entry into Jerusalem. (Matt. 21:1-9; Mark 11:1-10; Luke 19:28-40; John 12:12-19)
Jesus cleansed the temple at Jerusalem (Matt. 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46).
Jesus rested for the last time before His Agony, and Judas began planning the betrayal (Matt. 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).
Jesus made ready the Passover Lamb and instituted the Lord’s Supper. He suffered in agony at at the Garden of Gethsemane. Later that night Jesus was betrayed by Judas Iscariot, arrested and tried (Matt. 26:36-56; Mark 14:32-52; Luke 22:39-53; John 18:1-12).
Jesus was led to the cross and crucified at 9:00 a.m. and died at 3:00 p.m. and was buried later in the day (Matt. 27:31-60; Mark 15:20-46; Luke 23:26-54; John 19:16-42).
The body of Jesus lay in the sepulcher while Roman guards kept watch (Matt. 27:61-66; Mark 15:47; Luke 23:55-56).
Christ rose from the Dead.
'On the Third Day He rose again from the Dead; He ascended into Heaven'
A Passion Play for 2005
The First Day in Passion Week is Palm Sunday
There was a great crowd that went to Bethany to see Jesus (John 12:9-11).
Holy Week 2005, began with The US House of Representatives and US Senate, having failed in their maneuvers to stop Judge George Greer of Florida from removing the feeding tube of a brain damaged women, assembled their members on Palm Sunday, in an attempt to create new law to save her life.Monday, The Second Day in Passion-Week
20 March 2005: Unknown to school administrators, an American boy in Red Cloud, Minnesota is planning the murders of his family and schoolmates.
Jesus made His triumphal entry into Jerusalem. (Matt. 21:1-9; Mark 11:1-10; Luke 19:28-40; John 12:12-19)
21 March 2005: The United States Senate passed an emergency bill, S686 (203-58), calling for a federal court to review the case of Terri Shiavo, an innocent disabled woman, who the judiciary of the State of Florida, had sentenced to a death by starvation. Her parents felt hopeful.Tuesday, The Third Day in Passion Week
21 March 2005: A sixteen-year-old student, Jeff Weise, allegedly shot and killed ten innocent people, including himself, his grandparents, and his own schoolmates, and injured at least fifteen others.
Jesus cleansed the temple at Jerusalem (Matt. 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; Luke 19:45-46).
22 March 2005: Attempting to save an innocent disabled Florida woman from court ordered starvation; the United States House of Representatives immediately backed the Palm Sunday bill from the Senate. In the early morning hours, it was signed into law by President George W. Bush, who had traveled from Texas to Washington D.C. for the emergency legislation.Ash Wednesday
22 March 2005: Minnesotans were stunned to learn of a second fatal school shooting at a school in the last 18 months. The lives of two innocent students were taken at Rocori High School in Cold Spring in September 2003, allegedly by another student, fifteen year old John Jason McLaughlin, who now awaits trial in the case.
Jesus rested for the last time before His Agony, and Judas began planning the betrayal (Matt. 26:14-16; Mark 14:10-11; Luke 22:3-6).
23 March 2005: Florida Judge James Whittamore, ignoring petitions from the United States Congress and the President to take a new look at the case, refused to stop the court ordered starvation of a disabled, brain-damaged women, saying that her family would be unlikely to win the court case.Maundy Thursday
23 March 2005: Residents on the Red Lake Indian reservation in Minnesota are trying to understand what made sixteen-year-old Jeff Weise go on a bloody shooting rampage which resulted in death or injury to more than twenty-four innocent people. Community activist Audrey Thayer says that society needs to find ways to reach out to children like Jeff Weise and make them feel valued.
Jesus made ready the Passover Lamb and instituted the Lord’s Supper. He suffered in agony at at the Garden of Gethsemane. Later that night Jesus was betrayed by Judas Iscariot, arrested and tried (Matt. 26:36-56; Mark 14:32-52; Luke 22:39-53; John 18:1-12).
Thursday, 24 March 2005: The United States Supreme Court refused to hear an emergency appeal by the parents of Terri Schiavo to restore food and water to their dying daughter. Judge George Greer denied Florida Governor Jeb Bush's petition to have the state take custody of Mrs. Schiavo. Armed officers of the court watch Mary Schindler's visits to her dying child, as she is forbidden to place even a drop of water upon the parched lips of her daughter.Good Friday
Thursday, 24 March 2005: Minnesota authorities were still trying to determine the motive for the bloody rampage of the sixteen year old Jeff Weise which resulted in the murders of ten innocents. They believe that the youngster used the nickname "Todesengel", which is German for "Angel of Death."
Jesus was led to the cross and crucified at 9:00 a.m. and died at 3:00 p.m. and was buried later in the day (Matt. 27:31-60; Mark 15:20-46; Luke 23:26-54; John 19:16-42).
25 March 2005: There seem to be no options left to save an innocent child of God from the tyranny of the Judiciary. Terri will die very soon, perhaps during this Holy Week.The Sabbath
25 March 2005: Cody Thunder, a student shot by a classmate at Red Lake Reservation, Minnesota, today, was released from hospital with the bullet still lodged in his hip. Along a chain link fence at the school are a long row of white crosses representing those who were killed by a fifteen year old youth.
The body of Jesus lay in the sepulcher while Roman guards kept watch (Matt. 27:61-66; Mark 15:47; Luke 23:55-56).
The supporters trying to save the life of a brain-damaged Florida woman, begin to accept that her death is imminent, as she is deprived of water for the eighth day.Resurrection Sunday
26 March 2005: A broken-hearted native American tribe on a reservation in the far north of the United States begin burying their dead in traditional manner. They were slaughtered by a young member of the tribe. President George Bush requests the nation remember the people of Red Cloud in their prayers.
Christ rose from the Dead.
'On the Third Day He rose again from the Dead; He ascended into Heaven'
A Passion Play for 2005
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Life and Death 2005
Whether Terri lives or dies, there should be no exclamations of victory or cries of despair. There are two sides of this thoughtful debate, and those who disagree about the protection of human life should not condemn each other. It is possible that Christians of faith might support the withdrawal of Terri's feeding tube. Each of us wants to claim that God is on our side, but none of us knows for certain where God stands in this debate. That is the goal of the debate, to understand God's will. We cannot know for certain what Terri would want to do in this situation, as she did not clearly document her desires. We should be able to strongly defend our views regarding the important social and ethical issues of this case. However, it is impolite to denigrate those who strongly disagree with our views. Ad hominem attacks are rude and deserve no place in a logical discourse of life and dying, such as is raised by the tragic Terri Schiavo story. To have a worthwhile public debate on difficult issues we need to abide by the rules of fair play and good manners.
Unluckily for Terri - in Florida, They Do
Dr. Kevorkian to Prison in Michigan
Dr. Kevorkian is in prison, but Michael Schiavo and the Florida Courts, when seeking medical evaluations for Terri Schiavo, found another doctor, a member of the board of directors of the Choice in Dying Society, which promotes doctor-assisted suicide and euthanasia. According to Amelia at American Daughter blog, Dr. Ronald Cranford is a right-to-die activist who has been a featured speaker for the pro-euthanasia Hemlock Society.
An MRI for Terry
Dr. Thomas Zabiega, a University of Chicago trained neurologist, said, “Should Terri be given an MRI? Any neurologist who is objective would say ‘Yes’”.
Those fighting for Terri's life are pleading for her to have new testings and new examinations by unbiased neurologists. This was the hope of the Congress when they intervened in the case. There are fifty neurologists who all say that she should be reevaluated, reexamined, as they have serious doubts as to the accuracy of the PVS diagnosis. The fifty neurologists are all board-certified; a number of them are fellows of the American Academy of Neurology; several are professors of neurology. Tragically, the federal courts have ignored the plea from Congress.
Terri has never been given an MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging), as her guardian/husband has repeatedly refused to consent. Neurologists are shocked when they learn this. Dr. Peter Morin, M.D., is a researcher neurologist specializing in degenerative brain diseases, with a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Boston University. When told that Michael Schiavo had refused MRI and PET (Positron Emission Tomography) scans of his wife's brain injuries, Dr. Morin was stunned. “That’s criminal,” he said, and then asked about her husband, “How can he continue as guardian? People are deliberating over this woman’s life and death and there’s been no MRI or PET?” He concluded “These people don’t want the information.”
Those fighting for Terri's life are pleading for her to have new testings and new examinations by unbiased neurologists. This was the hope of the Congress when they intervened in the case. There are fifty neurologists who all say that she should be reevaluated, reexamined, as they have serious doubts as to the accuracy of the PVS diagnosis. The fifty neurologists are all board-certified; a number of them are fellows of the American Academy of Neurology; several are professors of neurology. Tragically, the federal courts have ignored the plea from Congress.
Terri has never been given an MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging), as her guardian/husband has repeatedly refused to consent. Neurologists are shocked when they learn this. Dr. Peter Morin, M.D., is a researcher neurologist specializing in degenerative brain diseases, with a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Boston University. When told that Michael Schiavo had refused MRI and PET (Positron Emission Tomography) scans of his wife's brain injuries, Dr. Morin was stunned. “That’s criminal,” he said, and then asked about her husband, “How can he continue as guardian? People are deliberating over this woman’s life and death and there’s been no MRI or PET?” He concluded “These people don’t want the information.”
Dr. Morin explained that he would feel obligated to obtain the information in these tests before making a diagnosis with life and death consequences. I told him that CT (Computer-Aided Tomography) scans had been done, and were partly the basis for the finding of PVS. The doctor retorted, “Spare no expense, eh?” I asked him to explain the comment; he said that a CT scan is a much less expensive test than an MRI, but it “only gives you a tenth of the information an MRI does.” He added, “A CT scan is useful only in pretty severe cases, such as trauma, and also during the few days after an anoxic (lack of oxygen) brain injury. It’s useful in an emergency-room setting. But if the question is ischemic injury [brain damage caused by lack of blood/oxygen to part of the brain] you want an MRI and PET. For subsequent evaluation of brain injury, the CT is pretty useless unless there has been a massive stroke.”Starving for a Fair Diagnosis: Terri Schiavo is not out of medical options. But that’s the “fact” her husband wants you to believe. By Reverend Robert Johansen
Travesty and Tragedy
Today, Charles Krauthammer, who is one of my favorite pundits, writes of the Travesty and Tragedy that is the Terri Schiavo case. I agree with most of what he writes. I disagree with his views on the Congress's intervention, about which I have already blogged. I believe that as representatives of "we the people", the Congress was attempting to have the courts reevaluate whether Mrs. Schiavo's Constitutional (federal) right to "due process" was violated. However, President Bush, "Dr." Krauthammer, and I, all agree that, in the absence of "clear and convincing evidence" of Terri's wishes (a written living will), we should err on the side of life.
The 14th Amendment
"Let's be clear about her condition. She is not dead. If she were brain-dead, we would be talking about harvesting her organs. She is a living, breathing human being. Some people have called her a vegetable. Apart from the term being disgusting, how do they know? How can we be sure of the complete absence of any consciousness, any awareness, any anything 'inside' this person?The Media Are Clueless!
"The crucial issue in deciding whether one would want to intervene to keep her alive is whether there is, as one bioethicist put it to me, 'anyone home.' Her parents, who see her often, believe that there is. The husband maintains that there is no one home. (But then again he has another home, making his judgment somewhat suspect.) The husband has not allowed a lot of medical testing in the past few years. I have tried to find out what her neurological condition actually is. But the evidence is sketchy, old and conflicting. The Florida court found that most of her cerebral cortex is gone. But 'most' does not mean all. There may be some cortex functioning. The severely retarded or brain-damaged can have some consciousness. And we do not go around euthanizing the minimally conscious in the back wards of mental hospitals on the grounds that their lives are not worth living."
The 14th Amendment
Hope Fades
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta ruled that the family of Terri Schiavo "failed to demonstrate a substantial case on the merits of any of their claims" that her feeding tube should be reinserted immediately, describing their decision as "a question of law". One of the three judges dissented and he has been the only one to agree that there can be no justice for Mrs. Schiavo and her family if she is allowed to be physically damaged or to expire before the court can fully review her case. Judge Charles R. Wilson, saying that Terri's "imminent" death would end the case, wrote: "In fact, I fail to see any harm in reinserting the feeding tube".
Two federal courts have now refused to give life a chance, apparently believing that they are applying the law as it is written. We are a nation of laws, thank God. Unfortunately, in this case, the law is not our friend. The Schindlers are continuing the fight to save their daughter and sister, but the prognosis is not good. The U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to intercede. There have obviously been legal mistakes on the side fighting for life; the Schindlers' attorneys, the U.S. Congress. The Schindlers, in their desperation, have called upon the strident Randall Terry to be a spokesman, which seems an unwise decision. Michael Schiavo is the legal guardian of his estranged wife and he wants her dead.
Our representatives, the Congress, spoke for us when they pleaded with the Federal Court in Florida to give the Schiavo case a new look. The federal judge heard two hours of testimony and refused to save Mrs. Schiavo's life and refused to take a fresh look at the circumstances of her case. He had the power to stop Terri's starvation. Instead, he snubbed the President, the Congress and "we the people" who had petitioned Congress for action.
Mr. Schiavo has claimed that his wife said that she would not want to live under such circumstances. Terri was a very young, healthy woman when tragedy struck and she had been raised as a Catholic. If her views on dying were so opposed to her Church's teachings, would she not have left written instructions? Why cannot the beliefs of that religion regarding life and death be assumed to be her beliefs, especially since she left nothing written to contradict her own church's dogma? Terri's life remains in the hands of a husband she was planning to leave, an overbearing husband some friends suspect of physical abuse, a man disliked by Terri's friends and caretakers, a man who cannot appreciate the agony of his estranged wife's family. Terri is not a sick woman. She is a damaged human being who probably can never be restored to her former self. She needs only food and water to survive. Why must she be condemned to death? We can only pray for a happy resolution.
Two federal courts have now refused to give life a chance, apparently believing that they are applying the law as it is written. We are a nation of laws, thank God. Unfortunately, in this case, the law is not our friend. The Schindlers are continuing the fight to save their daughter and sister, but the prognosis is not good. The U.S. Supreme Court is unlikely to intercede. There have obviously been legal mistakes on the side fighting for life; the Schindlers' attorneys, the U.S. Congress. The Schindlers, in their desperation, have called upon the strident Randall Terry to be a spokesman, which seems an unwise decision. Michael Schiavo is the legal guardian of his estranged wife and he wants her dead.
Our representatives, the Congress, spoke for us when they pleaded with the Federal Court in Florida to give the Schiavo case a new look. The federal judge heard two hours of testimony and refused to save Mrs. Schiavo's life and refused to take a fresh look at the circumstances of her case. He had the power to stop Terri's starvation. Instead, he snubbed the President, the Congress and "we the people" who had petitioned Congress for action.
Mr. Schiavo has claimed that his wife said that she would not want to live under such circumstances. Terri was a very young, healthy woman when tragedy struck and she had been raised as a Catholic. If her views on dying were so opposed to her Church's teachings, would she not have left written instructions? Why cannot the beliefs of that religion regarding life and death be assumed to be her beliefs, especially since she left nothing written to contradict her own church's dogma? Terri's life remains in the hands of a husband she was planning to leave, an overbearing husband some friends suspect of physical abuse, a man disliked by Terri's friends and caretakers, a man who cannot appreciate the agony of his estranged wife's family. Terri is not a sick woman. She is a damaged human being who probably can never be restored to her former self. She needs only food and water to survive. Why must she be condemned to death? We can only pray for a happy resolution.
We Have No Right To Die
We have no right to die. Our lives belong to our Creator and it is by His will that we live and die. Our laws do not give us a right to die. Our laws do not permit suicide. When a person attempts to leap from a bridge, we do all we can to intervene. We do not say "jump, that is your right". We have no right to die, and neither do we have a right to kill other humans by starvation.
It is now Wednesday morning and still there has been no word from the higher court in Atlanta which holds the life of Terri Schiavo in its power. It is difficult to understand why the first federal judge did not reinstate the feeding tube to keep her alive while court petitions continue. Her husband, as her guardian seems to be a conflict of interest, as there have been reports that at the time of Terri's collapse she was intending to leave him. Michael Schiavo has since established a family with another woman. It seems he should have relinquished guardianship to his wife's parents. Apparently there is bad blood between the Schiavos and the Schindlers, and that is why we have this predicament. Terri Schiavo may be quite able to drink and eat naturally, when the feeding tube is removed, but the court will not allow that. It is barbaric to deprive basic nourishment to a fellow human. If another Florida caretaker were to starve an invalid, he or she would be prosecuted for neglect, and homicide, if the helpless person died.
Some ethicists believe that the feeding tube amounts to "extraordinary means of prolonging life". So why not at least attempt to feed and hydrate the brain-damaged woman naturally? If she were not able to respond, and she died as a consequence, then it could be considered a natural death. But Terri Shiavo, by court order, is not allowed to be given sustenance of any kind. Meanwhile, the news reports are reassuring us that Terri feels no pain during the starvation. In fact, some say she will enter a state of euphoria. How can they know this, and how can they be so certain of this fact? That this trial is playing out during the holy week of Easter is focusing our minds, as we ponder that the mother of Terri Schiavo cannot place a drop of water on the parched lips of her own daughter.
It is now Wednesday morning and still there has been no word from the higher court in Atlanta which holds the life of Terri Schiavo in its power. It is difficult to understand why the first federal judge did not reinstate the feeding tube to keep her alive while court petitions continue. Her husband, as her guardian seems to be a conflict of interest, as there have been reports that at the time of Terri's collapse she was intending to leave him. Michael Schiavo has since established a family with another woman. It seems he should have relinquished guardianship to his wife's parents. Apparently there is bad blood between the Schiavos and the Schindlers, and that is why we have this predicament. Terri Schiavo may be quite able to drink and eat naturally, when the feeding tube is removed, but the court will not allow that. It is barbaric to deprive basic nourishment to a fellow human. If another Florida caretaker were to starve an invalid, he or she would be prosecuted for neglect, and homicide, if the helpless person died.
Some ethicists believe that the feeding tube amounts to "extraordinary means of prolonging life". So why not at least attempt to feed and hydrate the brain-damaged woman naturally? If she were not able to respond, and she died as a consequence, then it could be considered a natural death. But Terri Shiavo, by court order, is not allowed to be given sustenance of any kind. Meanwhile, the news reports are reassuring us that Terri feels no pain during the starvation. In fact, some say she will enter a state of euphoria. How can they know this, and how can they be so certain of this fact? That this trial is playing out during the holy week of Easter is focusing our minds, as we ponder that the mother of Terri Schiavo cannot place a drop of water on the parched lips of her own daughter.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Randall Terry on Scarborough
The following videos of Terri are from www.terrisfight.org, where they write "We believe the following videos clips give stunning testimony to Terri's awareness. These are in Real Media format."
As you view these videos remember that it has been reported that none of the judges who has ruled on Terri's life, has seen her in person. Judge Greer who has been the principle judge in her case has never even viewed these videos, as he is legally blind.
If you believe as do I, that Terri should not be sentenced to death, stay on the side of life. It is a good side to be on. Do not cause distress and embarrassment to those of us on this side by harassing others who disagree. This is a difficult issue for all. Do not attack them for their beliefs. Those charged with the implementation of our complicated laws, deserve our respect. Do not disparage them without merit. If you are a Christian person of faith, remember to behave in accord with the teachings of Jesus. Pray for Terri and give thanks to God that you live in a land where the life of one person is so valued by so many.
Life or Death Struggle
Fifteen Years of Questions
Videotape: beyond the snippets
 | Terri and her Mother | | Tracking a Balloon for Dr. Cranford |
| | Swab Test | | Asked to Open Her Eyes |
| | Terri Responding to Music | | "How's Your Cold?" |
If you believe as do I, that Terri should not be sentenced to death, stay on the side of life. It is a good side to be on. Do not cause distress and embarrassment to those of us on this side by harassing others who disagree. This is a difficult issue for all. Do not attack them for their beliefs. Those charged with the implementation of our complicated laws, deserve our respect. Do not disparage them without merit. If you are a Christian person of faith, remember to behave in accord with the teachings of Jesus. Pray for Terri and give thanks to God that you live in a land where the life of one person is so valued by so many.
Life or Death Struggle
Fifteen Years of Questions
Videotape: beyond the snippets
Nancy Cruzan 1983
The Legacy of Nancy Cruzan ~ According to Marilyn Webb, author of "The Good Death", “Few people are more central to changing the shape of how we die in America than Bill Colby, the attorney [who] brought the case of Nancy Cruzan to national attention.”
After a 1983 automobile accident, Nancy Cruzan, age 24, was resuscitated by paramedics into a persistent vegetative state and remained that way for seven years. She could breath on her own and required only a feeding tube. Her parents waged a legal battle to have her feeding tube removed, the case going all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court which ruled that there was no "clear and convincing evidence" of the patient's wishes to end medical treatment. Trial testimony consisted primarily of Nancy Cruzan's statements made to a roommate about a year before the accident that she would not want to live as a "vegetable".
Following the Supreme Court's decision, some of Nancy's friends came forward and gave additional testimony that she would have refused such treatment. The Missouri Courts ruled that testimony to be of "clear and convincing evidence", and Nancy Cruzan's feeding tube was removed. The Patient Self Determination Act was passed by Congress after the Cruzan decision, to allow patients to make their own decisions about end of life care if they be unable to make decisions for themselves.
See Life Support at Raven.
What happens when you withdraw food and hydration? Ethical Issues in Hydration and Nutrition
The Culture of Life
Karen Ann Quinlan, 1975
Medical technology has progressed to the point where a patient's vital signs can be sustained almost indefinitely. When a patient becomes permanently comatose, unable to interact and communicate, unable to respond to touch of another human, and unable to function cognitively, is there a purpose to continue the life of the patient? In 1975, the U.S. media asked this question in the case of Karen Ann Quinlan, a 22-year-old, New Jersey woman.
Several weeks after being rushed to a hospital emergency room, attending physicians described Karen Ann Quinlan as respirator dependent and in a chronic persistent vegetative state with no real hope of recovery. She was nourished by a nasogastric tube (artificial nutrition and hydration) and her breathing required a respirator. After several months of discussion with physicians, and Roman Catholic clergy, Karen's father asked the hospital to remove her from the respirator. They refused. Mr. Quinlan petitioned the New Jersey Courts to appoint him as Karen's guardian and give him permission to disconnect the respirator. He was denied, being opposed by Karen’s physicians, the local prosecutor and the state attorney general. The courts rejected the argument that there is a viable legal distinction between ordinary and extraordinary means to sustain life. Finally, the New Jersey Superior Court reversed the lower court's ruling, declaring that the patient’s constitutionally based right of privacy outweighed the State's interest in preserving life and, since Karen was incompetent, her father was a proper guardian of that right. The court allowed the respirator to be withdrawn without any liability to the medical community nor to her father.
Karen’s physicians weaned her from the respirator, and after its removal she continued to breathe on her own. Although the New Jersey Supreme Court had given permission for all life-support to be withdrawn, Karen's parents did not allow her to starve to death, therefore artificial nutrition and hydration continued. Karen lived another ten years until she was taken by pneumonia, demonstrating to the world the enduring will to live of the human spirit.
Withholding or Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Medical Treatment
Several weeks after being rushed to a hospital emergency room, attending physicians described Karen Ann Quinlan as respirator dependent and in a chronic persistent vegetative state with no real hope of recovery. She was nourished by a nasogastric tube (artificial nutrition and hydration) and her breathing required a respirator. After several months of discussion with physicians, and Roman Catholic clergy, Karen's father asked the hospital to remove her from the respirator. They refused. Mr. Quinlan petitioned the New Jersey Courts to appoint him as Karen's guardian and give him permission to disconnect the respirator. He was denied, being opposed by Karen’s physicians, the local prosecutor and the state attorney general. The courts rejected the argument that there is a viable legal distinction between ordinary and extraordinary means to sustain life. Finally, the New Jersey Superior Court reversed the lower court's ruling, declaring that the patient’s constitutionally based right of privacy outweighed the State's interest in preserving life and, since Karen was incompetent, her father was a proper guardian of that right. The court allowed the respirator to be withdrawn without any liability to the medical community nor to her father.
Karen’s physicians weaned her from the respirator, and after its removal she continued to breathe on her own. Although the New Jersey Supreme Court had given permission for all life-support to be withdrawn, Karen's parents did not allow her to starve to death, therefore artificial nutrition and hydration continued. Karen lived another ten years until she was taken by pneumonia, demonstrating to the world the enduring will to live of the human spirit.
Withholding or Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Medical Treatment
Monday, March 21, 2005
Praise God & MoveOn
Senator Robert C. Byrd opened his remarks to the MoveOn PAC crowd with "Praise GOD" and "Hallelujah!" and, astonishingly, received applause. Then he bellowed, "Let's hear it!, Let's hear it!" But his "Praise GOD" and "Hallelujah!" were not answered in kind, as even for the Byrd, that would be expecting a bit much of the MoveOners. Why can't the rest of us get away with praising GOD in our speech? He continued, telling the crowd that the Republicans "want to NUKE - NUKE - N.U.K.E. ... debate in the Senate". See the Byrd in Action as he rallys the troops to "fire the shot heard round the world". Trey Jackson has captured it all. "This is a nation built by God fearing people who want to preserve liberty ... 'Amen'!" "Be the Paul Revere - Spread the Word. ... Let's Fire that shot. Spread the word - high and low." The Byrd thanked GOD for the Constitution and they all CHEERED! "Praise GOD for the Constitution. Long live this Constitution" as he waved it through the air. Hear the thunderous applause. Glory be, what's a-happening with the Dems? Do ya suppose they's a-gettin' religion after all these years? I never did hear even one of those MoveOners condemn Bobby Byrd for forcing his religion on them. Curious indeed.
Bye Bye Byrdie
The Video is from Trey Jackson at Jackson's Junction.
Bye Bye Byrdie
The Video is from Trey Jackson at Jackson's Junction.
14th Amendment
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.In addition, at the founding of our country, Thomas Jefferson wrote in THE UNANIMOUS DECLARATION of the THIRTEEN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
~~14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Section 1.
"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." - Thomas Jefferson
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness
We now enter a national debate, because of Terry Schiavo and those who have fought in her behalf. Do handicapped people like her have a constitutional right to live? If the federal government concurs with the state of Florida that those who have become severely handicapped merit no such right, then we will need to debate how to rid the blessed land of these inconvenient humans. The state of Florida sanctions the deliberate starvation of the cognitively disabled. Is that the most humane procedure to terminate the lives of those deemed to be living in a vegetative state? We will need to study the protocols already adopted in places such as the Netherlands, where the medical community and the parents determine which handicapped children live or die. When they agree there is no hope for recovery, they administer an intravenous compound which puts the living child into the permanent sleep known as death. The debate will require us to peer into the heart and soul of our society. We will need to decide the value of a life such as Terri' s and we will need to determine if we show more compassion by killing the handicapped rather than caring for them.
Monday, March 14, 2005
Follow FDR's Plans for SS
When Social Security was created in 1935, Roosevelt sent a message to the Congress saying that any Social Security plan should include 'voluntary contributory annuities, by which individual initiative can increase the annual amounts received in old age'. He added that government funding, 'ought to ultimately be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans.' FDR also said that "for perhaps 30 years to come funds will have to be provided by the States and the Federal Government to meet these pensions."
No one knows if FDR would endorse President Bush's current plan to save Social Security by implementing private accounts, however we do know that FDR had proposed a voluntary program to allow people to buy annuities.
Seventy years ago the American president did indeed propose a plan under which workers would have been able to make voluntary payments for which they would receive credits. At age 65, the retirees would have been able to cash in the certificates for annuities that would pay up to the equivalent of about $1,300 today, based on their total deposits plus interest. Roosevelt expected private plans to become available as the 1930s economy improved, for he said; "I am greatly hoping that repeated promises of private investment and private initiative to relieve the government in the immediate future of much of the burden it has assumed will be fulfilled."
However the Congress would not go along with Roosevelt. Representative Frederick Vinson, who helped kill Roosevelt’s private annuity plan, saying there was no need for it at at that time, also told Congress; "Many of us think the time will come when the voluntary annuity plan, which rounds out the security program for the aged, will be written into law."
John Fund of the Wall Street Journal has written about this: 'Above All, Try Something' What FDR really said about private Social Security accounts.
No one knows if FDR would endorse President Bush's current plan to save Social Security by implementing private accounts, however we do know that FDR had proposed a voluntary program to allow people to buy annuities.
Seventy years ago the American president did indeed propose a plan under which workers would have been able to make voluntary payments for which they would receive credits. At age 65, the retirees would have been able to cash in the certificates for annuities that would pay up to the equivalent of about $1,300 today, based on their total deposits plus interest. Roosevelt expected private plans to become available as the 1930s economy improved, for he said; "I am greatly hoping that repeated promises of private investment and private initiative to relieve the government in the immediate future of much of the burden it has assumed will be fulfilled."
However the Congress would not go along with Roosevelt. Representative Frederick Vinson, who helped kill Roosevelt’s private annuity plan, saying there was no need for it at at that time, also told Congress; "Many of us think the time will come when the voluntary annuity plan, which rounds out the security program for the aged, will be written into law."
John Fund of the Wall Street Journal has written about this: 'Above All, Try Something' What FDR really said about private Social Security accounts.
Saturday, March 12, 2005
MoveOn is Movin' On Out!
How sweet can it get? MoveOn.org is movin' on up to the Right Side! That is according to the "progressive" Common Dreams News Center.
Global Vigil for Peace
MoveOn.org in Action Are They Now Pro-War? I will be awaiting their new videos as I do enjoy their music.
MoveOn.org: Making Peace With the War in Iraq, by Norman Solomon:
"Sadly, it has come to this. Two years after the invasion of Iraq, the online powerhouse MoveOn.org -- which built most of its member base with a strong antiwar message -- is not pushing for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. With a network of more than 3 million "online activists," the MoveOn leadership has decided against opposing the American occupation of Iraq."
Global Vigil for Peace
MoveOn.org in Action Are They Now Pro-War? I will be awaiting their new videos as I do enjoy their music.
Friday, March 11, 2005
We Are All Doomed
Could it be that the environmentalists are correct and that life as we know it is headed for extinction? There are two physicists at the University of California at Berkeley who seem to agree, although their studies have shown extinction of life to be a natural order of earthly things. They believe that we are already five million years overdue for the next cycle of extinction! The last was sixty-five million years ago when the dinosaurs and other life forms disappeared. The scientists do not have the answer to why this happens, however there are a number of theories:
Mass extinction comes every 62 million years, UC physicists discover
Mass extinction comes every 62 million years, UC physicists discover
"... perhaps there's some kind of "natural timetable" deep inside the Earth that triggers cycles of massive volcanism, Rohde has thought. There's even a bit of evidence: A huge slab of volcanic basalt known as the Deccan Traps in India has been dated to 65 million years ago -- just when the dinosaurs died, he noted. And the similar basaltic Siberian Traps were formed by volcanism about 250 million years ago, at the end of the Permian period, when the greatest of all mass extinctions drove more than 70 percent of all the world's marine life to death, Rohde said."This revelation has inspired Chrenkoff to offer a prize:
"It's only a matter of time before the next Great Dying takes place. The first prize ("Get out of extinction" card) will go the a reader who is best able to work Halliburton, Chimpy Bushhitler and neo-ziocons into a convincing theory."
Thursday, March 10, 2005
Jesus Didn't Slander People
And neither should you! That is my response to the commercial currently being aired by the United Church of Christ, which you may view here. The advertisement pretends to proclaim the church's diversity, but in fact is more focused on proclaiming that other Christian churches employ chained gates across their entrances, guarded by Nazi-looking bouncers. At the end, the ad states "Jesus didn't turn people away. Neither do we." I have already blogged on this recently, here. In response to complaints other than mine, the church has stated that they are merely using parody to make their point, in much the same way that Jesus used parables to teach the gospel. The United Church of Christ is using the techniques of satire more usually found on late night comedy shows, yet there is nothing humorous in the commercial. As I said, Jesus didn't slander his followers, and neither should the United Church of Christ.
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
Communista Giuliana Sgrena
By Financing Terrorism, is Italy on Our Side?
The mysterious saga of the kidnapped, then resqued, Italian reporter of the communist "Il Manifesto" newspaper, continues without much elucidation. The Italians say the fleeing group was traveling but twenty miles an hour, and the Americans say they were going one hundred. Giuliana Sgrena continues to suggest that the shooting at the check point was an ambush, which somewhat goes along with my theory, although she believes the Americans ambushed her and I suspect that the terrorists who kidnapped her are possibly involved. The terrorists are the only group who come out of this deal with what they want. They received more Italian ransom money to buy more weapons to kill more Americans and Iraqis. They also have strained relations between the government and people of Italy with the American administration, to the point of Italy possibly withdrawing its support for the war.
Today's Opinion Journal wonders if "Ms. Sgrena will also shed a tear for the Americans and Iraqis who will die because of the ransom that was paid for her release." Some reports are that the ransom was between $1 million and $6 million. If that be the case, perhaps the Italians should withdraw their soldiers. The journal continues "Not only does paying ransom encourage more kidnapping--of Italians especially--it also puts money in the hands of the enemy in a country where $40 buys an automatic rifle and $200 an attack on U.S. forces. The shooting of a speeding car at a military checkpoint in a war zone is an unintentional tragedy, but the paying of ransom amounts to a policy of deliberately aiding terrorists." One cannot trust the statements of Ms. Sgrena, as she is not consistant.
While Ms. Sgrena was in the custody of the kidnappers, with their threats of beheadings, there was video of her pleading with the Italians to capitulate to the terrorists. Her hands were clasped in prayer. My question is, to whom do communists pray?
According to Powerline, the new column by Michelle Malkin focuses on a neglected element of the Giuliana Sgrena story: "The ransom of a red reporter." Michelle also adds some flourishes in her post on the column here.
Fox News Take
The mysterious saga of the kidnapped, then resqued, Italian reporter of the communist "Il Manifesto" newspaper, continues without much elucidation. The Italians say the fleeing group was traveling but twenty miles an hour, and the Americans say they were going one hundred. Giuliana Sgrena continues to suggest that the shooting at the check point was an ambush, which somewhat goes along with my theory, although she believes the Americans ambushed her and I suspect that the terrorists who kidnapped her are possibly involved. The terrorists are the only group who come out of this deal with what they want. They received more Italian ransom money to buy more weapons to kill more Americans and Iraqis. They also have strained relations between the government and people of Italy with the American administration, to the point of Italy possibly withdrawing its support for the war.
Today's Opinion Journal wonders if "Ms. Sgrena will also shed a tear for the Americans and Iraqis who will die because of the ransom that was paid for her release." Some reports are that the ransom was between $1 million and $6 million. If that be the case, perhaps the Italians should withdraw their soldiers. The journal continues "Not only does paying ransom encourage more kidnapping--of Italians especially--it also puts money in the hands of the enemy in a country where $40 buys an automatic rifle and $200 an attack on U.S. forces. The shooting of a speeding car at a military checkpoint in a war zone is an unintentional tragedy, but the paying of ransom amounts to a policy of deliberately aiding terrorists." One cannot trust the statements of Ms. Sgrena, as she is not consistant.
While Ms. Sgrena was in the custody of the kidnappers, with their threats of beheadings, there was video of her pleading with the Italians to capitulate to the terrorists. Her hands were clasped in prayer. My question is, to whom do communists pray?
According to Powerline, the new column by Michelle Malkin focuses on a neglected element of the Giuliana Sgrena story: "The ransom of a red reporter." Michelle also adds some flourishes in her post on the column here.
Fox News Take
United Church of Christ Slander
The United Church of Christ has been advertising on liberal blog sites with a Flash commercial entitled "God Is Still Speaking" featuring a byline that states "Sadly, NBC & CBS choose not to air our ad of inclusiveness". I know not the reasoning for rejection by those television networks, however, the church should be grateful, as the commercial is about the most repugnant I have ever seen created by a Christian organization. View The Ad Here
The United Church of Christ, in the guise of attempting to trumpet their own inclusiveness, are actually using the ad to portray other Christian churches as intolerant. This is certainly a slander to all the other Christian churches in the United States who do not employ gatekeepers and bouncers at their Sunday services. The United Church of Christ should be ashamed to characterized other Christian organizations in such a false manner. It is not a Christian tradition to build up one's self, by tearing down others.
Jesus spoke thus to his followers:
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." Matthew 7:3-5
The United Church of Christ, in the guise of attempting to trumpet their own inclusiveness, are actually using the ad to portray other Christian churches as intolerant. This is certainly a slander to all the other Christian churches in the United States who do not employ gatekeepers and bouncers at their Sunday services. The United Church of Christ should be ashamed to characterized other Christian organizations in such a false manner. It is not a Christian tradition to build up one's self, by tearing down others.
Jesus spoke thus to his followers:
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." Matthew 7:3-5
Welcoming Diversity ... Except
Come visit environmentally sensitive Yachats,Oregon, prolifically populated with Moonbats. See them in their natural habitat at "Moonbat Friendly" Ocean Haven!
James Taranto of Best of the Web found this resort, Ocean Haven, on the Pacific coast at Yachats, Oregon, which proclaims to be open to diversity of all kinds ... unless you happen to have voted for President George W. Bush. That is correct! The owners of this business put their money where their mouths are. If you voted for Mr. Bush, you are NOT welcome here, as YOU are NOT a part of 'diversity'. Although voting by "secret ballot" is supposed to be de rigor in these United States, businesses in 'progressive' Oregon are apparently permitted to examine patrons' voting histories and discriminate accordingly. One has to ponder why any Republican or other free-thinker would choose to spend capitalist dollars in Oregon, when there are some terrific red states that are truly open to diversity and accommodating to ALL voters. What if other businesses were to exclude all people who voted for say, Jesse Jackson? Would they be allowed to do such in this land of diversity. What if some excluded all those who voted for Hillary Clinton. Would the N.O.W. "ladies" tar and feather them for the anti-diversity crime of gender bigotry? "No Hummers, No RVs, No Bush Voters". There you have it! Bush voters are nothing more than breathing automatons. However, Moonbats Always Welcome! Is this a great country, or what?
Perhaps the loophole is that it is not really discrimination or disrespect for diversity when U.S. citizens are banned "for reasons of health & safety". That must be it, as Ocean Haven states on its web site, "FOR REASONS OF HEALTH & SAFETY OCEAN HAVEN CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ... FOLKS WHO VOTED FOR BUSH ...".
The self-described goal of Ocean Haven is "Respecting the interdependence & diversity of all life." So, are they following their own rules? Of course not! That would not be defying logic. However, I did find the reason that visitors flock to Yachats, Oregon at its Vacation Guide web site. "This city is know for it terrific stormy winter weather. Visit this city and watch the storms pound into the rocky ledges of Yachats Oceanside." Too bad that I will miss all that, as my kind is not allowed.
James Taranto of Best of the Web found this resort, Ocean Haven, on the Pacific coast at Yachats, Oregon, which proclaims to be open to diversity of all kinds ... unless you happen to have voted for President George W. Bush. That is correct! The owners of this business put their money where their mouths are. If you voted for Mr. Bush, you are NOT welcome here, as YOU are NOT a part of 'diversity'. Although voting by "secret ballot" is supposed to be de rigor in these United States, businesses in 'progressive' Oregon are apparently permitted to examine patrons' voting histories and discriminate accordingly. One has to ponder why any Republican or other free-thinker would choose to spend capitalist dollars in Oregon, when there are some terrific red states that are truly open to diversity and accommodating to ALL voters. What if other businesses were to exclude all people who voted for say, Jesse Jackson? Would they be allowed to do such in this land of diversity. What if some excluded all those who voted for Hillary Clinton. Would the N.O.W. "ladies" tar and feather them for the anti-diversity crime of gender bigotry? "No Hummers, No RVs, No Bush Voters". There you have it! Bush voters are nothing more than breathing automatons. However, Moonbats Always Welcome! Is this a great country, or what?
Perhaps the loophole is that it is not really discrimination or disrespect for diversity when U.S. citizens are banned "for reasons of health & safety". That must be it, as Ocean Haven states on its web site, "FOR REASONS OF HEALTH & SAFETY OCEAN HAVEN CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ... FOLKS WHO VOTED FOR BUSH ...".
Ocean Haven - "Moonbat" Friendly Lodging on the Beautiful Oregon Coast
WE WELCOME DIVERSITY
Respecting the interdependence & diversity of all life.
NATURE FRIENDLY
Nature-friendly cleaning & maintenance. Committed to limiting human impact on nature.No Hummers, No RVs, No Bush Voters (due to his environmental destructive policies.)
The self-described goal of Ocean Haven is "Respecting the interdependence & diversity of all life." So, are they following their own rules? Of course not! That would not be defying logic. However, I did find the reason that visitors flock to Yachats, Oregon at its Vacation Guide web site. "This city is know for it terrific stormy winter weather. Visit this city and watch the storms pound into the rocky ledges of Yachats Oceanside." Too bad that I will miss all that, as my kind is not allowed.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Faux News Is Good News
Have you ever wondered why the Laming Fliberal Blogs refer to "Fair & Balanced" Fox News as "Faux News"? I always thought it was because "faux" meant an imitation of the real thing, such as "faux pearls". Therefore, the Libs were implying that the news at FOX was an imitation of the "real news", such as found at CBS News and CNN. What a joke that is! Even though both words, "faux" and "Fox", end with an "x", the "x" is silent in "faux". But don't tell that to the Laming Flibs. They think "Faux News" and "Fox News" are pronounced the same.
Robb Allen at Sharp as a Marble blogs about it:
Robb Allen at Sharp as a Marble blogs about it:
Sharp as a Marble! Now there is a good description of the Libs!Something that had been a wee bit confusing to me is to see people write 'Faux News' when referring to that obvious mouth piece of the White House and Chimpy McHalliburton, Fox News. Both Fox and Faux start and end with the same letters, but have completely different pronunciations. Faux is pronounced 'foh' while Fox is pronounced 'focks'. Knowing this I cannot read Faux News as anything but 'foh news' which kills the joke for me. I never understood why people wrote that.
Until I heard some of the lefties at work reading a newspaper article with the word faux in it. They kept saying 'focks'. Guess that explains it for me now.
Italians Were Reckless
Trey Jackson at Jackson's Junction, is a member of Olberman Watch, and has posted the TV video from "Countdown" of MSNBC's military analyst, Lt. Colonel Rick Francona, who described the recent shooting of Italian journalist, Guiliana Sgrena, as "the Italians were reckless". Watch for yourself!
I believe there to be more to this story than meets the eye. The Associated Press reported on Sunday after the shooting:
I believe there to be more to this story than meets the eye. The Associated Press reported on Sunday after the shooting:
In an interview with RAI, Italian state television, Sgrena recounted her final moments before freedom: "When they let me go, it was a difficult moment for me because they told me, `The Americans don't want you to return alive to Italy.'"Did the kidnappers release her, and then pass word to the Americans that a suicide bomber was on the way to the airport? Did the kidnappers get a double whammy for their efforts? They received a hefty ransom from the Italian government, which they use to obtain more terrorist weaponry to be used against the Iraqis and Americans, and, at the same time, create a backlash against the war and America in Italy? This hypothesis comes from Robert L. Simon, and it is a good one.
Monday, March 07, 2005
An Aspirin for Larry Summers
In January this year, Harvard University President Larry Summers spoke about gender disparities between men and women at a diversity conference. Although his stated goal was "provocation", he suggested that "rigorous and careful" thinking was needed to explain the gender gap among tenured science professors. We all know the denouement his words have evoked. We are all aware of what has happened to President Summers for the implication he espoused that ... (light bulb please) ... men and women are genetically different! We all are aware also that the very same "powers-that-be" have reacted in a mirror image fashion to the nutty Professor Ward Churchill.
We could offer the beleaguered Ivy League President an aspirin, but after reading today's Washington Post, it may cause him an even bigger headache with the "oh so" politically correct intelligentsia. Will that bastion of higher learning, Harvard University, react to this study, or just ignore it?
Study: Aspirin Impacts Women Differently Than Men
Aspirin does not protect women against heart attacks in the same way it does for men, but the venerable painkiller does cut women's chances of suffering a stroke, researchers reported today.
The study found that aspirin does not reduce the risk of first heart attacks for middle-aged women, as it does for men, but does cut the risk of strokes, which is not the case for men. But aspirin does lower the chances of having a heart attack for older women -- those age 65 and above, when the stroke-reduction benefits also appear to be the greatest.
The results add powerful new evidence to the growing body of data showing that men and women differ in fundamental ways on various aspects of health, and that research done on men does not necessarily translate directly to women.
"This truly underscores the importance of studying medical therapies among women as well as men," said Buring, whose findings were released early by The New England Journal of Medicine to coincide with a presentation at an American College of Cardiology meeting in Orlando. "We can't assume studies involving men apply to women."
This is great news for women, but I doubt that it will help Mr. Summers with his current kerfuffle, as logic is not in demand at liberal universities, such as Harvard and the University of Colorado.
Sunday, March 06, 2005
200 Al-Qaeda on UK Streets
It seems that Liberals are the same the world over.
From BBC News World EditionFormer Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens says up to 200 Al-Qaeda "terrorists" are operating in UK and the threat of attacks is real.
He has backed proposed anti-terror laws, saying critics were naive about the "brutal" threat posed by fanatics.
Sir John, writing in the News of the World, said militants trained by Osama bin Laden "fester" across the country.
But the Liberal Democrats accused him of sending "mixed messages" adding to an already "complicated situation".
Saturday, March 05, 2005
The Queen and I
The Queen and I are in agreement. She obviously has read my previous post: Germany's 12.6% Jobless Rate. I am flattered to be in such distinguished company. Long Live the Queen!
Her Royal Highness has proclaimed that henceforth the French language will no longer serve as the language of international haute cuisine. The palace menus are now written in only English.
Her Royal Highness has proclaimed that henceforth the French language will no longer serve as the language of international haute cuisine. The palace menus are now written in only English.
"As members of the International Olympic Committee attended a banquet last night, Buckingham Palace abandoned tradition to present each with a menu card written not in French, but English.
"For as long as anyone can remember menus at the Queen's official banquets have been written in French, generally regarded as the international language of cuisine.
"... there were no doubts as to where the Queen's sentiments lay. She even banned French wines from the menu, replacing pre-prandial champagne with Nyetimber 1995, an English sparkling wine, and choosing Commonwealth wines from Australia and New Zealand to accompany the meal."
Friday, March 04, 2005
The Oscars Redux
Speaking of the Oscars, (see Not a Mumblin' Word), Chrenkoff has an interesting observation, Where Has All The Magic Gone?, where he writes:
Perhaps a more interesting statistic is that while 39% of Democrats watch the Oscars, only 13% of Republicans do. Asks Powerline's Hindrocket:Kerfuffles: February 2005"Those numbers are stunning; wouldn't you think that if the film industry were motivated by economic self-interest, it would try to find a way to avoid alienating the members of America's most popular political party?"
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Canadian Department of Defence?
Who Knew? They probably had trouble believing him because no one had ever heard of a Canadian military.
OTTAWA, Canada (Reuters) -- The U.S. embassy in Canada denied a newspaper story on Wednesday that said Canadian Defence Minister Bill Graham had trouble boarding a plane because his name was on a U.S. no-fly list designed to deter terrorists.
Dean Believes South Downtrodden
Yes, coming on the heels of last week's denunciation of Republicans as "evil", newly elected DNC Chairman Howard Dean this week is in the South on a "red, white and blue" tour of Republican states, attempting to convince them to switch their support to the non-evil party of the non-Nazis, the Democrats. Yesterday, in Jackson, Mississippi, he said "The South will rise again, and when it does, it will have a D after its name". Apparently, people from Vermont believe that because the South is Republican, it is still suffering under the burden of Reconstruction. Send a message to Howard, Vermont and the Dems! The South has been reconstructed and has joined up with the Republicans! The South has already risen again. Welcome to the New South.
Governor Dean has been greeted with the traditional hospitality that Southerners have been showering upon Yankee "visitors" for scores and scores of post bellum years. Only hours before the National Chairman arrived in the state, the Mississippi Republican Party released a press preface, "AIEEEHHHH!!! The incredible shrinking party. The Great Dean Exodus from the MS Democratic Party begins", as they announced the sheriff of Tippah County was switching from Democrat to Republican.
Governor Dean has been greeted with the traditional hospitality that Southerners have been showering upon Yankee "visitors" for scores and scores of post bellum years. Only hours before the National Chairman arrived in the state, the Mississippi Republican Party released a press preface, "AIEEEHHHH!!! The incredible shrinking party. The Great Dean Exodus from the MS Democratic Party begins", as they announced the sheriff of Tippah County was switching from Democrat to Republican.
Bye Bye Byrdie
Is it not time for the RED state of West Virginia to say Bye-Bye to the Byrd? Does he not have enough highways and government buildings named for him by now? Can he continue to be the champion porker of the Republican controlled Senate, after saying that Republicans are naught but a reincarnation of Hitler and his Nazis? Come on West Virginia! Get real and put a stop to this embarrassment to the nation and to your state. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia is an 87 year old Senator who has served in Washington for 46 years. Somewhere in your state there must be a lovely nursing home suitable for him, perhaps even named "The Robert C. Byrd Home for Seniors". Or are you Mountaineers hoping to break South Carolina's record with Strom Thurmond, and allow Mr. Bryd to be the face of your state for another fourteen or more years? If he has forgotten the evils of Hitler and horrors of the Nazis, should he be in the United States Senate?
Of course, Democrats liked Bryd's Hitler speech. None of them has condemned it and some, such as influential Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy, who himself is 73 years old with 42 years in the Senate, was one, describing Mr. Bryd's comments, according to Thursday's "Washington Times", as "Excellent — well-thought-out, reasoned, compelling, legitimate and persuasive." Paul Begala of "Crossfire" praised Bryd, as "standing up for the rights of minorities in the Senate." Yes, believe it not, Begala said that about the former Ku Klux Klan's official “Kleagle*” of West Virginia, who in 1964, was the Democrats' leader of a filibuster on the Senate floor against the Civil Rights Act. Senator Bryd fought fervently against giving American minorities full rights. Among his disgraceful statements was this one: “I would never fight with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times … than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.” He claims to have reformed himself, yet in 2001, during an interview with "Fox News", he twice used the "N" word.
Jackson's Junction has the video.
Radio Blogger
Robert C. Byrd Place Names
Remove Hood, Insert Foot
*Kleagle is the title held by a form of Klan officer whose role is to recruit new members. One famous example is Senator Robert Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, who was a Klan Kleagle in the 1940s. (Wikipedia Encylopedia)
Byrd
Of course, Democrats liked Bryd's Hitler speech. None of them has condemned it and some, such as influential Massachusetts Senator Edward M. Kennedy, who himself is 73 years old with 42 years in the Senate, was one, describing Mr. Bryd's comments, according to Thursday's "Washington Times", as "Excellent — well-thought-out, reasoned, compelling, legitimate and persuasive." Paul Begala of "Crossfire" praised Bryd, as "standing up for the rights of minorities in the Senate." Yes, believe it not, Begala said that about the former Ku Klux Klan's official “Kleagle*” of West Virginia, who in 1964, was the Democrats' leader of a filibuster on the Senate floor against the Civil Rights Act. Senator Bryd fought fervently against giving American minorities full rights. Among his disgraceful statements was this one: “I would never fight with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times … than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.” He claims to have reformed himself, yet in 2001, during an interview with "Fox News", he twice used the "N" word.
Jackson's Junction has the video.
Radio Blogger
Robert C. Byrd Place Names
Remove Hood, Insert Foot
*Kleagle is the title held by a form of Klan officer whose role is to recruit new members. One famous example is Senator Robert Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, who was a Klan Kleagle in the 1940s. (Wikipedia Encylopedia)
Byrd
There are no Blue states.
The Real Engine of Blue America
There are no Blue states, —only Blue cities, where tax eaters rule.
~~by Steven Malanga
Is it really true that America is politically divided between conservative “Red” states in the southern and middle sections of the country and liberal “Blue” states on both coasts? Not exactly: a close look at the district-by-district voting patterns of the coastal states in the 2004 elections brings into crystal-clear focus the real nature of our political divisions. There’s really no such thing as a Blue state—, only Blue metropolitan regions. Indeed, the electoral maps of some states that went for John Kerry in 2004 consist mostly of Red suburban and rural counties surrounding deep Blue cities.
What makes these cities so Blue is a multifaceted liberal coalition that ranges from old-style industrial unionists and culturally liberal intellectuals, journalists, and entertainers to tort lawyers, feminists, and even politically correct financiers. But within this coalition, one group stands out as increasingly powerful and not quite in step with the old politics of the Left: those who benefit from an expanding government, including public-sector employees, workers at organizations that survive off government money, and those who receive government benefits. In cities, especially, this group has seized power from the taxpayers, as the vast expansion of the public sector that has taken place since the beginning of the War on Poverty has finally reached a tipping point. In New York City, this coalition has helped roll back some of the reforms of the Giuliani years. In California cities and towns, it is thwarting the expansion of private businesses, Wal-Mart above all. In nearly 100 municipalities, it has imposed higher costs on tens of thousands of businesses by persuading city councils to pass “living-wage” laws.
The New New Left : How American Politics Works Today
The New New Left concentrates its political energies toward larger government and higher taxes-to benefit the public sector.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)