August 9, 2009

Race for 2012…

Filed under: Activism,Taxes & Government — Rose @ 12:05 pm

Barry Casselman has a piece on Josh Mandel here.

An excerpt:

…Watching Mandel perform as he tours the country to raise funds for his next race (his goal is to raise a million dollars one year before the treasurer’s race begins in earnest), there is no question that he is already something of a political presence. Bright, aggressive, quite articulate and seemingly fearless, he leaves his audiences with a sense they have met a future political superstar. He has a story to tell, and he knows how to tell it. including about two grandfathers who were the greatest influence on his life, one a Holocaust survivor from Poland, and the other a World War II veteran. Proudly Jewish, Mandel pointedly cites how the Italian Jewish side of his family were saved from the Nazis by the Catholic Church.

These are not good times for the Republican Party in Ohio and the nation. Only a few years ago, Republicans were in charge almost everywhere. Now they are in minorities, and struggling to redefine conservatism for the years ahead. Young talented persons in both parties seem more and more reluctant to enter public service with the brutal state of election campaigns, the preoccupation with fundraising, and the severe restriction on privacy and personal lives.

Josh Mandel is, for now, a contrarian phenomenon, already a model of political energy and conservative pragmatism, with accomplishments way ahead of his years, and a young man apparently going someplace, and soon.

I couldn’t agree more…as long Josh remembers who/what got him to each step and doesn’t end up like our other politicians who ultimately sell their souls for a seat at the trendy table of the day.

That should be our prayer for everyone running in any election cycle.

Sarah Palin Asserts the Obvious ….

Filed under: Activism,Health Care,Life-Based News,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 10:40 am

PalinFamily0808…. which is why those who want to fudge, obfuscate, pretend and hide what they’re really up to, and what they’re really all about, hate her so deeply.

From AP via Breitbart:

In her first communication since leaving office, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin described in an Internet posting Friday that President Obama’s plan to overhaul the health care system was evil.

“Who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course,” the former vice presidential candidate wrote on her Facebook page.

“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil,” Palin wrote.

For those who really don’t yet get it, the PJM column put up today at BizzyBlog, which immediately follows below if you’re on the home page, explains it. See the three point-making paragraphs at the end. You’ll get it after reading them; the only question is whether you have the integrity and perhaps courage to admit that those points, and of course Palin, are right.

_________________________________________

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin piles on, God love her (“Death panels? What death panels? Oh, those death panels”) –

ObamaCare As A Moral Clunker

Filed under: Economy,Health Care,Life-Based News,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 9:30 am

NoObamaCare0809The moral arguments against it are overwhelming, and need to take center stage.

_____________________________________

Note: This column was published at Pajamas Media and teased here at BizzyBlog on Friday.

_____________________________________

Slowly but surely, the nation is waking up to the likelihood that the unwieldy state-run health care concoction known as ObamaCare will likely not achieve the cost savings the President and his supporters have promised.

That’s a nice development, but it’s not enough. In fact, at some point, and I believe we are there, it becomes a distraction.

Though a relevant consideration, cost is among the least of ObamaCare’s problems. Leading the argument against ObamaCare with cost considerations sells the American people short, and betrays a moral insecurity that, if not addressed, will cause some future form of ObamaCare to sneak in — if not now, in the not very distant future.

ObamaCare’s supporters would love opponents to stay focused on cost, because, despite plentiful help from the Congressional Budget Office debunking the administration’s weak claims, the absence or presence of potential savings is not directly provable. As long as the focus remains on cost, important points about fundamental human rights that would be stripped away and handed over to the tender mercies of the state won’t get heard. That must change.

The moral insecurity emanating from ObamaCare’s Washington-based opposition (vs. many of us in the heartland, who see evil’s attempt to visit itself upon us for what it is) seems to revolve around two bogus ideas.

The first is that Obama and the statists in Congress somehow occupy the moral high ground because they promise to “insure” everybody.

But ObamaCare isn’t about insurance. If it were, every American would be insured shortly after it takes effect. But The CBO estimated that even when implemented, only 16 million more Americans would be insured, barely a third of the alleged total of uninsured. ObamaCare, as IBD and many other editorialists have noted, is really about (eventually) eliminating insurance and devolving the entire system into a single-payer arrangement — something Obama himself enthusiastically supported in 2003 before he became concerned with electoral viability.

Health care should first and foremost be about whether those who need treatment get treatment. And guess what? In this country, those who need treatment not only almost always get treated, but they also almost always get treated timely. It is against the law for hospitals to turn away patients requiring emergency medical treatment regardless of whether they can afford to pay.

Yes, there are many who are not insured and who cannot afford medical care. And yes, they often delay doing something about very real medical problems until they become more serious. That is a real problem. But the answer, while elusive, most certainly should not involve jeopardizing the viability of everyone else’s medical coverage and access to care, as ObamaCare indisputably does.

The second explanation for Beltway opponents’ moral insecurity is that our conservative elites seem not to believe that the American people will respond to moral arguments.

If they’re taking their cues from alleged religious “leaders,” their reluctance is understandable. Many Catholic bishops appear to support state-run care as long as abortion services are somehow excluded. Even worse, sadly and scandalously, many Catholic organizations which should know better, including Catholic Charities USA, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and the Catholic Health Association, have been outspoken campaigners for ObamaCare, even as it appears that abortion coverage remains in the statists’ plans.

But the moral arguments against ObamaCare are so easy, and so easily understood, that I can summarize them in the three points that follow.

First — Virtually without exception worldwide, state-run health care has led to rationing of care and long waits for even critical services. This has led to many needless deaths and disabilities, along with greatly diminished quality of life for many who eventually do receive care. Obama and the Congressional majority have presented no evidence indicating that serious rationing will not occur under its plan. In fact, under its progenitor known as CommonwealthCare aka RomneyCare in Massachusetts, serious rationing under the guise of fixed per-patient budgets is already on the horizon. How can any compassionate person claiming to have his or her moral bearings even consider supporting this almost certain result?

Second — Virtually without exception worldwide, state-run health care has led to denial of care on age-based and so-called qualify of life criteria. The Obama administration and Congress already opened the door for this abomination in the stimulus bill passed in February when it included funding for “comparative effectiveness research.” Michael Barone has accurately portrayed this attempt at final solutions that override doctor-patient decisions as “worse than junk science—it’s inherently deceptive.” How can someone claiming to have his or her moral bearings even consider supporting this?

Finally — The Obama administration is stacked with czars, Cabinet officials, and others who are enthusiastic supporters of the first two items, and who have frighteningly ghoulish outlooks on life and humanity. Take John Holdren (please). Many of these same people and others with similar “philosophies” would take responsible positions within ObamaCare’s maze, and would no doubt stay on as long as possible regardless of who controls the White House or Congress. How can someone claiming to have his or her moral bearings even consider allowing these people anywhere near the nation’s health care system?

That wasn’t difficult, was it?

If ObamaCare is opposed on clear moral grounds, it could go down to a crushing, argument-over defeat. If argued on cost alone, it will more than likely be back to haunt us. I say we bury it once and for all.

Positivity: New documentary recounts lives of ‘courageous’ women religious under communism

Filed under: Positivity,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 7:09 am

From Washington:

Washington D.C., Aug 9, 2009 / 04:04 am

A new documentary tells the stories of Greek and Roman Catholic women religious who lived their faith under communist harassment and persecution in Eastern and Central Europe.

The one-hour documentary, “Interrupted Lives: Catholic Sisters Under European Communism,” will be distributed to ABC television stations and affiliates on September 13. It will be scheduled at the discretion of local stations.

Between World War II and the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, many women religious endured imprisonment, exile to Siberia, forced farm and factory labor, deportation, seizure of their schools and hospitals and even expulsion from their convents.

Some sisters were nurses or educators while others cared for orphans, the elderly and the mentally ill, a Friday press release from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) says. “Interrupted Lives” tells their stories and interviews the “secret sisters” who joined religious life during the Communist period and lived their vocations in the underground.

The sisters and European scholars interviewed offer a “powerful testimony to the faith, courage and endurance of these religious women,” the USCCB says. “Their own stories raise awareness of those who still today undergo persecution for political or religious beliefs.”

The documentary was filmed on location in Ukraine, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Hungary and the United States. It tells the sisters’ stories, taking viewers to the apartments, prisons, concentration convents and seized properties where Communism affected the sisters’ lives.

Sr. Margaret Nacke, a Sister of St. Joseph, was one of the executive producers of the documentary.

“We are inspired and strengthened by the faith and commitment of these sisters who endured over forty years of oppression under communism,” she said. ….

Go here for the rest of the story.