November 11, 2009

‘We’re Saving the Vaccine for Public School Students’

Filed under: Activism,Education,Health Care,Taxes & Government — Rose @ 5:59 pm

Really? Well, so much for government school socialists being “for all the children…”

From The Home School Legal Defense Association:

“We’re Saving the Vaccine for Public School Students”

A southwest Virginia mother of two brought her children to the public health department for an H1N1 vaccination. They told her, “We’re saving the vaccine for public school students.” A northern Virginia mom asked the Alexandria school system if her kids could be vaccinated with the others. They promptly rebuffed her.

What does HSLDA have to do with flu vaccinations? Everything—if homeschoolers are being discriminated against.

HSLDA Senior Counsel Scott Woodruff called the Alexandria officials, but they refused to budge, insisting that it was the school’s property, and they could decide who comes on it. For the mom at the other end of the state, Woodruff called a state health department official, who promptly placed a call to southwest Virginia, and the homeschooled children got the vaccinations. One of her children had a respiratory issue.

Woodruff followed up with the state official and asked if unvaccinated children would get priority treatment at local public health departments consistent with their status as members of a “target group” the Center for Disease Control has identified. The surprising answer: no. She said that homeschooled children—who don’t have access to all the convenient public school vaccination events—would have to get in line and be treated like people who are not in a target group.

Confronted with this totally unsatisfactory situation, Woodruff sent a memo to the state commissioner of health.

This began a chain of events that lead to a statewide conference call with Woodruff, Yvonne Bunn of Home Educators Association of Virginia, Parish Mort of Organization of Virginia Homeschoolers, Dr. Karen Remley, state commissioner of health, Dr. Diane Helentjaris, state office of epidemiology, and others. Woodruff asked Remley to instruct local public health departments to set aside special times each week when unvaccinated children would receive priority treatment. Bunn and Mort agreed that more needed to be done for homeschooled children.

The rest is here.

Personally, I don’t mind the government schools not considering my children equal with “theirs” (and I mean that in every statist, brown-shirt sense of the possessive pronoun). Just give us our fricking money back. You know, the millions extorted from hard working families each year to pay for the Taj Mahals, transportation and administrative “services” that we don’t use; not to mention the levy drives and eminent domain fights designed to extort more money from us…all “for the children,” of course (eyeroll).

I am a patient adversary. As such, I will wait patiently for the opportunity to wage the war of Armageddon against these hypocritical brood of vipers…and oh what a glorious war that will be.

WSJ on the Pfizer Pull-Out from New London, CT

Filed under: Economy,Quotes, Etc. of the Day,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 3:30 pm

The Wall Street Journal editorializes on what yours truly blogged about yesterday, casting doubt on the alleged development expertise of those who wear black robes:

Pfizer and Kelo’s Ghost Town
Pfizer bugs out, long after the land grab.

The Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of New London stands as one of the worst in recent years, handing local governments carte blanche to seize private property in the name of economic development. Now, four years after that decision gave Susette Kelo’s land to private developers for a project including a hotel and offices intended to enhance Pfizer Inc.’s nearby corporate facility, the pharmaceutical giant has announced it will close its research and development headquarters in New London, Connecticut.

The aftermath of Kelo is the latest example of the futility of using eminent domain as corporate welfare. While Ms. Kelo and her neighbors lost their homes, the city and the state spent some $78 million to bulldoze private property for high-end condos and other “desirable” elements. Instead, the wrecked and condemned neighborhood still stands vacant, without any of the touted tax benefits or job creation.

That’s especially galling because the five Supreme Court Justices cited the development plan as a major factor in rationalizing their Kelo decision. Justice Anthony Kennedy called the plan “comprehensive,” while Justice John Paul Stevens insisted that “The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue.” So much for that.

One other point that should not be overlooked: Pfizer isn’t officially going to be fully “bugged out” of New London until its 10-year tax abatement period runs out in 2011.

Anyone Else Want to Sell Us Out?

Filed under: Activism,General,Health Care,Taxes & Government — Rose @ 8:38 am

First Right to Life, now the Catholic Church. But as Justice Brandeis said, sunlight is the best disinfectant.

For the record, I’m about as shocked by this as I am about the “unwritten rule” that priests can have girlfriends.

Pay close attention to the mention of Catholics and the SEIU…How “rich” for the “poor,” quadrillion dollar Catholic Church.

Do NOT pay close attention, to all the talk about pro-abort dems wanting to “investigate” the church’s tax exempt status. The Catholic Church helped seal this deal and gave Dems exactly what they wanted. Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

From Accuracy in Media:

Catholic Bishops Help Pass Pelosicare
By Cliff Kincaid
November 8, 2009

The AARP and American Medical Association supported H.R. 3692, the Affordable Health Care for America Act of 2009, but a careful analysis of the media coverage demonstrates that it was the U.S. Catholic Church that provided the winning margin. Yet, the liberal media are failing to raise the issue of the alleged separation of church and state.

Contrary to some media reports, the U.S. Catholics Bishops never opposed a national health care scheme. In fact, their main objection was to a provision for federal funding of abortion. Once that provision was eliminated, the Catholic Bishops embraced the bill.

On Saturday, after Catholic lobbyists had finalized a deal with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the most prominent Catholic in the U.S. Government, the Politico reported that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops had “delivered a critical endorsement” to Pelosi “by signing off on late-night agreement to grant a vote on an amendment barring insurance companies that participate in the exchange from covering abortions.” The anti-abortion amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak, a Catholic Democrat, passed. Hence, the Bishops are now officially in favor of a bureaucratic plan that could spell the end to freedom of choice in health care and financially bankrupt the U.S.

“A half dozen lobbyists for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops joined negotiators in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office to come to terms,” reported the Christian Science Monitor.

The Hill newspaper reported that Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) had been trying to broker a deal and appealed to the Catholic Bishops. “I would like the [U.S. Conference of Catholic] Bishops, who as I understand it want a bill, to help us work out a plan where we don’t have winners and losers,” Waxman was quoted as saying. “Because the losers will make us lose the bill and the winners won’t have won anything.”

NBC’s Doug Adams reported that the Catholic Bishops were “lobbying hard.”

The shocking turn of events once again demonstrates the extreme left-wing drift of the Catholic Church, which is the nation’s largest religious denomination with 67 million members and run by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. But their role in passing Pelosicare is not the only evidence of such a turn. The Bishops poured more than $7.3 million of parishioners’ money into the corrupt left-wing organization ACORN over the last decade before publicity over the organization’s scandals forced suspension of the funding.

…Another factor could be the influence of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which recently announced a major agreement with the Catholic Bishops to make it easier for workers in Catholic hospitals to join unions. These hospitals have 525,193 full-time employees and 233,934 part-time workers who would normally be entitled to employer-paid health insurance. But under Pelosicare they could be transferred to a government plan offered under a so-called “health insurance exchange.” Once again, taxpayers would be stuck with the bill.

“Health reform will bring the U.S. closer to a true, coordinated health care system. We need and deserve a solid health care infrastructure that serves everyone and promotes the common good,” says the Catholic Health Association.

Oh yeah, the Vatican was involved as well…

Vatican Engineered Victory for Pelosicare
By Cliff Kincaid
November 9, 2009

In a story about why the U.S. Catholic Bishops have embraced Democratic-style universal health care, the Los Angeles Times noted that the Roman Catholic Church considers healthcare a basic human right, “a position the church has articulated since 1963, when it was included in a papal encyclical by Pope John XXIII.” Indeed, healthcare is declared a right in the “Peace on Earth” encyclical. That is also the basis of Obamacare.

The group Catholic Democrats has hailed passage of H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act of 2009, and notes that the only House Republican voting for it, Representative Joseph Cao of Louisiana, is a Catholic and former Jesuit seminarian. “The Catholic Church has been at the forefront of advocating for health care as a right for decades, including pastoral letters issued by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) in 1981 and 1993,” the group notes.

The evidence indicates that the Bishops-and the Vatican itself-are calling the shots behind the scene. In fact, as many media organizations are now reporting, they engineered the “compromise” that deleted abortion funding so the bill could pass the House. The Los Angeles Times reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic, not only “conferred with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to be sure the new restrictions were acceptable” but “consulted by telephone with a cardinal in Rome.”

CNN reported that, as a deal was being made between Pelosi and Catholic lobbyists, “Several Democrats, including Rep. Jason Altmire, D-Pennsylvania, said they are in touch with their Catholic Bishops back home. Altmire said he must have the approval of his bishop in Pittsburgh before he can vote yes.”

Where is the media outrage over “the separation of church and state?” In this case, there is direct evidence of a foreign entity, the Vatican, actually passing judgment on legislation and, in effect, delivering votes for it.

Few in the media, on the left or right, want to raise the issue, apparently fearful of being labeled “anti-Catholic.”

But the outcome of the legislation in the House demonstrates that while the Republicans don’t have the votes to stop it, the Vatican has the votes to pass it. Could the same thing happen in the U.S. Senate?

It is time for the major media to investigate how the officials of a major religious denomination, with its headquarters in Rome, are affecting the outcome of major pieces of legislation in the Congress of the United States.

The Catholic Church is starting to make televangelists like Paula White and Creflo Dollar look legitimate.

The Hood Goes to the Fort…

Filed under: Taxes & Government,US & Allied Military — Rose @ 8:34 am

…because he was “too-little-too-late” in not letting the crisis go to waste. Proving yet again that he is both devoid and incapapble of compassion and leadership.

As usual, Alan Keyes we ahead of everyone on the analysis…

Why Obama’s Ft. Hood reaction seems so strange

There are times when even Obama’s critics seem to have difficulty putting into words their reaction to his strange behavior. I think that’s because they refuse to consider the simple premise that makes sense of it all: He feels no love for the USA. He seems in fact to feel himself to be no part of this country.

The occupant of the office he lays claim to is supposed to represent the body politic. People expect that his reactions will reflect its joys and pains i.e., the joys and pains of the American people as a whole. They expected him to react to the shocking events at Ft. Hood the way a person reacts to a grievous and unexpected wound to his body. Even a minor blow (like stubbing his toe) gets a pained reaction from the whole body. But the Ft. Hood attack is like a razor sharp knife that slips from its proper use to cut off a finger. It can only seem like a minor wound to someone whose gut isn’t writhing with pain.

It was obvious to all that Obama’s gut wasn’t writhing. He spoke like a spectator taking notice of a scuffle on the sidelines. ‘We shouldn’t react until we know all the facts,’ he says, as if the gut waits for a doctor’s report rather than twisting with pain as a part of the body falls away.

With due regard to Bill Clinton, the simple fact is this. Obama doesn’t feel our pain. To be sure, once it becomes clear that appearing to do so will serve his agenda of power, he will study the part and summon the right appearance when the script calls for it. But only fools will forget that this aspect of the role doesn’t come naturally for him. His instinct isn’t to feel for the country. It is to protect our assailants from any overreaction by Americans. He apparently assumes that we are prone to spiteful nastiness.

…Obama’s reaction did not represent the American people. It came from years of associating with, studying, and even worshiping with people who hate us and everything we stand for in the world. In his heart of hearts I wager he even despises the decent motivation of many who voted for him. Many did so precisely because they naively believed that their action would lay to rest once and for all the stigma of institutionalized bigotry and hatred that mars all too many pages of our history as a nation. But there is a kind of relentless hating that sees in repentance only the admission of guilt. Though such people thought Obama’s victory would stand for hope, every day it becomes more apparent that he brings only judgment.


Lucid Links (111109, Morning)

Filed under: Lucid Links — Tom @ 8:30 am

Ralph Peters, inDeadly Denial“:

As President Obama belatedly appears at Fort Hood today, will he dare to speak the word “terror?”

He won’t use the word “Islamist.” If he mentions Islam at all, it’ll be to sing its praises yet again.
We’ve already learned that Islamist terrorist Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan attended the Northern Virginia mosque of Imam Anwar al-Aulaqi, a fiery al Qaeda supporter who later fled the United States. We know that Hasan’s peers, subordinates and patients repeatedly raised red flags that his superiors suppressed. We know he was a player on Islamist-extremist Web sites. The FBI’s uncovering one extremist link after another.

But to call this an act of terrorism, the White House would need an autographed photo of Osama bin Laden helping Hasan buy weapons in downtown Killeen, Texas. Even that might not suffice.

Read the whole thing.

The answer to Peters’ first question is “no.”


From Nidal Hasan’s slide show at the Washington Post (HT Michelle Malkin):

“Maj. Nidal M. Hasan, the Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood, was supposed to discuss a medical topic during a presentation to senior Army doctors in June 2007. Instead, he lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting wars in Muslim countries.”

Here are Slides 48 (partial) and 50:


As far as I can tell, no adverse action was taken against Hasan after this mis-presentation.

Political correctness as applied in the military isn’t some abstract, harmless construct. It’s a mentally debilitating condition that potentially is — and in this actually was — deadly.


Comparing cable news ratings for November 4 and November 5, the day of the Fort Hood terrorist massacre, a few things are pretty clear:

  • Absent a major breaking story, Fox News’s audience is not only greater than CNN, MSNBC, and Headline News combined, it’s FAR greater than the three of them.
  • Absent a major breaking story, CNN is now clearly third behind MSNBC — and in danger of being overtaken by its own Headline News.
  • When a major story breaks, CNN still gets a big ratings spike, Fox New’s spike is almost as big as CNN’s.

I would suggest that many casual viewers have figured out that CNN tries to put a PC, leftist spin on the news from the moment it breaks, and they’re going to Fox to get it straight.


Both Politifact and Ed Morrissey at Hot Air miss a fundamental, critical point about the Stupak Amendment to the statist health care legislation the House passed on Saturday. It revolves around coercion.

The Hyde Amendment forbidding federal funding of abortion stands largely because government aid programs are voluntary. Nobody forces anyone to get on S-CHIP or Medicaid; in fact, federal and state bureaucrats are driven to distraction over the fact that many individuals and families are too proud to take government aid.

There’s nothing voluntary about health insurance in the House’s version of ObamaCare. I believe (and I doubt anyone can make a convincing case that I’m wrong) that the courts won’t allow a prohibition of access to what they have decided is a fundamental constitutional right in insurance coverage that a person MUST buy, especially if (more like when) the unfairly advantaged “government option” ends up having tens of millions of individual and family participants consisting mostly of refugees from terminated employer and individual plans.

Positivity: Veteran’s Day Tribute

Filed under: Taxes & Government,US & Allied Military — Tom @ 6:48 am

God Bless America’s soldiers: