More good news on the horizon...
From BBC:
...Analysts say defence spending is higher than the official figure, but Beijing says there are no hidden outlays.
"There is no such thing as so-called hidden military expenditure in China," said Mr Li at a news conference in Beijing. ...
How about that, the ChiComs have a sense of humor..
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Death on a Friday Afternoon
Once again I am reading Death on a Friday Afternoon by the late Father Richard John Neuhaus. I cannot recommend it highly enough. It is the reason Lent has become one of my favorite seasons of the Christian year.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
The Problem of Evil -- Whose?
Right in time for my own Ash Wednesday meditations and Lenten prayers in general, Anthony Esolen over at MereComments has some wonderful thoughts (as usual) on the evil that is our very own..
A benevolent God would not allow so much evil to be in the world -- so I hear from people who take neither God nor evil seriously. I don't ask just how much evil would be incompatible with the benevolence of God. Presumably the objectors mean that people do evil things, and people die. I've already cast doubt upon those who use the term "evil" as a counter in an argument which they hope will lead to the conclusion that neither good nor evil exists in reality -- while they hope that their opponents fail to notice the contradiction. For now I'd like to ask, "Who are you talking about?"
"Do you believe," I ask, "that a benevolent God could not possibly have created me, or could not possibly allow me to remain in existence?"
"Well, no, I will concede that it is imaginable that a benevolent God could have created you."
"Then who are you talking about? Yourself? Do you mean that a benevolent God could not have possibly have created you?"
"No, I'm not talking about myself, either. I'm talking about the evil in the world."
And there you have it: talk about something vague, something extrinsic to myself and perhaps to my lunch companions. It is unreal. People who have a palpable sense of the presence of evil do not bandy the subject about in this way. They understand, sure, that some people commit murders. They also understand their own hardness of heart, and do not so readily dissociate themselves from killers. They see people steeped in debauchery; but they know too the promptings of the flesh. People who have really meditated upon moral evil will not wave it about like a talisman, crying, "See here, God does not exist, and therefore we may do what we please!" They will sense the evil inherent in that very rationalization. They know that they themselves are the cause that other people doubt the goodness of God. They will at least glimpse what Dostoyevsky was getting at, when Sonia tells Raskolnikov that he must lie down upon the earth in full sight of everyone, and kiss it, and cry out that he has sinned against the earth and against all people, and that he and he alone is responsible for all the evil in the world. That is what people are like, who examine their consciences, and the vanity of their imaginations.
I once knew a woman -- was passionately in love with her, in fact -- who asked me why Catholics go to confession. "To confess their sins," I answered, not understanding the question. "But what if you have no sins to confess?" she asked. That astounded me. "Everyone has sins to confess," I said. "I don't think I do," she replied.
Had I had any sense at all, I'd have run away from this scene as fast as I could. But when I was young and stupid, I was young and stupid. Setting aside the sins she and I were committing together -- that was a touchy subject, and I myself wanted to put it out of my mind -- I suggested that, for instance, everyone tells a lie now and then. "But I've never told a lie," she said, with a straight face. She was, not surprisingly, the most dishonest woman I had ever met, as I well knew at the time. I could (and did) recount a few lies she had told -- which she promptly rationalized away....
...So if you are talking to me about the problem of evil, and you are not talking from the depths of your sorrow, for the evil you yourself have committed, then I say you are not honest; you are not interested in the truth. People as innocent as children -- even they do not bandy the issue about. They, and self-convicted sinners, have good reason not to. For the problem of evil is ineluctably the personal burden of evil: and the materialist response is brutal. It is not that you will carry that burden to your grave. It is worse than that. It is that your burden in itself means nothing; and that there is no one who can lift it from your shoulders. That is, if they ever descend from their pedestals to speak to people whose consciences are so burdened. They seldom do so, lest their shoulders begin to ache. More soon on a world with "compassion" but no sin and no forgiveness...(read the whole article here)
A benevolent God would not allow so much evil to be in the world -- so I hear from people who take neither God nor evil seriously. I don't ask just how much evil would be incompatible with the benevolence of God. Presumably the objectors mean that people do evil things, and people die. I've already cast doubt upon those who use the term "evil" as a counter in an argument which they hope will lead to the conclusion that neither good nor evil exists in reality -- while they hope that their opponents fail to notice the contradiction. For now I'd like to ask, "Who are you talking about?"
"Do you believe," I ask, "that a benevolent God could not possibly have created me, or could not possibly allow me to remain in existence?"
"Well, no, I will concede that it is imaginable that a benevolent God could have created you."
"Then who are you talking about? Yourself? Do you mean that a benevolent God could not have possibly have created you?"
"No, I'm not talking about myself, either. I'm talking about the evil in the world."
And there you have it: talk about something vague, something extrinsic to myself and perhaps to my lunch companions. It is unreal. People who have a palpable sense of the presence of evil do not bandy the subject about in this way. They understand, sure, that some people commit murders. They also understand their own hardness of heart, and do not so readily dissociate themselves from killers. They see people steeped in debauchery; but they know too the promptings of the flesh. People who have really meditated upon moral evil will not wave it about like a talisman, crying, "See here, God does not exist, and therefore we may do what we please!" They will sense the evil inherent in that very rationalization. They know that they themselves are the cause that other people doubt the goodness of God. They will at least glimpse what Dostoyevsky was getting at, when Sonia tells Raskolnikov that he must lie down upon the earth in full sight of everyone, and kiss it, and cry out that he has sinned against the earth and against all people, and that he and he alone is responsible for all the evil in the world. That is what people are like, who examine their consciences, and the vanity of their imaginations.
I once knew a woman -- was passionately in love with her, in fact -- who asked me why Catholics go to confession. "To confess their sins," I answered, not understanding the question. "But what if you have no sins to confess?" she asked. That astounded me. "Everyone has sins to confess," I said. "I don't think I do," she replied.
Had I had any sense at all, I'd have run away from this scene as fast as I could. But when I was young and stupid, I was young and stupid. Setting aside the sins she and I were committing together -- that was a touchy subject, and I myself wanted to put it out of my mind -- I suggested that, for instance, everyone tells a lie now and then. "But I've never told a lie," she said, with a straight face. She was, not surprisingly, the most dishonest woman I had ever met, as I well knew at the time. I could (and did) recount a few lies she had told -- which she promptly rationalized away....
...So if you are talking to me about the problem of evil, and you are not talking from the depths of your sorrow, for the evil you yourself have committed, then I say you are not honest; you are not interested in the truth. People as innocent as children -- even they do not bandy the issue about. They, and self-convicted sinners, have good reason not to. For the problem of evil is ineluctably the personal burden of evil: and the materialist response is brutal. It is not that you will carry that burden to your grave. It is worse than that. It is that your burden in itself means nothing; and that there is no one who can lift it from your shoulders. That is, if they ever descend from their pedestals to speak to people whose consciences are so burdened. They seldom do so, lest their shoulders begin to ache. More soon on a world with "compassion" but no sin and no forgiveness...(read the whole article here)
Sex without Morals
Insanity. Our kids need clear guidelines, but we do not know what is right and wrong...That's really an excellent illustration of the cunundrum isn't it? Without Truth there is no right and wrong and then everything is up for grabs isn't it...
From MereComments:
Linda Blair, a clinical psychologist, said educating older children and teenagers about sex had to be a process of negotiation. “We do not know what is right and wrong; right and wrong is relative, although your child does need clear guidelines,” she said.
So what's to tell?...(More)
From MereComments:
Brits this past weekend read about a new government leaflet informing parents how to talk to their children about sex.
Linda Blair, a clinical psychologist, said educating older children and teenagers about sex had to be a process of negotiation. “We do not know what is right and wrong; right and wrong is relative, although your child does need clear guidelines,” she said.
So what's to tell?...(More)
Obama putting military in harm's way?
From OneNews Now:
A military advocacy organization is not happy with President Barack Obama's plans to drastically cut defense spending by $53 billion.
Military Families United (MFU) is a non-profit organization committed to supporting America's troops and their families. MFU executive director Brian Wise says the Obama administration has no qualms about providing $350 billion to bail out Wall Street or $17.4 billion to bail out General Motors and Chrysler, but cannot provide the necessary funding to protect American troops from improvised explosive devices (IEDs). "The president is taking away from a $1.5 billion budget for detecting IEDs, $1 billion. Seventy-five percent of that budget will be removed," he points out. "If those programs aren't in place, more of our soldiers will be lost to terrorists trying to kill [them]."...(More)
A military advocacy organization is not happy with President Barack Obama's plans to drastically cut defense spending by $53 billion.
Military Families United (MFU) is a non-profit organization committed to supporting America's troops and their families. MFU executive director Brian Wise says the Obama administration has no qualms about providing $350 billion to bail out Wall Street or $17.4 billion to bail out General Motors and Chrysler, but cannot provide the necessary funding to protect American troops from improvised explosive devices (IEDs). "The president is taking away from a $1.5 billion budget for detecting IEDs, $1 billion. Seventy-five percent of that budget will be removed," he points out. "If those programs aren't in place, more of our soldiers will be lost to terrorists trying to kill [them]."...(More)
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Lessons Learned-Part 2
First a review:
Laprascopic removal of your appendix leaves two holes in the middle and one on the LEFT side.
Two weeks later a pain on the left side does at the incision site does not necessarily mean an infection.
Lessons learned from part 1 can be used in lesson 2. These would include that whole bit about rebound pain and gas not lasting more than two hours.
Now for the new lessons:
You can feel the exact same pain on your left side as you did on your right.
It can start in the morning and increase through the day.
Having this happen while your wife is out of the country while having children to watch is the epitome of poor timing.
Having neighbors (even a cranky old Frenchman) is a real blessing.
Your children, due to stress and fear and an uncanny ability to take note of opportunities that may arise at such times, may not be on their best behavior.
a CT scan and white blood cell counts can tell you (much clearer than with appendix) that you do not have an infection or abscess from your appendectomy and can see rather clearly that you have diverticulitis.
After 40 most of us have diverticulosis. these are caused by small weaknesses in the intestinal lining that causes pouches to form (diverticuli)
Pain from this condition can mimic appendicitis and is sometimes referred to as "left sided appendicitis."
Sometimes the pain from this condition can be worse.
Treatment can range anywhere along a spectrum from going home and treating with antibiotics or have a section of the colon removed.
I sat in the hospital and was fed through an IV (not even water) and given two types of antibiotics for two nights.
Having a room to yourself is much better than sharing
The antibiotics they give you are effective but brutal. Rarely have I felt so bad on antibiotics. But only if I got up.
Being fed by an IV is a fast way to lose wight but not fun.
Further tests will be required but only after recovering for another two weeks.
While recovering you probably won't feel like doing ANYTHING, not even checking e-mail or posting on a blog.
Many thanks to Chewy and MC for posting in my absence. I'm fine.
For those half a dozen readers who check in regularly, I'll be back soon. Thanks for the prayers
Laprascopic removal of your appendix leaves two holes in the middle and one on the LEFT side.
Two weeks later a pain on the left side does at the incision site does not necessarily mean an infection.
Lessons learned from part 1 can be used in lesson 2. These would include that whole bit about rebound pain and gas not lasting more than two hours.
Now for the new lessons:
You can feel the exact same pain on your left side as you did on your right.
It can start in the morning and increase through the day.
Having this happen while your wife is out of the country while having children to watch is the epitome of poor timing.
Having neighbors (even a cranky old Frenchman) is a real blessing.
Your children, due to stress and fear and an uncanny ability to take note of opportunities that may arise at such times, may not be on their best behavior.
a CT scan and white blood cell counts can tell you (much clearer than with appendix) that you do not have an infection or abscess from your appendectomy and can see rather clearly that you have diverticulitis.
After 40 most of us have diverticulosis. these are caused by small weaknesses in the intestinal lining that causes pouches to form (diverticuli)
Pain from this condition can mimic appendicitis and is sometimes referred to as "left sided appendicitis."
Sometimes the pain from this condition can be worse.
Treatment can range anywhere along a spectrum from going home and treating with antibiotics or have a section of the colon removed.
I sat in the hospital and was fed through an IV (not even water) and given two types of antibiotics for two nights.
Having a room to yourself is much better than sharing
The antibiotics they give you are effective but brutal. Rarely have I felt so bad on antibiotics. But only if I got up.
Being fed by an IV is a fast way to lose wight but not fun.
Further tests will be required but only after recovering for another two weeks.
While recovering you probably won't feel like doing ANYTHING, not even checking e-mail or posting on a blog.
Many thanks to Chewy and MC for posting in my absence. I'm fine.
For those half a dozen readers who check in regularly, I'll be back soon. Thanks for the prayers
A Baby is Actually Human!
The citizens of North Dakota are taking major strides to acknowledge by law that a fetus is actually a human being. Fox News has the article. Of course, this has major implications for the abortion debate...
Monday, February 23, 2009
Not-So-Free Exercise
Apparently Virginia is considering a law that would re-instate...RE-instate, mind you...the right of police chaplains to pray in the name of a specific deity, such as Jesus Christ. The article is here.
What I want to know is how the previous law preventing them from doing so was not a violation of the 1st Amendment that says Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion or...wait for it...prohibiting the free exercise thereof?
Jesus said specifically in John 14:13, 14:14, and 16:23 that God will answer our prayers if we pray in His name. Praying in the name of Jesus is part of what it means to practice the Christian faith. Thus by definition the previous Virginia law was unconstitutional.
What I want to know is how the previous law preventing them from doing so was not a violation of the 1st Amendment that says Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion or...wait for it...prohibiting the free exercise thereof?
Jesus said specifically in John 14:13, 14:14, and 16:23 that God will answer our prayers if we pray in His name. Praying in the name of Jesus is part of what it means to practice the Christian faith. Thus by definition the previous Virginia law was unconstitutional.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Obama's Governing Style
In the Middle Ages, when a young prince suddenly and prematurely became king, the royal court, the church leadership and other senior aristocrats would scrutinize his every word and habit for signs of what kind of mind would be deciding their country's fate and their personal prosperity and safety. Today, around the world, President Barack Obama's every word, every action, every inaction is being likewise scrutinized for similar reasons.
Mr. Obama himself has described as of the highest priority to him -- and thus, one presumes, items to which he would have given his personal attention: Cabinet selection, closing Gitmo, the stimulus package and bipartisanship.
Regarding the Cabinet selection, he famously said he "screwed up."
Closing of Gitmo, “His first public signing as president was that executive order to close it down. President Obama: "And we then provide, uh, the process whereby Guantanamo will be closed, uh, no later than one year from now. We will be, uh. … Is there a separate, uh, executive order, Greg, with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that, uh, written?"
…in the third item -- the stimulus process -- his lack of personal involvement in its design is curious. He recently said (incorrectly, I believe) that his presidency will be judged only on whether he fixes the economy or not. Thus, as he has identified the stimulus as essential to the recovery process, his willingness to let House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid design a bill that, even now that it's passed, Mr. Obama has continued to criticize as needing improvement
I can think of four possible explanations for this almost unprecedented presidential detachment from the decision making of policies the president publicly declared to be vital to the country and his presidency:
1) He is a very, very big-picture man, and he delegates decisions even on the central points of vital issues.
2) For tactical reasons, he decided these matters were not worth using up political chits.
3) He is either hesitant or unskilled at management, and he let matters drift until it seemed too late to intervene personally.
4) Or his personality type leaves him surprisingly uninterested in things that aren't personally about him.
Mr. Obama himself has described as of the highest priority to him -- and thus, one presumes, items to which he would have given his personal attention: Cabinet selection, closing Gitmo, the stimulus package and bipartisanship.
Regarding the Cabinet selection, he famously said he "screwed up."
Closing of Gitmo, “His first public signing as president was that executive order to close it down. President Obama: "And we then provide, uh, the process whereby Guantanamo will be closed, uh, no later than one year from now. We will be, uh. … Is there a separate, uh, executive order, Greg, with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that, uh, written?"
…in the third item -- the stimulus process -- his lack of personal involvement in its design is curious. He recently said (incorrectly, I believe) that his presidency will be judged only on whether he fixes the economy or not. Thus, as he has identified the stimulus as essential to the recovery process, his willingness to let House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid design a bill that, even now that it's passed, Mr. Obama has continued to criticize as needing improvement
I can think of four possible explanations for this almost unprecedented presidential detachment from the decision making of policies the president publicly declared to be vital to the country and his presidency:
1) He is a very, very big-picture man, and he delegates decisions even on the central points of vital issues.
2) For tactical reasons, he decided these matters were not worth using up political chits.
3) He is either hesitant or unskilled at management, and he let matters drift until it seemed too late to intervene personally.
4) Or his personality type leaves him surprisingly uninterested in things that aren't personally about him.
Obama unveils plan for troubled housing market
Where does it end? Why is it always the private sector that caused the problem? Why is it never the government’s problem, unless of course we are speaking to the right?
How much can the taxpayer shoulder? After all, how can the government continue to put people on the dole unless they put a heaver tax burden on the rest of us? The unemployment rate is still 3% under what it was in the early 80s, notwithstanding the interest rates! Was that met with governmental bailouts, no, it was met head-on with tax cuts and deregulation which stimulated the economy.
The current administration is spending us into oblivion. Soon our currency will be good for nothing but lining the bird cage. Japan tried it in the 90s and quadrupled their national debt and was still in recession Look at Argentina in the 80s, I personally lived that one.
Now GM wants more, Chrysler wants more, now we’re going to assure there’s a mortgage in every pot. Where does it end? We’re being set up, watch your wallet. Been to the DMV lately…………the government is so efficient at everything they do.
How much can the taxpayer shoulder? After all, how can the government continue to put people on the dole unless they put a heaver tax burden on the rest of us? The unemployment rate is still 3% under what it was in the early 80s, notwithstanding the interest rates! Was that met with governmental bailouts, no, it was met head-on with tax cuts and deregulation which stimulated the economy.
The current administration is spending us into oblivion. Soon our currency will be good for nothing but lining the bird cage. Japan tried it in the 90s and quadrupled their national debt and was still in recession Look at Argentina in the 80s, I personally lived that one.
Now GM wants more, Chrysler wants more, now we’re going to assure there’s a mortgage in every pot. Where does it end? We’re being set up, watch your wallet. Been to the DMV lately…………the government is so efficient at everything they do.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Federal obligations exceed world GDP
If this doesn't make you furious, I don't know what will!
Does $65.5 trillion terrify anyone yet?
As the Obama administration pushes through Congress its $800 billion deficit-spending economic stimulus plan, the American public is largely unaware that the true deficit of the federal government already is measured in trillions of dollars, and in fact its $65.5 trillion in total obligations exceeds the gross domestic product of the world.
"Put simply, there is no way the government can possibly pay for the level of social welfare benefits the federal government has promised unless the government simply prints cash and debases the currency, which the government will increasingly be doing this year," Williams said, explaining in more detail why he feels the government is now in the process of monetizing the federal debt.
Does $65.5 trillion terrify anyone yet?
As the Obama administration pushes through Congress its $800 billion deficit-spending economic stimulus plan, the American public is largely unaware that the true deficit of the federal government already is measured in trillions of dollars, and in fact its $65.5 trillion in total obligations exceeds the gross domestic product of the world.
"Put simply, there is no way the government can possibly pay for the level of social welfare benefits the federal government has promised unless the government simply prints cash and debases the currency, which the government will increasingly be doing this year," Williams said, explaining in more detail why he feels the government is now in the process of monetizing the federal debt.
Say it ain't so..........Slick Willie!
Why how can this be true............Slick Willie was our first black President! How can they possibly tie him in with the current economic crises!? After all, this is clearly a Republican issue. Everybody knows there were no Democrats elected prior to 2008! How can the Liberals possibly be associated with any wrong doing in this crisis?
“TIME's list of the "25 People to Blame" for the global economic collapse. "Oh no," he responded, "My question to them is: Do any of them seriously believe if I had been president, and my economic team had been in place the last eight years, that this would be happening today?”
“Clinton ushered out the Glass-Steagall Act, which for decades had separated commercial and investment banking, and signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act - which exempted all derivatives, including the now-notorious credit-default swaps, from federal regulation. His administration also loosened housing rules, which added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.”
At least we know the Messiah cares given the ramming of the porkulus package down our throat, of course we have nobody to blame but ourselves given our apathy regarding our elected officials, notwithstanding our obsession with celebrity. At least it was a bipartisan effort….hello….it didn’t work when Bush did it, why will it work when the Messiah does it?
Our children may be able to pay off the $1,000,000,000,000, but what about the interest, our great-grandchildren? What will it be, an additional 2,000,000,000,000?
“TIME's list of the "25 People to Blame" for the global economic collapse. "Oh no," he responded, "My question to them is: Do any of them seriously believe if I had been president, and my economic team had been in place the last eight years, that this would be happening today?”
“Clinton ushered out the Glass-Steagall Act, which for decades had separated commercial and investment banking, and signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act - which exempted all derivatives, including the now-notorious credit-default swaps, from federal regulation. His administration also loosened housing rules, which added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.”
At least we know the Messiah cares given the ramming of the porkulus package down our throat, of course we have nobody to blame but ourselves given our apathy regarding our elected officials, notwithstanding our obsession with celebrity. At least it was a bipartisan effort….hello….it didn’t work when Bush did it, why will it work when the Messiah does it?
Our children may be able to pay off the $1,000,000,000,000, but what about the interest, our great-grandchildren? What will it be, an additional 2,000,000,000,000?
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Freedom Go To Hell
No doubt you remember the snazzy slogan above from the Muslim protests against the 2006 Dutch refusal to prohibit the publication of the cartoons depicting Muhammad. (the link is here if you need your memory refreshed.) There were many such slogans at the rally (e.g. .."Your 9/11 is on its way," "get ready for the real holocaust" and of course the old stand-by, "behead those who insult Islam") which received widespread publication in the U.S.- oh wait, no they didn't. But you can still see them at Snopes.
So why bring this up now three years later? Well, as many of you know we have been following the saga of Dutch law maker Geert Wilders and others in Europe who seem intent on surrendering (or is the correct word submitting) to Islamic intimidation.
It would appear that England has chosen to go the way of the Dutch and others. Rest assured that this same type of thing is heading our way. Better to fight it now before it is (more) firmly established in this country. (as this lovely open minded professor shows)
Beyond the obvious free speech issues involved here and the hypocrisy of denying the film or the Dutch MP's views as "hate speech" and yet allowing the type of preaching in the country's Mosques that reflect the placards above, there is the nagging thought in the back of my mind that there may be more truth to what Mr. Wilders says than any of us would care to admit.
Pat Condell: Britain's spineless government- there are a number of links here including a petition in support of Mr Wilders
A montage of the Geert Wilders debate - a summary of the debate going on in Britain right now and one we need to have as well.
What Wilders Would Have Said If the UK Allowed Free Speech
H/T to EuropeNews for the above three links.
Censorship in England is nothing new of course, and not just of things deemed anti-Islamic. They also have a penchant for censoring Christianity as reported in this Zenit article:
ROME, FEB. 15, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Censorship is back; not against pornography or unpopular political opinions, but against Christianity and pro-life opinions. A number of recent cases highlight the trend to silence unpopular convictions.A Baptist nurse, Caroline Petrie, was suspended from her job at the North Somerset Primary Care Trust for offering to pray for a patient, reported the Telegraph on Feb. 1. Last December, when she was attending a patient, Petrie offered to pray for her. The patient did not accept her offer, and Petrie did not persist. Subsequently, Petrie was suspended.The patient concerned, May Phippen, subsequently told the Telegraph newspaper in an article published the following day that she had not made a complaint about Petrie's offer and that all she did was to mention it to another nurse. Phippen also said she did not want Petrie to be dismissed over the issue.The Christian Medical Fellowship said Caroline Petrie's suspension amounted to religious discrimination, reported the Daily Mail newspaper Feb. 3.... (more)
So why bring this up now three years later? Well, as many of you know we have been following the saga of Dutch law maker Geert Wilders and others in Europe who seem intent on surrendering (or is the correct word submitting) to Islamic intimidation.
It would appear that England has chosen to go the way of the Dutch and others. Rest assured that this same type of thing is heading our way. Better to fight it now before it is (more) firmly established in this country. (as this lovely open minded professor shows)
Beyond the obvious free speech issues involved here and the hypocrisy of denying the film or the Dutch MP's views as "hate speech" and yet allowing the type of preaching in the country's Mosques that reflect the placards above, there is the nagging thought in the back of my mind that there may be more truth to what Mr. Wilders says than any of us would care to admit.
Pat Condell: Britain's spineless government- there are a number of links here including a petition in support of Mr Wilders
A montage of the Geert Wilders debate - a summary of the debate going on in Britain right now and one we need to have as well.
What Wilders Would Have Said If the UK Allowed Free Speech
H/T to EuropeNews for the above three links.
Censorship in England is nothing new of course, and not just of things deemed anti-Islamic. They also have a penchant for censoring Christianity as reported in this Zenit article:
ROME, FEB. 15, 2009 (Zenit.org).- Censorship is back; not against pornography or unpopular political opinions, but against Christianity and pro-life opinions. A number of recent cases highlight the trend to silence unpopular convictions.A Baptist nurse, Caroline Petrie, was suspended from her job at the North Somerset Primary Care Trust for offering to pray for a patient, reported the Telegraph on Feb. 1. Last December, when she was attending a patient, Petrie offered to pray for her. The patient did not accept her offer, and Petrie did not persist. Subsequently, Petrie was suspended.The patient concerned, May Phippen, subsequently told the Telegraph newspaper in an article published the following day that she had not made a complaint about Petrie's offer and that all she did was to mention it to another nurse. Phippen also said she did not want Petrie to be dismissed over the issue.The Christian Medical Fellowship said Caroline Petrie's suspension amounted to religious discrimination, reported the Daily Mail newspaper Feb. 3.... (more)
Friday, February 13, 2009
"The American people really don't care, about those "little, tiny, yes, porky amendments."
From NYPost:
SEN.Charles Schumer took to the floor on Tuesday to sneer at public outrage over the trillion-dollar porkulus. "The American people really don't care," he said, about those "little, tiny, yes, porky amendments."
He punctuated his derision by pinching his pointer finger and thumb together. Only the "chattering classes" worry about such trivial matters, the New York Democrat scoffed.
Well, we are all "chattering classes" now. Congressional phones and fax lines have been ringing off the hooks all week with complaints from angry constituents across the country.
And just two days after Schumer declared that no one cares, the taxpayer group Americans for Prosperity delivered 400,000 petitions to the Senate protesting the behemoth bill. Those petitions were signed before the latest details of the House-Senate conference-report negotiations had been disclosed - and before any final legislative text had been made available to the general public.
If the stimulus plan were a Thanksgiving dinner entree, it would be a Turbaconducken - the heart attack-inducing dish of roasted chicken stuffed inside a duck stuffed inside a turkey, all wrapped in endless slabs of bacon.
But, according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's fantasyland "fact sheet" released yesterday afternoon, "there are no earmarks or pet projects" in the final package.
Thanks to Michigan's Democratic Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin, General Motors will receive a special tax break worth an estimated $7 billion to cover liabilities incurred when it accepted its $13.4 billion bailout from the Bush administration.
The failing automaker has lined up for an addition $4 billion in bailout funds - at which time it will no doubt ask for another mega-tax-liability waiver. The moochers' cycle never ends.
Then there's Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Railway to Sin City. Appointing yourself a Senate conferee has its perks. Roughly $8 billion in perks.
Reid, you see, needs to stimulate his re-election bid in Nevada, so he haggled with Obama to tuck in a teeny, tiny, yes, porky amendment for high-speed rail lines.
Reid has his eyes - and paws - on a proposed Los Angeles-to-Las Vegas magnetic-levitation train. He has already sunk $45 million in previous earmarks into his, yes, pet project. Wasn't it earlier this week that Obama was lecturing companies not to travel to Las Vegas on the taxpayers' dime?
But I digress. Along with these not-earmarks, not-pet projects, there's $2 billion for impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's pet FutureGen, near-zero-emissions power-plant project, $300 million for souped-up "green" golf carts for government workers, $30 million for "smart appliances" and $65 million for digital-TV coupons.
According to Hill Republicans, money for basic highways and bridges was cut by $1 billion from the House-passed level, but:
* $9 billion for school construction was added back in (originally cut by the Nelson-Collins "compromise").
* $5 billion was added to the state fiscal-stabilization fund (originally cut by Nelson-Collins), making it a grand total of $53.6 billion.
* $1 billion was added back for Prevention & Wellness Programs, including STD education.
* $2 billion was added for neighborhood-stabilization programs. (more)
SEN.Charles Schumer took to the floor on Tuesday to sneer at public outrage over the trillion-dollar porkulus. "The American people really don't care," he said, about those "little, tiny, yes, porky amendments."
He punctuated his derision by pinching his pointer finger and thumb together. Only the "chattering classes" worry about such trivial matters, the New York Democrat scoffed.
Well, we are all "chattering classes" now. Congressional phones and fax lines have been ringing off the hooks all week with complaints from angry constituents across the country.
And just two days after Schumer declared that no one cares, the taxpayer group Americans for Prosperity delivered 400,000 petitions to the Senate protesting the behemoth bill. Those petitions were signed before the latest details of the House-Senate conference-report negotiations had been disclosed - and before any final legislative text had been made available to the general public.
If the stimulus plan were a Thanksgiving dinner entree, it would be a Turbaconducken - the heart attack-inducing dish of roasted chicken stuffed inside a duck stuffed inside a turkey, all wrapped in endless slabs of bacon.
But, according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's fantasyland "fact sheet" released yesterday afternoon, "there are no earmarks or pet projects" in the final package.
Thanks to Michigan's Democratic Sens. Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin, General Motors will receive a special tax break worth an estimated $7 billion to cover liabilities incurred when it accepted its $13.4 billion bailout from the Bush administration.
The failing automaker has lined up for an addition $4 billion in bailout funds - at which time it will no doubt ask for another mega-tax-liability waiver. The moochers' cycle never ends.
Then there's Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's Railway to Sin City. Appointing yourself a Senate conferee has its perks. Roughly $8 billion in perks.
Reid, you see, needs to stimulate his re-election bid in Nevada, so he haggled with Obama to tuck in a teeny, tiny, yes, porky amendment for high-speed rail lines.
Reid has his eyes - and paws - on a proposed Los Angeles-to-Las Vegas magnetic-levitation train. He has already sunk $45 million in previous earmarks into his, yes, pet project. Wasn't it earlier this week that Obama was lecturing companies not to travel to Las Vegas on the taxpayers' dime?
But I digress. Along with these not-earmarks, not-pet projects, there's $2 billion for impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich's pet FutureGen, near-zero-emissions power-plant project, $300 million for souped-up "green" golf carts for government workers, $30 million for "smart appliances" and $65 million for digital-TV coupons.
According to Hill Republicans, money for basic highways and bridges was cut by $1 billion from the House-passed level, but:
* $9 billion for school construction was added back in (originally cut by the Nelson-Collins "compromise").
* $5 billion was added to the state fiscal-stabilization fund (originally cut by Nelson-Collins), making it a grand total of $53.6 billion.
* $1 billion was added back for Prevention & Wellness Programs, including STD education.
* $2 billion was added for neighborhood-stabilization programs. (more)
The Press Strikes Again: Woman Swims Atlantic- NOT
(Ok- I know I'm a little behind but I had this appendectomy see...)
No doubt you read the headlines on the AP wires: Woman, 56, claims record Atlantic swim and 56-year-old becomes first woman to swim Atlantic.
But no, not quite:
The AP originally reported that Figge swam from the Cape Verde Islands off the coast of Africa to Trinidad (2,100 miles) in 25 days while escorted by a boat. She was said to have rested every night and hopped back in the water in the morning.
Figge woke most days around 7 a.m., eating pasta and baked potatoes while she and the crew assessed the weather. Her longest stint in the water was about eight hours, and her shortest was 21 minutes.
There were problems with the story from the start. A few of the less-important ones included the fact that Cape Verde is at least 2,400 miles, not 2,100, from Trinidad. And the African islands are about 500 miles off the western coast of the continent, meaning Figge had a huge head start on her trip across the Atlantic. (It'd be like somebody saying they ran across America after starting in Cincinnati.)
Those are trivial though. The real issue stemmed from the fact that swimming 2,100 miles in 25 days is impossible. (Some newspapers picked up on this.) It's infinitely more impossible when somebody only spends 21 minutes swimming during one of those 25 days. Michael Phelps swimming his fastest would take about 20 days to cover that distance. And that's his fastest pace, sustained for three weeks, without ever stopping. Impossible.
Yet, somehow, the AP ran the story even though a few seconds of thought and a pocket calculator was enough to disprove it. They ran a correction yesterday that read, in part:
Figge swam only a fraction of the 2,100-mile journey. The rest of the time, she rested on her crew's westward-sailing catamaran. Her spokesman [said] that her total swimming distance has not been calculated yet, but that due to ocean hazards including inclement weather, he estimates she swam about 250 miles.
Swimming 250 miles is nothing to scoff at; but it's not 2,100. To go back to the running-across-America analogy, this would be like driving cross country with a friend, and getting out of the car every ten miles to run one mile for the entire trip. That'd be an impressive feat, but nobody would ever confuse it with running across the United States. ...(more)
Our press is no longer the watchdogs they used to be or that we need...
No doubt you read the headlines on the AP wires: Woman, 56, claims record Atlantic swim and 56-year-old becomes first woman to swim Atlantic.
But no, not quite:
The AP originally reported that Figge swam from the Cape Verde Islands off the coast of Africa to Trinidad (2,100 miles) in 25 days while escorted by a boat. She was said to have rested every night and hopped back in the water in the morning.
Figge woke most days around 7 a.m., eating pasta and baked potatoes while she and the crew assessed the weather. Her longest stint in the water was about eight hours, and her shortest was 21 minutes.
There were problems with the story from the start. A few of the less-important ones included the fact that Cape Verde is at least 2,400 miles, not 2,100, from Trinidad. And the African islands are about 500 miles off the western coast of the continent, meaning Figge had a huge head start on her trip across the Atlantic. (It'd be like somebody saying they ran across America after starting in Cincinnati.)
Those are trivial though. The real issue stemmed from the fact that swimming 2,100 miles in 25 days is impossible. (Some newspapers picked up on this.) It's infinitely more impossible when somebody only spends 21 minutes swimming during one of those 25 days. Michael Phelps swimming his fastest would take about 20 days to cover that distance. And that's his fastest pace, sustained for three weeks, without ever stopping. Impossible.
Yet, somehow, the AP ran the story even though a few seconds of thought and a pocket calculator was enough to disprove it. They ran a correction yesterday that read, in part:
Figge swam only a fraction of the 2,100-mile journey. The rest of the time, she rested on her crew's westward-sailing catamaran. Her spokesman [said] that her total swimming distance has not been calculated yet, but that due to ocean hazards including inclement weather, he estimates she swam about 250 miles.
Swimming 250 miles is nothing to scoff at; but it's not 2,100. To go back to the running-across-America analogy, this would be like driving cross country with a friend, and getting out of the car every ten miles to run one mile for the entire trip. That'd be an impressive feat, but nobody would ever confuse it with running across the United States. ...(more)
Our press is no longer the watchdogs they used to be or that we need...
Unstoppable Global Warming
As I've said before, when the computer models can predict next weeks weather then I might start listening to the models. Right now of course they can't model a "blocking high" or "el nino" so tell me again why we need to sink billions to thwart something thats very existence much less cause is so very far from clear? From FrontPage:
...That's right! Al Gore wants Congress to impose a tax that could be considered a tax on climate. He describes his new tax as "putting a price on carbon."
And, by the way, the new name for global warming is "climate change," acknowledging the fact that thermometers register downward trends as well as upward trends.
The warmest year in the past century was 1934, followed by 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999 and 1993. Four of the top 10 are from the 1930s, before auto emissions were a factor, while only three are from the last 10 years. As S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery point out in their latest book, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years (2007), "That there has been no warming trend in the United States since the 1930s seriously undermines claims that the effects of global warming are already being felt in the United States." S. Fred Singer is Distinguished Research Professor at George Washington University and is author or editor of more than a dozen books and monographs. Dennis T. Avery is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute and author of several books.
Most of those individuals known as "global warmers" have consistently relied upon the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as their reference point. The IPCC Report (1995) claims they've found a "human fingerprint" in the current global warming trend. Singer and Avery claim this term "human fingerprint" was inserted for "political not scientific reasons."
The IPCC Report was challenged as lacking a scientific basis on January 28 by a former chief of the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA), Dr. John S. Theon. He "slammed the computer models used to determine future climate, claiming they are not scientific in part because modelers 'resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists.'" Dr. Theon was joined by Dr. J. Scott Armstrong, founder of the International Journal of Forecasting, in stating, "The computer models underpinning the work of many scientific institutions concerned with global warming are fundamentally flawed."
Citing procedures described in the IPCC Report they noted that there was no scientific forecast of the changes in the earth's climate. The only forecasts were based on the opinions of some scientists. An audit of the procedures described "clearly violated 72 scientific principles of forecasting," Theon and Armstrong said. In all the succeeding forecasts made by IPCC "scientists," the same 72 violations of scientific principles were repeated....(more)
...That's right! Al Gore wants Congress to impose a tax that could be considered a tax on climate. He describes his new tax as "putting a price on carbon."
And, by the way, the new name for global warming is "climate change," acknowledging the fact that thermometers register downward trends as well as upward trends.
The warmest year in the past century was 1934, followed by 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999 and 1993. Four of the top 10 are from the 1930s, before auto emissions were a factor, while only three are from the last 10 years. As S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery point out in their latest book, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years (2007), "That there has been no warming trend in the United States since the 1930s seriously undermines claims that the effects of global warming are already being felt in the United States." S. Fred Singer is Distinguished Research Professor at George Washington University and is author or editor of more than a dozen books and monographs. Dennis T. Avery is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute and author of several books.
Most of those individuals known as "global warmers" have consistently relied upon the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as their reference point. The IPCC Report (1995) claims they've found a "human fingerprint" in the current global warming trend. Singer and Avery claim this term "human fingerprint" was inserted for "political not scientific reasons."
The IPCC Report was challenged as lacking a scientific basis on January 28 by a former chief of the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA), Dr. John S. Theon. He "slammed the computer models used to determine future climate, claiming they are not scientific in part because modelers 'resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists.'" Dr. Theon was joined by Dr. J. Scott Armstrong, founder of the International Journal of Forecasting, in stating, "The computer models underpinning the work of many scientific institutions concerned with global warming are fundamentally flawed."
Citing procedures described in the IPCC Report they noted that there was no scientific forecast of the changes in the earth's climate. The only forecasts were based on the opinions of some scientists. An audit of the procedures described "clearly violated 72 scientific principles of forecasting," Theon and Armstrong said. In all the succeeding forecasts made by IPCC "scientists," the same 72 violations of scientific principles were repeated....(more)
About Islam: What the West Needs/Wants to Know
A couple of interesting posts highlighting both sides of the question above, over at MereComments. The first, "What the West Needs to Know" highlights an interesting film Islam: What the West Needs to Know. It has, I believe been out for some time though I myself have not seen it. I think it might be worth the purchase.
(1) Why are you so quiet?
Since the first Israelis were targeted for death by Muslim terrorists blowing themselves up in the name of your religion and Palestinian nationalism, I have been praying to see Muslim demonstrations against these atrocities. Last week’s protests in Jordan against the bombings, while welcome, were a rarity. What I have seen more often is mainstream Muslim spokesmen implicitly defending this terror on the grounds that Israel occupies Palestinian lands. We see torture and murder in the name of Allah, but we see no anti-torture and anti-murder demonstrations in the name of Allah.
There are a billion Muslims in the world. How is it possible that essentially none have demonstrated against evils perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam? This is true even of the millions of Muslims living in free Western societies. What are non-Muslims of goodwill supposed to conclude? When the Israeli government did not stop a Lebanese massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Chatilla refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982, great crowds of Israeli Jews gathered to protest their country’s moral failing. Why has there been no comparable public demonstration by Palestinians or other Muslims to morally condemn Palestinian or other Muslim-committed terror?
(2) Why are none of the Palestinian terrorists Christian?
If Israeli occupation is the reason for Muslim terror in Israel, why do no Christian Palestinians engage in terror? They are just as nationalistic and just as occupied as Muslim Palestinians.
(3) Why is only one of the 47 Muslim-majority countries a free country?
(4) Why are so many atrocities committed and threatened by Muslims in the name of Islam?
Young girls in Indonesia were recently beheaded by Muslim murderers. Last year, Muslims – in the name of Islam – murdered hundreds of schoolchildren in Russia. While reciting Muslim prayers, Islamic terrorists take foreigners working to make Iraq free and slaughter them. Muslim daughters are murdered by their own families in the thousands in “honor killings.” And the Muslim government in Iran has publicly called for the extermination of Israel.
(5) Why do countries governed by religious Muslims persecute other religions?
No church or synagogue is allowed in Saudi Arabia. The Taliban destroyed some of the greatest sculptures of the ancient world because they were Buddhist. Sudan’s Islamic regime has murdered great numbers of Christians.
Instead of confronting these problems, too many of you deny them. Muslims call my radio show to tell me that even speaking of Muslim or Islamic terrorists is wrong. After all, they argue, Timothy McVeigh is never labeled a “Christian terrorist.” As if McVeigh committed his terror as a churchgoing Christian and in the name of Christ, and as if there were Christian-based terror groups around the world....(more)
It was a rational and non-hysterical inquiry into the history and teachings of Islam. Major interviewees from inside Islam: Bat Ye'or, Walid Shoebat, Abdullah Al-Araby, plus Serge Trifkovic and Robert Spencer. It made a pretty compelling case for viewing Islam as much more than a religion but really a political/religious ideology for world domination. Any truces are temporary, never long-term peace arrangements. There are peaceful aspects to parts of Islam, it seems, that can be appreciated by those not interested in world jihad, but such "moderates" ignore what the rest of the Koran as a whole is said to teach. The more violet sections are from chronologically later periods in the life of Mohammedan, and the god of the Koran seems to say that if he makes a statement later on that contradicts an earlier statement, ignore the earlier one. Mohammed's decapitation of several hundred Jews sets the tone for much of the rest, a tone that still lives on in the fierce and hateful rhetoric towards Israel. I suppose that statements about peaceful Islam on the part of government officials here can only be seen as either ill-informed statements, weak-kneed appeasement sop, or (at best) as attempts to set down admittedly minority of Islam that we hope will be practiced b growing number of "moderates," even if it turns its back on the example of Mohammed, which one of the interviewees noted was supposed to the example of the perfect man. Individual Muslims can be very peaceful, indeed, but the ideology of the Koran is anything but.
The second posting highlights an LA Times article asking some questions of Islam:
...Here are five of them:
(1) Why are you so quiet?
Since the first Israelis were targeted for death by Muslim terrorists blowing themselves up in the name of your religion and Palestinian nationalism, I have been praying to see Muslim demonstrations against these atrocities. Last week’s protests in Jordan against the bombings, while welcome, were a rarity. What I have seen more often is mainstream Muslim spokesmen implicitly defending this terror on the grounds that Israel occupies Palestinian lands. We see torture and murder in the name of Allah, but we see no anti-torture and anti-murder demonstrations in the name of Allah.
There are a billion Muslims in the world. How is it possible that essentially none have demonstrated against evils perpetrated by Muslims in the name of Islam? This is true even of the millions of Muslims living in free Western societies. What are non-Muslims of goodwill supposed to conclude? When the Israeli government did not stop a Lebanese massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Chatilla refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982, great crowds of Israeli Jews gathered to protest their country’s moral failing. Why has there been no comparable public demonstration by Palestinians or other Muslims to morally condemn Palestinian or other Muslim-committed terror?
(2) Why are none of the Palestinian terrorists Christian?
If Israeli occupation is the reason for Muslim terror in Israel, why do no Christian Palestinians engage in terror? They are just as nationalistic and just as occupied as Muslim Palestinians.
(3) Why is only one of the 47 Muslim-majority countries a free country?
According to Freedom House, a Washington-based group that promotes democracy, of the world’s 47 Muslim countries, only Mali is free. Sixty percent are not free, and 38% are partly free. Muslim-majority states account for a majority of the world’s “not free” states. And of the 10 “worst of the worst,” seven are Islamic states. Why is this?
(4) Why are so many atrocities committed and threatened by Muslims in the name of Islam?
Young girls in Indonesia were recently beheaded by Muslim murderers. Last year, Muslims – in the name of Islam – murdered hundreds of schoolchildren in Russia. While reciting Muslim prayers, Islamic terrorists take foreigners working to make Iraq free and slaughter them. Muslim daughters are murdered by their own families in the thousands in “honor killings.” And the Muslim government in Iran has publicly called for the extermination of Israel.
(5) Why do countries governed by religious Muslims persecute other religions?
No church or synagogue is allowed in Saudi Arabia. The Taliban destroyed some of the greatest sculptures of the ancient world because they were Buddhist. Sudan’s Islamic regime has murdered great numbers of Christians.
Instead of confronting these problems, too many of you deny them. Muslims call my radio show to tell me that even speaking of Muslim or Islamic terrorists is wrong. After all, they argue, Timothy McVeigh is never labeled a “Christian terrorist.” As if McVeigh committed his terror as a churchgoing Christian and in the name of Christ, and as if there were Christian-based terror groups around the world....(more)
Careful, I think there is a real journalist alive at the Times. Who knows what good might come of this...
Runaway 6ft rhea bird called Charlie terrorises village for 7 hours
From the Mirror:
I'm sorry- its funny. I mean between the naughty place names and attacking squirrels, its just plain funny. I really miss England.
But not to be outdone my next favorite country Austria comes along with this:
Farmer crams two cows in the back of VW Golf
but it turns out this is a fight between animal rights activists which brings about it's own "brand" of humor:
After this picture appeared in Austrian papers, the farmer who owns them spoke out about allegations of violence against animals. The Tyrolean from Kufstein district said he "acted out of love for his animals."
The man said he had converted his car especially for the purpose of transporting calves from his farm to the pasture or the local vet. The man even claimed police gave him the green light to do so when they checked his old Golf last year.
To calm down furious animal-rights campaigners, the farmer added he would only transport young animals in the car that did not weigh more than 80 kilos.
Asked why he didn’t use a trailer for such purposes, the man argued that the draft would be dangerous to the young animals’ health – and that they would be warmer and more comfortable in the car.
I'm sorry- its funny. I mean between the naughty place names and attacking squirrels, its just plain funny. I really miss England.
But not to be outdone my next favorite country Austria comes along with this:
Farmer crams two cows in the back of VW Golf
but it turns out this is a fight between animal rights activists which brings about it's own "brand" of humor:
After this picture appeared in Austrian papers, the farmer who owns them spoke out about allegations of violence against animals. The Tyrolean from Kufstein district said he "acted out of love for his animals."
The man said he had converted his car especially for the purpose of transporting calves from his farm to the pasture or the local vet. The man even claimed police gave him the green light to do so when they checked his old Golf last year.
To calm down furious animal-rights campaigners, the farmer added he would only transport young animals in the car that did not weigh more than 80 kilos.
Asked why he didn’t use a trailer for such purposes, the man argued that the draft would be dangerous to the young animals’ health – and that they would be warmer and more comfortable in the car.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Pornography and the Courts
By way of Mere Comments an article on "global porning" and while, like one of the comments at MereComments I would disagree with the idea that the biggest problem the Muslim world has with us is our smutty culture, this article makes some good points, chief among them, the ludicrous position that, "The idea that pornography is “speech,” within the meaning of the first amendment, and thereby protected by the Constitution..." It also highlights the destructiveness of this material on society.
From Public Discourse
President Obama’s choice of David Ogden for Deputy Attorney General is not of concern to Americans only. The world-wide explosion of pornographic material, and its exploitation through the internet, is to a great extent the result of legal activism in the United States. Legal activism is a threat at the best of times—a way in which elites and special interests can circumvent the democratic process and impose themselves on the majority. In the case of pornography it also opens the way to a temptation against which ordinary people are inadequately protected.
Porn exploits the existing screen-addiction, induced by TV and the internet, in order to catalyze a far worse addiction, which is the addiction to vicarious sex. Psychologists, philosophers and social critics concur in the judgment that this addiction is immensely damaging, not merely in undermining family relations and exposing children and other vulnerable people to sexual predation, but in destroying the capacity for loving sexual relations. It is one of the great social diseases, and it is looked on with dismay by the majority—including a majority of those who are addicted to it.
Yet it is legal activism in America that has paved the way for the world-wide flood of pornographic material, and for the world-wide revulsion against a society and a culture that seems to find nothing wrong with it. The issue of pornography is therefore not just a major domestic problem: it is, or ought to be, at the top of the foreign policy agenda. For President Obama to be making overtures of conciliation towards the Muslim world—something that is certainly needed—while appointing to high legal office one of the most virulent advocates of a culture that poses the greatest threat to Muslim society is, it seems to me, indicative of a deep confusion—a confusion inherent in the essential negativity of liberal politics.
The idea that pornography is “speech,” within the meaning of the first amendment, and thereby protected by the Constitution, is so absurd that it is hard for an outsider to see how American judges have been persuaded to accept it again and again. Of course porn is big business, and can afford to keep beating at the doors of the courts. But the real reason for the legalization of pornography in America lies in the culture of the liberal elite and in the strategy of legal activism whereby that elite continues its relentless assault on majority values. Porn has been incorporated into the “culture war” precisely because ordinary Americans see it as a threat to family and religious values....(more)
From Public Discourse
President Obama’s choice of David Ogden for Deputy Attorney General is not of concern to Americans only. The world-wide explosion of pornographic material, and its exploitation through the internet, is to a great extent the result of legal activism in the United States. Legal activism is a threat at the best of times—a way in which elites and special interests can circumvent the democratic process and impose themselves on the majority. In the case of pornography it also opens the way to a temptation against which ordinary people are inadequately protected.
Porn exploits the existing screen-addiction, induced by TV and the internet, in order to catalyze a far worse addiction, which is the addiction to vicarious sex. Psychologists, philosophers and social critics concur in the judgment that this addiction is immensely damaging, not merely in undermining family relations and exposing children and other vulnerable people to sexual predation, but in destroying the capacity for loving sexual relations. It is one of the great social diseases, and it is looked on with dismay by the majority—including a majority of those who are addicted to it.
Yet it is legal activism in America that has paved the way for the world-wide flood of pornographic material, and for the world-wide revulsion against a society and a culture that seems to find nothing wrong with it. The issue of pornography is therefore not just a major domestic problem: it is, or ought to be, at the top of the foreign policy agenda. For President Obama to be making overtures of conciliation towards the Muslim world—something that is certainly needed—while appointing to high legal office one of the most virulent advocates of a culture that poses the greatest threat to Muslim society is, it seems to me, indicative of a deep confusion—a confusion inherent in the essential negativity of liberal politics.
The idea that pornography is “speech,” within the meaning of the first amendment, and thereby protected by the Constitution, is so absurd that it is hard for an outsider to see how American judges have been persuaded to accept it again and again. Of course porn is big business, and can afford to keep beating at the doors of the courts. But the real reason for the legalization of pornography in America lies in the culture of the liberal elite and in the strategy of legal activism whereby that elite continues its relentless assault on majority values. Porn has been incorporated into the “culture war” precisely because ordinary Americans see it as a threat to family and religious values....(more)
Sunday, February 8, 2009
So much for a change in Washington
Stumbling out the gate: Barack Obama flubs his first big test.
From the NY Daily News:
It's not easy to waste a mandate and a honeymoon at the same time, but President Obama seems determined to try. You know he's off to a lousy start when his most favorable reviews came after he said, "I screwed up."
Did he ever, and not just once. If he keeps going this way, America will be saying, "We screwed up."
He's our President, it's a horribly dangerous time at home and abroad and we desperately need him to succeed. But he can't be successful unless he builds a broad swath of public trust in his leadership. So far, he's going backward.
It's very early, but it's worrisome that Obama has stumbled almost since he took the oath. His inauguration speech was uninspired and next to nothing has gone right for him. Already he looks like he needs a vacation.
The historic young President with the political wind at his back has quickly turned testy toward those who disagree with him. Despite promises to the contrary, he's been so rigid that the defeated Republicans are relevant again.
Obama's fumbled rollout is surprising, given a smooth and skillful transition. He appointed key players early, talked repeatedly of being ready "to hit the ground running" and was eager to get off to a fast start.
Maybe too fast. His vetting of top aides was shockingly sloppy, and he has been concerned primarily with the speed of the stimulus bill, not its contents. The failed vetting produced a string of embarrassments over tax dodgers and influence peddlers, and his embrace of the flawed stimulus has put him on the wrong side of the American public, with only about 1 in 3 voters with him.
Even more surprising, his famously cool temperament is AWOL. He has been visibly frustrated at what he calls needless delay, despite a rapid timetable given the whopping price tag of the stimulus legislation and the uncertainty of its impact.
He should genuinely welcome those who want to make the bill better. After all, there's never been much doubt he would get a huge package passed, so he doesn't need to make enemies over it. The only real question is whether it will succeed.
But unable to get his way quickly, he pulled rank with a snippy, "I won." When the Senate insisted on debate, he turned to harsh attacks and campaign-style rhetoric. Some insiders already are grumbling about disarray and arrogance.
So much for a change in Washington. ...(more)
From the NY Daily News:
It's not easy to waste a mandate and a honeymoon at the same time, but President Obama seems determined to try. You know he's off to a lousy start when his most favorable reviews came after he said, "I screwed up."
Did he ever, and not just once. If he keeps going this way, America will be saying, "We screwed up."
He's our President, it's a horribly dangerous time at home and abroad and we desperately need him to succeed. But he can't be successful unless he builds a broad swath of public trust in his leadership. So far, he's going backward.
It's very early, but it's worrisome that Obama has stumbled almost since he took the oath. His inauguration speech was uninspired and next to nothing has gone right for him. Already he looks like he needs a vacation.
The historic young President with the political wind at his back has quickly turned testy toward those who disagree with him. Despite promises to the contrary, he's been so rigid that the defeated Republicans are relevant again.
Obama's fumbled rollout is surprising, given a smooth and skillful transition. He appointed key players early, talked repeatedly of being ready "to hit the ground running" and was eager to get off to a fast start.
Maybe too fast. His vetting of top aides was shockingly sloppy, and he has been concerned primarily with the speed of the stimulus bill, not its contents. The failed vetting produced a string of embarrassments over tax dodgers and influence peddlers, and his embrace of the flawed stimulus has put him on the wrong side of the American public, with only about 1 in 3 voters with him.
Even more surprising, his famously cool temperament is AWOL. He has been visibly frustrated at what he calls needless delay, despite a rapid timetable given the whopping price tag of the stimulus legislation and the uncertainty of its impact.
He should genuinely welcome those who want to make the bill better. After all, there's never been much doubt he would get a huge package passed, so he doesn't need to make enemies over it. The only real question is whether it will succeed.
But unable to get his way quickly, he pulled rank with a snippy, "I won." When the Senate insisted on debate, he turned to harsh attacks and campaign-style rhetoric. Some insiders already are grumbling about disarray and arrogance.
So much for a change in Washington. ...(more)
Stimulus: $1 billion per page- It (Still) Won't Work
From AmSpec:
Everybody's saying it now, but just in case someone missed it the first time around:
Announcing the compromise Friday evening, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania said:
"I think no one could argue with the fact that the situation would be much worse without this bill."
Really, Senator? "No one could argue"? Many certainly will argue with you, especially with your apparent assumption that "this bill" is the only possible response to the current economic crisis, and that we must either pass "this bill" or suffer the catastrophe about which the president has so direly warned.
The real problem with the stimulus bill is not that it is too big (although it is too big) nor its various objectionable ingredients (although many are objectionable), but rather that it is based on a false economic theory." The American people...did not vote for the false theories of the past," Obama assured his listeners Thursday. Yet the "economic recovery plan" pushed by Pelosi and other Democrats is nothing but Keynesian theory in postmodern drag, elegantly costumed by the Orator-in-Chief with a lot of glittering generalities about "modernizing our health care system...21st century classrooms...and end[ing] the tyranny of oil in our time."This plan is not a Change We Can Believe In and, as I wrote two months ago, before Obama was inaugurated, it won't work.
Peter Schiff says the stimulus will make us "a nation of paupers": ...(more)
Everybody's saying it now, but just in case someone missed it the first time around:
Announcing the compromise Friday evening, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania said:
"I think no one could argue with the fact that the situation would be much worse without this bill."
Really, Senator? "No one could argue"? Many certainly will argue with you, especially with your apparent assumption that "this bill" is the only possible response to the current economic crisis, and that we must either pass "this bill" or suffer the catastrophe about which the president has so direly warned.
The real problem with the stimulus bill is not that it is too big (although it is too big) nor its various objectionable ingredients (although many are objectionable), but rather that it is based on a false economic theory." The American people...did not vote for the false theories of the past," Obama assured his listeners Thursday. Yet the "economic recovery plan" pushed by Pelosi and other Democrats is nothing but Keynesian theory in postmodern drag, elegantly costumed by the Orator-in-Chief with a lot of glittering generalities about "modernizing our health care system...21st century classrooms...and end[ing] the tyranny of oil in our time."This plan is not a Change We Can Believe In and, as I wrote two months ago, before Obama was inaugurated, it won't work.
Peter Schiff says the stimulus will make us "a nation of paupers": ...(more)
What Is Congress Stimulating?
From WSJ, an excellent summary of all that I find distrubing in the so-called stimulas package- namely its the government that's getting stimulated...that and our local frisbie golf course...(no, I'm not making that last part up..)
...For starters, notwithstanding the new president's high approval rating, his stimulus bill (ghost-written by Nancy Pelosi) has been losing altitude with public opinion by the day. People are nervous.
Then after Tim Geithner scampered through the tax minefield and into a Cabinet seat, the Daschle tax bomb went off, laying open for public view the world of Washington's pay-for-favors that makes the average Wall Street banker look like Little Bo-Peep.
Conventional wisdom holds that the Republican refuseniks shot themselves in the foot by staying off the House stimulus package. Real wisdom holds that congressional Republicans should consider putting distance between themselves and anything Democratic just now. The party's crypts are opening.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, with an apparently recession-proof cash hoard, is running radio ads against 28 House Republicans. The theme of the ads is "Putting Families First."
Families first? The only family standing at the front of the stimulus pay line is the federal family. Read the bill.
Check your PC's virus program, then pull down the nearly 700 pages of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Dive into its dank waters and what is most striking is how much "stimulus" money is being spent on the government's own infrastructure. This bill isn't economic stimulus. It's self-stimulus.
(All sums here include the disorienting zeros, as in the bill.)
Title VI, Financial Services and General Government, says that "not less than $6,000,000,000 shall be used for construction, repair, and alteration of Federal buildings." There's enough money there to name a building after every Member of Congress.
The Bureau of Land Management gets $325,000,000 to spend fixing federal land, including "trail repair" and "remediation of abandoned mines or well sites," no doubt left over from the 19th-century land rush.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are getting $462,000,000 for "equipment, construction, and renovation of facilities, including necessary repairs and improvements to leased laboratories."
The National Institute of Standards gets $357,000,000 for the "construction of research facilities." The Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration gets $427,000,000 for that.
The country is in an economic meltdown and the federal government is redecorating.
The FBI gets $75,000,000 for "salaries and expenses." Inside the $6,200,000,000 Weatherization Assistance Program one finds "expenses" of $500,000,000. How many bureaucrats does it take to "expense" a half-billion dollars?
The current, Senate-amended version now lists "an additional amount to be deposited in the Federal Buildings Fund, $9,048,000,000." Of this, "not less than $6,000,000,000 shall be available for measures necessary to convert GSA facilities to High-Performance Green Buildings."
High performance?
Sen. Tom Coburn is threatening to read the bill on the floor of the Senate. I have a better idea: Read it on "Saturday Night Live."
Such as the amendment to Section 2(3)(F) of the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, which will permit payments to guys employed to repair "recreational vessels." Under Incentives for New Jobs, we find a credit to employ what the bill calls "disconnected youths," defined as "not readily employable by reason of lacking a sufficient number of basic skills."
President Obama is saying the bill will "create or save" three million new jobs. The bad news is your new boss is Uncle Sam. ...
...This is a chance for the GOP to climb down from its big-government dunce chair. Until that reversal is achieved, there is no hope for this party....
(more)
...For starters, notwithstanding the new president's high approval rating, his stimulus bill (ghost-written by Nancy Pelosi) has been losing altitude with public opinion by the day. People are nervous.
Then after Tim Geithner scampered through the tax minefield and into a Cabinet seat, the Daschle tax bomb went off, laying open for public view the world of Washington's pay-for-favors that makes the average Wall Street banker look like Little Bo-Peep.
Conventional wisdom holds that the Republican refuseniks shot themselves in the foot by staying off the House stimulus package. Real wisdom holds that congressional Republicans should consider putting distance between themselves and anything Democratic just now. The party's crypts are opening.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, with an apparently recession-proof cash hoard, is running radio ads against 28 House Republicans. The theme of the ads is "Putting Families First."
Families first? The only family standing at the front of the stimulus pay line is the federal family. Read the bill.
Check your PC's virus program, then pull down the nearly 700 pages of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Dive into its dank waters and what is most striking is how much "stimulus" money is being spent on the government's own infrastructure. This bill isn't economic stimulus. It's self-stimulus.
(All sums here include the disorienting zeros, as in the bill.)
Title VI, Financial Services and General Government, says that "not less than $6,000,000,000 shall be used for construction, repair, and alteration of Federal buildings." There's enough money there to name a building after every Member of Congress.
The Bureau of Land Management gets $325,000,000 to spend fixing federal land, including "trail repair" and "remediation of abandoned mines or well sites," no doubt left over from the 19th-century land rush.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are getting $462,000,000 for "equipment, construction, and renovation of facilities, including necessary repairs and improvements to leased laboratories."
The National Institute of Standards gets $357,000,000 for the "construction of research facilities." The Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration gets $427,000,000 for that.
The country is in an economic meltdown and the federal government is redecorating.
The FBI gets $75,000,000 for "salaries and expenses." Inside the $6,200,000,000 Weatherization Assistance Program one finds "expenses" of $500,000,000. How many bureaucrats does it take to "expense" a half-billion dollars?
The current, Senate-amended version now lists "an additional amount to be deposited in the Federal Buildings Fund, $9,048,000,000." Of this, "not less than $6,000,000,000 shall be available for measures necessary to convert GSA facilities to High-Performance Green Buildings."
High performance?
Sen. Tom Coburn is threatening to read the bill on the floor of the Senate. I have a better idea: Read it on "Saturday Night Live."
Such as the amendment to Section 2(3)(F) of the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, which will permit payments to guys employed to repair "recreational vessels." Under Incentives for New Jobs, we find a credit to employ what the bill calls "disconnected youths," defined as "not readily employable by reason of lacking a sufficient number of basic skills."
President Obama is saying the bill will "create or save" three million new jobs. The bad news is your new boss is Uncle Sam. ...
...This is a chance for the GOP to climb down from its big-government dunce chair. Until that reversal is achieved, there is no hope for this party....
(more)
Friday, February 6, 2009
Most Unintentionally Funny Video Ever
Always with a keen eye for the humorous the folks over at Creative Minority Report: have posted this video which settles a mystery for me. I've always thought those squirrels that launched themselves in front of my car were part of some bizarre rodent hazing ritual. Now I know they were just depressed.
An Open Letter to Obama from Father of Serviceman Killed on U.S.S. Cole
From Dr Bulldog
Fireman Gary G. Swenchonis, Jr. Denied Justice Here in the Country that he gave his life for.
President Obama:
Do you know how much it hurts to see you drop the charges against our son’s killers?
First the Dictator of Yemen freed our son’s killers. And now you sir.
We had hoped for some justice here in our own country. But now it appears that politics are more important than justice and the truth.
President Obama I refused your invitation to meet with with you because I knew what you were going to do. Drop the charges against al-Nashiri, and stop the trial which we were getting ready to leave for today.
I want you to know that your actions broke my wifes heart. I sat and watched her cry all nite long out of frustration, anger, and emotional pain. Again. I should be used to this but I am not.
I have had to watch her cry before when Saleh of Yemen freed our sons killers. When President Clinton refused to take any action against the killers. And when President Bush refused to quit our country’s support of Yemen. And when the Justice Department refused to honor the Federal Court Ruling Against the Sudan which helped to murder our son. And numerous other times when our government ignored our plight.
Will the Cole Victims and their familes ever recieve justice?
I am begining to realize now that we never will have justice unless that justice is politically convenient.
Fireman Gary G. Swenchonis, Jr. Denied Justice Here in the Country that he gave his life for.
President Obama:
Do you know how much it hurts to see you drop the charges against our son’s killers?
First the Dictator of Yemen freed our son’s killers. And now you sir.
We had hoped for some justice here in our own country. But now it appears that politics are more important than justice and the truth.
President Obama I refused your invitation to meet with with you because I knew what you were going to do. Drop the charges against al-Nashiri, and stop the trial which we were getting ready to leave for today.
I want you to know that your actions broke my wifes heart. I sat and watched her cry all nite long out of frustration, anger, and emotional pain. Again. I should be used to this but I am not.
I have had to watch her cry before when Saleh of Yemen freed our sons killers. When President Clinton refused to take any action against the killers. And when President Bush refused to quit our country’s support of Yemen. And when the Justice Department refused to honor the Federal Court Ruling Against the Sudan which helped to murder our son. And numerous other times when our government ignored our plight.
Will the Cole Victims and their familes ever recieve justice?
I am begining to realize now that we never will have justice unless that justice is politically convenient.
“Badly botched” doesn’t quite cover it
From GetReligion:
Written by the Associated Press’ Christine Armario, the story is actually rather well done:
Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.
Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.
Only Renelique didn’t arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.
What Williams and the Health Department say happened next has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the clinic’s owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant’s umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.
Written by the Associated Press’ Christine Armario, the story is actually rather well done:
Eighteen and pregnant, Sycloria Williams went to an abortion clinic outside Miami and paid $1,200 for Dr. Pierre Jean-Jacque Renelique to terminate her 23-week pregnancy.
Three days later, she sat in a reclining chair, medicated to dilate her cervix and otherwise get her ready for the procedure.
Only Renelique didn’t arrive in time. According to Williams and the Florida Department of Health, she went into labor and delivered a live baby girl.
What Williams and the Health Department say happened next has shocked people on both sides of the abortion debate: One of the clinic’s owners, who has no medical license, cut the infant’s umbilical cord. Williams says the woman placed the baby in a plastic biohazard bag and threw it out.
Almost too painful to read isn't it? But isn't it the ultimate hypocricy for someone who is pro-abortion to be "outraged"? The death of that child was after all the sought after result was it not? And if you are pro-abortion and find something here to be outraged with, shouldn't you ask yourself, why?
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Job Qualifications
For what job do the following resume items prepare you:
- Provided legal representation for Playboy
- Provided legal representation for Penthouse
- Opposed the Children’s Internet Protection Act of 2000
- Gone on record to state that for a porn company to verify its models were over 18 would “burden too heavily and infringe too deeply on the right to produce First Amendment-protected material.”
- Led a lawsuit to allow Playboy to print braille versions of its magazine
- Has argued “Abortion rarely causes or exacerbates psychological or emotional problems. When women do experience regret, depression or guilt, such feelings are mild and diminish rapidly, without adversely affecting general functioning. The few women who do experience negative psychological responses after abortion, appear to be those with pre-existing emotional problems.”
- Has argued that requiring a 13- or 14- year old girl to notify her parents before getting an abortion is “an unconstitutional burden.”
Apparently they prepare you to be the new deputy Attorney General of the United States of America. Read the article here.
Can't Fix the Roof
It would seem that if a religious group exercises its right to equal access of a public facility, that facility will not be eligible for funds from the stimulus package with which to make repairs. Read the article here.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Lessons Learned
Some lessons (some obvious) that I've learned over the last week or so.
Gas pains do not last more than a few hours.
You can push on your stomach when you have gas pains and it will hurt. If you let up and let your belly pop back into place and it hurts, it's not gas. It's called rebound pain. Rebound pain is not good.
If you are a woman and have pain in the lower right quadrant of your belly there are many possibilities. Women have more stuff than men. (Viva la difference')
If you are a man and have pain in the lower right quadrant of your belly there are a very few possibilities as to why.
Diarrhea, feeling gassy, crampy or nauseous and having abdominal pain may mean you ate something that didn't agree with you. Or it may not.
Having all of these in one day is a classic appendicitis picture. It can also be spread over four days.
If your gassy, crampy feeling causes you to remain hunched over after getting up from a chair and this goes on for more than a few hours then its a good idea to go ahead and go to the doctor.
Your white blood cell count does not have to be highly elevated to be indicative of trouble. Even a slightly elevated count can be an issue.
Appendix pain can range over the entire portion of your lower belly (below the navel) from hip to hip.
Your appendix is located between the point of your right hip and your belly button (aka navel)
None of the above will necessarily mean you are about to have a ruptured appendix (but it could so go sooner, rather than later to the doctor) but it may mean that the situation has been a chronic feature for some time.
When you have your appendix removed via laparoscopy you will have three incisions, none of them on your right side.
The incisions will be below your navel and one a couple inches below that and one forming a triangle to your left
When you go to the emergency room in February you may find that the ER and the hospital are full and you must do a lot of waiting. Not to be seen, just to get a room.
If the hospital is full you may find that you have to share a room.
There is a limit to how much Spanish language television you can listen to and/or watch when you can't speak Spanish. Actually, it's not very long at all.
The day after surgery you will be sore but your right side won't hurt when you go over speed bumps anymore.
The day after surgery you will still feel gassy but this time its because they've pumped you full of it for the surgery.
You may lose all embarrassment at passing gas in a room with strangers.
You must keep all relatives informed daily on progress even if the last report was positive (e.g. he just got out of surgery, everything went well and he's getting discharged tomorrow)
Failure to do so may lead to terse voice-mails from mothers who "since they haven't heard something today, can only assume the worse," followed by the attempted guilt of "you're not a mother you'll never know what its like."
The above may lead to reuniting siblings, who are not otherwise on speaking terms with each other, in shared agreement with their mother.
This may lead to a fond desire to return to the less stressful times of Spanish television.
None of the above either before or after is conducive to posting to blogs.
Gas pains do not last more than a few hours.
You can push on your stomach when you have gas pains and it will hurt. If you let up and let your belly pop back into place and it hurts, it's not gas. It's called rebound pain. Rebound pain is not good.
If you are a woman and have pain in the lower right quadrant of your belly there are many possibilities. Women have more stuff than men. (Viva la difference')
If you are a man and have pain in the lower right quadrant of your belly there are a very few possibilities as to why.
Diarrhea, feeling gassy, crampy or nauseous and having abdominal pain may mean you ate something that didn't agree with you. Or it may not.
Having all of these in one day is a classic appendicitis picture. It can also be spread over four days.
If your gassy, crampy feeling causes you to remain hunched over after getting up from a chair and this goes on for more than a few hours then its a good idea to go ahead and go to the doctor.
Your white blood cell count does not have to be highly elevated to be indicative of trouble. Even a slightly elevated count can be an issue.
Appendix pain can range over the entire portion of your lower belly (below the navel) from hip to hip.
Your appendix is located between the point of your right hip and your belly button (aka navel)
None of the above will necessarily mean you are about to have a ruptured appendix (but it could so go sooner, rather than later to the doctor) but it may mean that the situation has been a chronic feature for some time.
When you have your appendix removed via laparoscopy you will have three incisions, none of them on your right side.
The incisions will be below your navel and one a couple inches below that and one forming a triangle to your left
When you go to the emergency room in February you may find that the ER and the hospital are full and you must do a lot of waiting. Not to be seen, just to get a room.
If the hospital is full you may find that you have to share a room.
There is a limit to how much Spanish language television you can listen to and/or watch when you can't speak Spanish. Actually, it's not very long at all.
The day after surgery you will be sore but your right side won't hurt when you go over speed bumps anymore.
The day after surgery you will still feel gassy but this time its because they've pumped you full of it for the surgery.
You may lose all embarrassment at passing gas in a room with strangers.
You must keep all relatives informed daily on progress even if the last report was positive (e.g. he just got out of surgery, everything went well and he's getting discharged tomorrow)
Failure to do so may lead to terse voice-mails from mothers who "since they haven't heard something today, can only assume the worse," followed by the attempted guilt of "you're not a mother you'll never know what its like."
The above may lead to reuniting siblings, who are not otherwise on speaking terms with each other, in shared agreement with their mother.
This may lead to a fond desire to return to the less stressful times of Spanish television.
None of the above either before or after is conducive to posting to blogs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)