Thursday, March 31, 2005

Code Blue Issues $100,000 challenge ... to any neurologist...

who can correctly interpret 6 out of 10 brain CTs and differentiate between PVS patients and older patients. This radiologist reminds readers that it is the radiologist, not neurologist, who is accurately trained to interpret CT scans.

This makes for an interesting must read

(BIG hat tip to Bogus Gold)

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Is Terri Schiavo soylent green?

It appears that the spirit of Josef Mengele is alive and well. From a debate between Wesley Smith and Bill Allen held on March 24, 2005:

Wesley Smith: Bill, do you think Terri is a person?

Bill Allen: No, I do not. I think having awareness is an essential criterion for personhood. Even minimal awareness would support some criterion of personhood, but I don't think complete absence of awareness does.

I worked for two years at a residential center for severely mentally and physically handicapped adults, many of whom couldn't feed themselves, and had no means of verbal communication. Some of them would have made the present-day Terri Schiavo look like a Harvard professor. But I loved working with those people. They showed me humility, and they showed me that every human being is deserving of dignity.

In the elementary school that I work at, I worked with a 10-year old girl named Megan. Megan was profoundly mentally retarded and had spina bifida. Megan was wheelchair bound, microcephalic, and needed to be tube fed. She oftentimes suffered from respiratory distress, and one could always hear her wheezing. There was one thing that Megan was noted for. Her smile. Even through her sufferings, through her respiratory distress, Megan smiled one of the most contagious smiles I have ever seen. She delighted at the simple pleasures of life, such as sunlight beaming on her face through the skylights of the elementary school. Though her awareness was intermittent at best, Megan knew how to love. She touched so many people with her simple acceptance of her plight. When Megan was born, the doctors gave her perhaps a year to live, but at every turn Megan proved them wrong. Megan finally did die at the age of 10, from complications due to respiratory distress. Over 450 people (this is in a rural area) showed up for Megan's funeral. Megan's life was a life that stated in no uncertain terms: every life has purpose; every life has meaning.

That fact is somehow lost on our more "enlightened" bioethicists:

So who are the so-called human non-persons? All embryos and fetuses, to be sure. But many bioethicists also categorize newborn infants as human non-persons (although some bioethicists refer to healthy newborns as “potential persons”). So too are those with profound cognitive impairments such as Terri Schiavo and President Ronald Reagan during the latter stages of his Alzheimer’s disease.

Personhood theory would reduce some of us into killable and harvestable people. Harris wrote explicitly that killing human non-persons would be fine because “Non-persons or potential persons cannot be wronged” by being killed “because death does not deprive them of something they can value. If they cannot wish to live, they cannot have that wish frustrated by being killed.”
Yes, Josef Mengele would indeed be proud!

After all, undesireables like Jews weren't really deserving of personhood either, were they?

History repeats itself. These types of monsters have been around since time immemoriam. The Terri Schiavo case has merely brought them out of the woodwork, circling around Terri as her life dwindles, making their case for their macabre , twisted and unholy view of creation shared by such luminaries as Mengele, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao and Stalin. History does repeat itself, dear readers. Make no mistake about it. And don't think we're immune to it.

Boortz is wrong

On my way to pick up my son from the airport, I was listening to Neal Boortz, a nationally-syndicated libertarian talk show host. I agree with Boortz on a host of issues, but his lack of vision in the Schiavo case is simply amazing. Boortz read a story and went on to criticize a Florida police officer for stopping a doctor on his way to the hospital to assist in the birth of a baby:

FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida (AP) -- A police officer who stopped a doctor for speeding on his way to deliver a baby, and then took him to the maternity ward in handcuffs, has agreed to an unpaid suspension for lack of judgment.

Dr. Anthony Chidiac was driving his motorcycle 10 miles above the 25 mph speed limit last March when he was stopped by 15-year veteran Officer William Lilliston.

According to records released Monday from an internal police investigation, when the doctor explained he was going to a delivery, the officer allegedly asked if he was delivering a pizza and later said, "If you're a doctor, I'm Mickey Mouse or Joe Blow."

Lilliston called the hospital to confirm Chidiac's story, and drove him to the hospital as the baby's head was showing. The officer then asked to see the doctor's driver's license before letting Chidiac change into scrubs.

Chidiac delivered the baby 15 minutes after the handcuffs were removed.

The officer, who said the doctor had been slow in pulling over, later wrote Chidiac a traffic citation.

After having fun lampooning the officer for being so "strict" with the law, Boortz took a caller sympathetic to the parents of Terri Schiavo. The caller related that since Terri's parents were blood relatives, their wishes should take precedent over Michael Schiavo's wishes. Boortz went on to criticize the caller's ideas, saying that since the rule of law favored the next-of-kin, and since Michael Schiavo was by law, next of kin, that it was Schiavo's decision to make. Boortz went on to admonish the caller saying that we are a nation of laws, and we cannot disregard the laws as they stand.

This, after only moments before chiding a police officer for following the letter of the law?

Boortz failed to see the similarities in the two scenarios. He chided the officer for following the letter of the law in what could have been a life and death situation, but at the same time Boortz failed to see that the Schiavo case is a life and death situation as well. Boortz fails to take into account that Michael Schiavo is husband in name only. He discounts the fact that his behavior, including taking a live-in mistress and fathering two children with the same, all but negates his committment to Terri, and thus his motives and his ability to decide in Terri's best interest must seriously be called into question. So why does Boortz maintain that the letter of the law needs to be followed in Schiavo's case, but that the policeman should have looked the other way and/or used more discretion?

Boortz criticizes strict enforcement of speeding while overlooking court-imposed, premeditated murder? The man needs to get his head on straight.

Tuesday, March 29, 2005

Jesse Jackson weighs in on Schiavo..

As he has done so many times ad nauseum, to the point where he has been likened to a shakedown artist, The Reverend Jesse Jackson has again inserted himself in a situation. But this time it seems different. Jesse Jackson has heretofore been a political animal of a liberal bent. As Gail Snotes once told H.I. McDonough in the movie, Raising Arizona, "Neville and I never go noplace without there's a purpose.." The same usually rings true for Rev. Jackson. He historically has never gone anywhere without there was a self-serving purpose, usually consisting of face-time coupled with the expectation of a handout in return for the Rainbow Coalition's ultimate agreement to leave alone the object of their consternation.

But for some reason, dear readers, this appears different. Could it be that Rev. Jackson has finally had a come-to-Jesus meeting with his conscience, and has come back to his pro-life roots? Said Jackson in 1977:

"There are those who argue that the right to privacy is of [a] higher order than the right to life ... that was the premise of slavery. You could not protest the existence or treatment of slaves on the plantation because that was private and therefore outside your right to be concerned."


"What happens to the mind of a person, and the moral fabric of a nation, that accepts the aborting of the life of a baby without a pang of conscience? What kind of a person and what kind of a society will we have 20 years hence if life can be taken so casually? It is that question, the question of our attitude, our value system, and our mind-set with regard to the nature and worth of life itself that is the central question confronting mankind. Failure to answer that question affirmatively may leave us with a hell right here on earth."

Jesse has since travelled on a tortuous journey, saying in 1988:

''it is not right to impose private, religious and moral positions on public policy.''
Again, in contrast, the Reverend Jackson of 2005 states:

"I feel so passionate about this injustice being done, how unnecessary it is to deny her a feeding tube, water, not even ice to be used for her parched lips," said Jackson, who has run for president as a Democrat. "This is a moral issue and it transcends politics and family disputes."

It's still too early to say whether the Rev. Jackson is indeed back to his pro-life roots, or whether the ever-available ulterior motive is at play. If it is indeed the former, all I can say is, "Welcome back!"

Resistance is will be assimilated.

It seems that the ever-present and omniscient ACLU, the champions of free speech, have no qualms regarding quashing people's freedoms to view or not view what they wish. A story in the World Net Daily related the following:

Ten months ago, the district settled a lawsuit with the ACLU over the right of a student group, the Gay-Straight Alliance, to meet on campus. The year-long litigation strained relations in the conservative northeast portion of the state. In addition to allowing the group to meet on campus after school, district officials agreed that all students, staff and teachers would be required to receive "tolerance training."

The agreement stipulated all would attend "mandatory anti-harassment workshops," including the viewing of an hour-long "training" video covering sexual orientation and gender identity issues for middle and high school students.

But ten months on, one-third of Boyd County students have failed to see the video, and that has the ACLU threatening court action.

The problem with the ACLU's browbeating is the following:

District figures show 105 of 730 middle school students opted out of the training video and 145 of 971 high school students did likewise. On the day scheduled for training, 324 students didn't show up for school.

But the decree issued by the Courts stated that there would be no "opt out" feature.

One of our basic freedoms, our freedom of religion, also allows us freedom of conscience, part and parcel of the living of one's religion. If one's conscience dictates that the practice of homosexuality is wrong, then one should not be forced to have his or her children view materials or be subjected to a process of indoctrination that preaches otherwise.

This instance is clearly demonstrative of the ACLU's selective "defense of liberties." This story is also demonstrative of the fact that Civil Liberties is at best secondary to their actual agenda. As evident by their long history of actions and inactions, the ACLU's primary objective is not to protect liberties, but to push the liberal agenda under the guise of protecting civil liberties. The ACLU cares nothing of those whose liberty of conscience is clearly being violated in this case. Their clear agenda is to ram their doctrine down the throats of the unwilling, while stating, "Resistance is futile--you will be assimilated.

It appears that students who express anti-gay sentiments in Boyd County, Kentucky are now being told to keep quiet. The Arizona-based Alliance Defense Fund filed a suit(PDF File) March 28, alleging the free speech rights of the Boyd County School District's students are being violated.

A clear violation of freedom of speech. So where, oh where is the ACLU? Is what's good for the goose good for the goosesteppers?

Monday, March 28, 2005

A note from a motorcyclist

Since my eldest son will soon be graduating from Harley Davidson Mechanics School in Phoenix, and will be soon returning to Minnesota, I felt it in my selfish best interest to post the following:

Dear fellow motorists,
I wonder if you realized how close you came to injuring or killing me today. You seemed completely unaware that you began to move into my lane when only half of your car had passed me. If I had glanced at my mirror at that second, I probably wouldn't have been able to brake fast enough to keep you from hitting my front tire and throwing me off my motorcycle. I apologize for slapping your window and lecturing you. It probably seemed to you that some crazy biker was trying to terrorize you. I'm sure you're a nice lady and wouldn't want to hurt anybody, but your inattention nearly caused a collision that would have been a mere fender bender for your Mercedes Benz, but could have caused me to be killed, and that made me angry.

Perhaps you are not completely to blame. As cars get smoother, more comfortable, and easier to drive, as they get quieter inside and come equipped with high-power, nine-speaker, surround-sound stereos, as more distractions like cell phones and laptop computers become available for you to use while driving, it's easy to forget that you are hurling tow tons of steel and plastic down the road. Inside that nice new car of yours, you have air bags, seat belts and anti-lock brakes to keep you safe and since you surely have at least the minimum required insurance, a collision with a 600 pound motorcycle just isn't very threatening to you but it is life threatening to me.

I ride a motorcycle nearly everyday,year round, because I love the feeling of being in the open air, feeling the temperature changes and the bugs splatter on me, and of course the sunshine and wind on my face. I love the feel of the leaning to steer and accelerating out of a curve. I love it so much that I not only ride to work everyday, I ride for fun on weekends. My idea of a fun vacation is riding my motorcycle to a rally in Arizona. I'm very aware of the dangers and I have decided that, to me, the risk is an accptable trade off.

And you must understand that regardless of how you feel about motorcycle, they are legal vehicles and are permitted to use the roadways. Regardless of your feeling about "bikers" I am a human being and deserve the same consideration that you wish to recieive from other. And if you accidentally kill me because you weren't paying close enough attention or didn't see me, you will have to live with the fact that caused another human being to die. I can't believe you would want that to happen, so let me try to help you understand what I must do to minimize the danger of riding and how you can help me stay out from under your wheels and not come crashing through your windshield to die in your front seat.

First, you have to understand that the natural at-rest position of a motorcycle is on it's side. In order to keep it upright, I have to balace it. When I get it up to 35 mph or so, natural forces help me to keep it upright, that is as long as the surface I'm riding on remains pretty consistent. But on patched roadways, or worse yet that underconstruction, there are lots of hazards that can upset that natural balance. Raised surfaces such as the edge of a patch that you car bumps over easily can drop a motorcycle in a second if not crossed over properly. Loose surface gravel and curves that are sloped in the wrong direction all pose potential hazards if I don't ride carefully and give myself enough space to react.
I swear sometimes it seems like the highway department is trying to do me in. But I hope that they, like you,just don't understand that the dynamics of a motorcycle is different from that of four-wheeled vehicle. With practice and concentration, I've learned how to keep the shinny side of the motorcycle facing up, as long as you grant me a few courtesies.

If I leave slightly more than a car length between me and the vehicle I'm following, it's so I have enough time to react to the piece of truck tire that's lying in the roadway. It's not an invitation for you to slip into the space while you're trying to leapfrog through heavy traffic. That forces me to drop back and open another gap that someone else will leapfrog into. And since I don't tail you, extend the same courtesy to me. If you need to look down to change the temperature control on your climate control, you need to have enought time to avoid hitting me if traffic suddenly slows.

When you see a small gap in the middle of a group of motorycles, don't. maneuver quickly into the gap. It's common motorcycles to travel in groups, it's part of the fun. Needlessly splitting up the group is rude and dangerous.

These are common courtesies and safe driving practices for all vehicles and are particularly important to me as a motorcyclist. But in order for you to extend me these courtesies you have to be aware of my presence. I know that a motorcycle can easily hide in a blind spot so when I ride behind you in an adjacent lane, I always try to see your face in the rear view mirror. That means that you can see me if you scan your mirror regularly as they teach in any safe-driving class. I always ride with my headlamp on to make me more visible. My last line of defense is a rather loud exhaust system. You may find it annoying, but if it makes you notice that I'm traveling in a blind spot beside you, I consider it a safety device. I try not to annoy my neighbors with the noise, but I use it on the highway.

Some motorcyclists ride aggressively and faster than the flow of traffic. Passing other vehicles can be safer than being passed by them in some situations. Maybe the biker that roars past you is just a sociopathic punk, or maybe he's trying to obseve how you're driving and control the time that you are actually close enough to hit him. In either case, what can you gain by getting mad and returning the the aggression?

Don't take offense if I ride between lanes and move to the front of a long line of stopped cars, especially on hot days. Without air moving over it , the air-cooled engine on my motorcycle will overheat and be damaged. Lane splitting is tricky and dangerous and I only do it when necessary but it is permitted by law in this state Don't take it personally.

Notice me, but please don't stare at me as you drive beside me. Remember that you tned to steer in the direction that you are looking.
Let me have my lane.

You and I can share the road safely as long as you give your driving the attention it deserves and give me the same consideration that you would want from other drivers. In return, I'll try not to vent my anger at you when another, less-considerate drivers does something that endangers me. And when we get to where we're going I can take a smaller parking spot designated for motorcycles and leave the big space for your luxury automobile
A motorcyclist

Michael Schiavo's Death Wish

The Empire Journal has a scathing article outlining the many conflicts of interest, incompetence, and out-and-out corruption that has beseiged the Schiavo case. Among the tangled web of conflicts of interest that would make a Charlie Brown-flown, tree-bound kite look straight:

In April, 2000, without court approval or knowledge of the Schindlers, Terri Schiavo was moved to Woodside Hospice in Pinellas Park, operated by Hospice of Florida Suncoast, without the proper certification. Although the certificate was signed by the hospice medical director who was under direct administration of Felos as board chairman, Dr. Victor Gambone, her attending physician at the time, did not sign the certificate of need as mandated by federal law. He has since testified under oath that she was healthy and that Terri was moved to the hospice not on his orders, but rather those of Michael Schiavo.
This underscores the fact that Terri was and is (until the disconnection of her feeding tube) a healthy, cognitively disabled individual. This also underscores the death wish imposed on Terri by Michael Schiavo. Back in 1995, when my mother was inflicted with ovarian cancer, she was moved to the hospice unit of St. Joseph's Hospital in Marshfield, Wisconsin, thinking that she had at best a few weeks to live. Her condition, however, actually improved; so much so that her cancer count had decreased to near zero. She was one of the few who was moved out of hospice due to her improved condition, which was no longer considered to be imminently terminal. She lived for another two years before the ovarian cancer would again consume her body, and she died in the same hospice unit that she was discharged from two years earlier.

My whole point is, a hospice unit is set up in such a way as to care for a terminally ill patient in the final stages of life (usually a week to a month before death). Why move an otherwise physically healthy woman to a hospice center back in 2000, and keep her there, when her condition was anything but terminal?

This is just one point in a whole chronology of missteps, blatant conflicts of interest, and of out-and-out lawbreaking that has occurred. This article is the most comprehensive expose of this travesty of justice I have seen yet. I encourage all to read it.

Sunday, March 27, 2005

Ponyang Times grasping at straws..

The L.A. Times has a story comparing Tom DeLay's experiences with his ailing father in 1988 with the Terri Schiavo affair. The ever-available organ of the DNC and all-things left-of-center made a lame attempt to brand DeLay as a hypocrite with regard to his family's decision not to resucitate his father, who was seriously injured in a freak accident:

The man in a coma, kept alive by intravenous lines and oxygen equipment, was DeLay's father, Charles Ray DeLay.

Today, as House Majority Leader, DeLay has teamed with his Senate counterpart, Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), to champion political intervention in the Schiavo case. They pushed emergency legislation through Congress to shift the legal case from Florida state courts to the federal judiciary.

And DeLay is among the strongest advocates of keeping the woman, who doctors say has been in a persistent vegetative state for 15 years, connected to her feeding tube. DeLay has denounced Schiavo's husband, as well as judges, for committing what he calls "an act of barbarism" in removing the tube.

In 1988, however, there was no such fiery rhetoric as the congressman quietly joined the sad family consensus to let his father die.
Okay, where is the moral equivalence? Where is the hypocrisy in Delay's current stand on these issues? Delay's father was being kept alive via respirators. His kidneys were shutting down. Terri Schiavo merely needs nutrition and hydration to keep alive, the same as you or I (although Terri's kidneys are no doubt shutting down now due to lack of hydration). But the L.A. times will not rest on mere fact. They go on to try to twist and squirm in an effort to fit a square peg in a round hole:

There were also these similarities: Both stricken patients were severely brain-damaged. Both were incapable of surviving without medical assistance. Both were said to have expressed a desire to be spared from being kept alive by artificial means. And neither of them had a living will.

This previously unpublished account of the majority leader's personal brush with life-ending decisions was assembled from court files, medical records and interviews with family members.

Leave it to the LA Times to try their level best to portray those who stand on the side of life as hypocrites (although there are some real hypocrites at play here). Unfortunately for them, their level-best efforts to propagandize the truth of this situation fall flatter than the state of South Dakota.

Adolph Hitler, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, Josef Stalin: On behalf of the Culture of Death, we apologize.

Carl Limbacher has a story on Newsmax that mirrors much of what I have been writing with comparison of Terri Schaivo's fate to those visited on unfortunate souls during the Nazi and other regimes.

Confounding all conventional wisdom and human experience, many liberal groups and even some medical experts have argued for Terri Schiavo’s death.

They claim that starvation and dehydration are not painful or discomforting for her or anyone undergoing the experience.

In fact, they allege that such victims begin to experience "euphoria" as the victims draw close to death.

If such claims are true, we may have to rewrite the history of such notorious events as the Holocaust – where starvation was the key process by which millions died and were later placed in crematoriums.

The internationally accepted Geneva Convention – which identifies starvation as a war crime – also will have to be rewritten. Ditto for many statements made by reputable organizations, many of them liberal, that have condemned the practice for decades.

As I have been trying to pound home for weeks now, why doesn't Terri Schiavo enjoy at least the same level of protection that would be expected to be provided a prisoner of war? If death by starvation is peaceful and even euphoric and such a natural, good way to die, then why aren't Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin and other totalitarian monsters held up in a more positive light by the culture of death and the left? Have the people who live in the Culture of Death suddenly found starvation to be acceptable, now that it is convenient to their own ends? Meanwhile, Terri Schiavo is in a state of euphoria now, right?

ON another note...

Gibbs said Schiavo, 41, was declining rapidly. "They've begun to give her morphine drip for the pain. And at this point, we would say Terri has passed the point of no return," he told CBS' "Face the Nation."

A question: If starvation is such a painless, peaceful means of dying, why the need for a morphine drip?

Hat tip to Irongoat from Unto the Breach.

Friday, March 25, 2005

The Netherlands has nothing on US.

It would appear that even in the Netherlands, a country that has been under the microscope from conservative groups in this country for what was heretofore considered its ultra-liberal policy on euthanasia, Terri Schiavo would be alive right now with feeding tube intact:

...Dutch Penal Code Articles 293 and 294 make both euthanasia and assisted suicide illegal, even today. However, as the result of various court cases, doctors who directly kill patients or help patients kill themselves will not be prosecuted as long as they follow certain guidelines. In addition to the current requirements that physicians report every euthanasia/assisted-suicide death to the local prosecutor and that the patient's death request must be enduring (carefully considered and requested on more than one occasion), the Rotterdam court in 1981 established the following guidelines:
  • The patient must be experiencing unbearable pain.
  • The patient must be conscious.
  • The death request must be voluntary.
  • The patient must have been given alternatives to euthanasia and time to consider these alternatives.
  • There must be no other reasonable solutions to the problem.
  • The patient's death cannot inflict unnecessary suffering on others.
  • There must be more than one person involved in the euthanasia decision.
  • Only a doctor can euthanize a patient.
  • Great care must be taken in actually making the death decision.
  • Let's go down the list, shall we?

    1. The patient must be experiencing unbearable pain.
    (Uhh... nope. At least as far as anybody can tell.)

    2. The patient must be conscious.
    (Uhh.. according to Michael Schiavo, not since 1992).

    3. The death request must be voluntary.
    (Well, according to one person, from a conversation a long, long time ago. Although there appears to be no doubt regarding his penchant for wishful thinking).

    4. The patient must have been given alternatives to euthanasia and time to consider these alternatives. (Something tells me this conversation never took place with Terri. At least not between Terri and her husband. Her family has, however, provided a viable alternative).

    5. There must be no other reasonable solutions to the problem.
    (see point #4)

    6. The patient's death cannot inflict unnecessary suffering on others.
    (One needs only to look at these faces to see unnecessarily inflicted suffering:

    7. There must be more than one person involved in the euthanasia decision.
    Unless Michael Schiavo has cloned himself, this again is a NO.

    8. Only a doctor can euthanize a patient.
    I don't know if a doctor pulled the feeding tube or not. I do know that whomever pulled it had help from the Florida and Federal judiciaries.

    9. Great care must be taken in actually making the death decision.
    The merits of this final point are up for argument, as there have been conflicting medical views regarding Terri's condition.

    There is a member of my forum community who hails from the Netherlands. A number of months ago, some of our forum membership (myself included) were giving him a hard time due to his country's stand on euthanasia. Looks like we owe him an apology. In just this one instance, our Culture of Death has made an end-around the Netherlands in so quick a manner that the Dutch now look like a bunch of nuns working for Operation Rescue.

    Is Greer even qualified to decide Schiavo case?

    An article in the Empire Journal notes the following:

    In refusing to grant a stay of Greer’s death order, originally issued on Feb. 11, 2000, the DCA said that “it is beyond any question that the trial curt obtained lawful jurisdiction over the subject matter of this guardianship and person of Mrs. Schiavo”.

    “The trial judge followed and obeyed the laws set out by precedent of the Supreme Court of Florida and by the general laws adopted by the Legislature”, the DCA said.

    However, based on an investigation conducted by The Empire Journal , Pinellas County Probate Judge George Greer has NEVER had jurisdiction of the case as he failed to comply with Florida Statutes and the Florida Constitution by failing to qualify for office in 1998 and 2004 and possibly as early as 1992. According to public records, George Greer not only failed to qualify for office in a timely manner, but he failed to file the proper documentation as well as the proper oath of office.

    By law, by failing to qualify for judicial office in 1998, Greer could not legally appear on the ballot and thus was not legally elected. Without legal title to the office, he lacked not only subject matter jurisdiction but any jurisdiction at all in the Schiavo case and all rulings would be void. In that he has never had legal title to the office, he cannot claim to be a de facto officer.

    According to the DCA decision, the entire Schiavo matter has been based on the mistaken presumption that George Greer has had jurisdiction of the case when in fact he did not follow and obey the law as set out by precedent and state law.

    However, the Schindler attorneys have not raised the jurisdictional issue.

    Hat tip to Stacy from Unto the Breach

    Making Law

    Judges have been very successful at making law. They have made laws that make it legal to kill babies. They have made laws that make it illegal to execute convicted murders. They have made laws that restrict parental rights over their young children. They have made laws that allow a criminal to get off scott free. They have made laws to make sure convicted criminals are comfortable. They have made laws that insure a non US citizen gets the same rights and protections a US citizen gets. They have intruded into virtually every aspect of life.

    I wonder why they can not bring themselves to make a law to save the life of an innocent?

    To Congressman Moran:... duhhhhh!!!

    I was just watching congressman Jim Moran, who said the fallout from the current Schiavo case will be detrimental, because it would leave people with the impression that they have recourse with the legislature when the judicial branch does not rule in their favor.

    To that, the Ice Palace politely says, "DUHHHHHHH!!!"

    Has the honorable Congressman Moran, a member of the party that has for the first time in history effectively and extra-constitutionally required a supermajority in order to approve judicial appointments, ever heard of tyranny of the bench?

    The judicial branch is out of control. They are the one branch of government that is not elected and/or otherwise held accountable to the electorate. They have, in the past 30 years seen things in the Constitution that weren't there and have ignored things in the Constitution that are there. The bench has been a principal party to the deaths of at least 40,000,000 would-be American citizens. Even those on the highest court of the land have begun using foreign law to decide what is best for Americans (so much for governing by consent of the governed). The activist judiciary have become the unelected, unaccountable modern-day tyrants. And the electorate is not supposed to have recourse against this?

    In the past 40 years, the left has relied on the judiciary to impose its agenda, since there is no way the majority of the electorate would otherwise consent to be governed under said principles. The judiciary is their savior. To have a judiciary in some way accountable to the electorate, or to have a check on judicial power, would drive a stake into the very heart of their being.

    There is a sizeable piece of this nation that has finally had enough of judicial tyranny, and the time is ripe for politicians who will run on a platform of reining in judicial power. To those who are used to the days when judicial power can run roughshod over the will of the people and were used to having their leftist agenda imposed carte blanche, I would submit that those days are now being numbered. Something's gotta give, and eventually, it will.

    Whittemore again says ...let her eat air

    Judge James Whittemore today again refused to order re-insertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube. Time is quickly running out for Terri, whose brother said looking at her was like looking at pictures of prisoners in concentration camps. Said Brian Schiavo, Michael's brother:

    Brian Schiavo, brother of Terri Schiavo's husband Michael Schiavo, strongly disagreed with that assessment, telling a news network that Terri Schiavo "does look a little withdrawn" but insisting she was not in pain. He added that starvation is simply "part of the death process."
    Starvation is simply a part of the death process? The point is, SHE WOULDN'T BE DYING IF YOUR BROTHER WASN'T STARVING HER TO DEATH, YOU BLITHERING IDIOT!! This is much akin to Josef Mengele throwing a bunch of Jews into the gas chamber and saying, "Gasping for air is simply a part of the death process." But this tactic, dear readers, is part and parcel of the Culture of Death. Never call it what it is.

    while you euthanize.

    Josef Mengele would be proud.

    The Night Writer

    ..has an interesting take on the Schiavo matter. He points out a lot of parallels between the Schiavo case and the movie, The Passion:
    This time last year I went to see "The Passion of the Christ" and I can still remember how difficult it was to watch the scourging and crucifixion of the innocent Christ and to witness the callousness and even fervor of his persecutors who were blind to what they were really doing. Even though I knew every bit of Jesus's suffering was for a just and vital cause, it was hard to look - but even harder to look away.

    Though her situation is nowhere near as significant, I have had the same feelings of grief and frustration this week watching the Terri Schiavo passion play. Once again an innocent is flayed on the flimsiest of pretenses, but with a certain horrific inevitability. You have it all - betrayal, distortions, pride, prejudice, the midnight hearings, a fickle populace, the washing of hands. It even appears, again, as if the players have no choice but to play the parts assigned to them. Believe me, I want to look away, but I simply cannot.

    I do believe that there is something metaphysical, and inevitable at play here. Although a horrible situation, I do believe that Divine Providence is taking hold. I also believe that just like many other dark chapters in Earth's history, this will turn out for the greater glory of God.

    Thursday, March 24, 2005

    The Culture of Death-March Continues... Mother arrested for attempting to interfere with 14-year old daughter's abortion

    According to an exclusive from the Illinois Leader, a mother was arrested on March 17th as she attempted to interfere with her own 14-year old daughter's abortion. According to the story, the pregnant girl's boyfriend's mother took the girl out of school, posing as the girl's grandmother. When the biological mother went to the clinic to intervene, the clinic staff called the authorities and had the mother arrested:

    She took a seat near the main desk and said, “I was told I could not prove my daughter was there so I began calling her name. A medical tech at the clinic told me, ‘It’s your daughter’s rights, it’s her body. You have no rights.’”

    After continuing to call out her daughter’s name and telling her “don’t do it,” authorities were called and the mother was arrested.

    The 14-year old told her mother she could hear her but when she asked employees to give her mother a message, they came back to the room and told her that her mother had left.

    In the school district at which I work, a child cannot receive a Tylenol without a parent's consent. Even though it's the child's body, and the child's headache, the child cannot give her own consent to take an over-the-counter medicine, even though the medicine produces little or no side effects. By rights, hospitals require parental consent to treat a child, even in emergency medical situations

    Minors and Consent: Legal Perspectives

    In the U.S., state legislation requiring parental consent for medical treatment reflects the conception that minors (those under the age of 18) are incapable of understanding and making decisions about medical treatment (Melton, 1983). The state recognizes that the legal age of majority (age 18) is arbitrary and that there are minors who are competent and others, of legal age, who are not (AMA, 1992); however, legislation is designed to protect minors from the consequences of poor decisions.

    But many states still...
    authorize minors to consent to contraceptive services, testing and treatment for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases, prenatal care and delivery services, treatment for alcohol and drug abuse, and outpatient mental health care. With the exception of abortion, lawmakers have generally resisted attempts to impose a parental consent or notification requirement on minors' access to reproductive health care and other sensitive services.
    So, a child under the age of 18 doesn't have the decision-making capacity to know whether or not it is in her best interest to take a Tylenol, while at the same time the same girl should be trusted to act in her best interest on issues with long-term consequences such as sexual activity, contraceptive use, and abortion? According to the adherents of the Culture of Death, that is exactly the case. Because you see, my friends, the actual best interest of the child, the child's actual capacity to make a decision in her own best interest, as well as the parents' authority to determine it, all run a distant last to furthering their agenda to devalue life at all costs, or at best to determine life's value based on the currencies of convenience and functionality. As I have said before, the culture of death needs blood sacrifices to further its unholy cause.

    What is there to hide?...court refuses to unseal medical records

    I heard on the top of the hour news a few minutes ago that among the three motions on behalf of Terri Schiavo's parents that judge George Greer denied was one that would open up Terri Schiavo's medical records with respect to allegations of abuse. Question: Why keep the medical records sealed? Especially in an extraordinary case where a woman's life hangs in the balance? In most allegations of abuse, an investigation ensues, and part of the investigation includes the inspection of medical records. Why the need for privacy for a woman who's brain dead and supposedly doesn't know the difference anyway? If there was not abuse or neglect, the records will reveal as such. What is to be gained by keeping those records sealed?

    Peggy Noonan...on the Culture of Death

    Peggy Noonan has an excellent article on OpinionJournal today, weighing in on the impending death of Terri Schiavo. Among the parts I found most poignant:
    I do not understand why people who want to save the whales (so do I) find campaigns to save humans so much less arresting. I do not understand their lack of passion. But the save-the-whales people are somehow rarely the stop-abortion-please people.

    The PETA people, who say they are committed to ending cruelty to animals, seem disinterested in the fact of late-term abortion, which is a cruel procedure performed on a human.

    I do not understand why the don't-drill-in-Alaska-and-destroy-its-prime-beauty people do not join forces with the don't-end-a-life-that-holds-within-it-beauty people.

    I do not understand why those who want a freeze on all death penalty cases in order to review each of them in light of DNA testing--an act of justice and compassion toward those who have been found guilty of crimes in a court of law--are uninterested in giving every last chance and every last test to a woman whom no one has ever accused of anything.

    There are passionate groups of women in America who decry spousal abuse, give beaten wives shelter, insist that a woman is not a husband's chattel. This is good work. Why are they not taking part in the fight for Terri Schiavo? Again, what explains their lack of passion on this? If Mrs. Schiavo dies, it will be because her husband, and only her husband, insists she wanted to, or would want to, or said she wanted to in a hypothetical conversation long ago. A thin reed on which to base the killing of a human being.

    On Democratic Underground they crowed about having "kicked the sh-- out of the fascists." On Tuesday James Carville's face was swept with a sneer so convulsive you could see his gums as he damned the Republicans trying to help Mrs. Schiavo. It would have seemed demonic if he weren't a buffoon.

    Why are they so committed to this woman's death?

    They seem to have fallen half in love with death.

    What does Terri Schiavo's life symbolize to them? What does the idea that she might continue to live suggest to them?

    Why does this prospect so unnerve them? Again, if you think Terri Schiavo is a precious human gift of God, your passion is explicable. The passion of the pull-the-tube people is not.


    Terri Schiavo may well die. No good will come of it. Those who are half in love with death will only become more red-fanged and ravenous.

    And those who are still learning--our children--oh, what terrible lessons they're learning. What terrible stories are shaping them. They're witnessing the Schiavo drama on television and hearing it on radio. They are seeing a society--their society, their people--on the verge of famously accepting, even embracing, the idea that a damaged life is a throwaway life.

    Our children have been reared in the age of abortion, and are coming of age in a time when seemingly respectable people are enthusiastic for euthanasia. It cannot be good for our children, and the world they will make, that they are given this new lesson that human life is not precious, not touched by the divine, not of infinite value.

    Once you "know" that--that human life is not so special after all--then everything is possible, and none of it is good. When a society comes to believe that human life is not inherently worth living, it is a slippery slope to the gas chamber. You wind up on a low road that twists past Columbine and leads toward Auschwitz. Today that road runs through Pinellas Park, Fla.

    I have said much of the same these past few days... Those who buy into the culture of death are rejoicing, their bloodthirst now nearly consummated on the altar of euthanasia.

    According to those happily participating in the culture of death, Michael Schiavo is a patron saint. Not necessarily because of his attitude toward Terri, but rather due to the mere fact that he is providing them with a blood sacrifice that their culture demands. To have Terri live would be a tragedy, because it would then confirm the inherent value of life. When that is recognized and affirmed, the culture of death cannot long endure.

    To maintain that Terri is nothing but a vegetable depersonalizes her. To maintain that a fetus is nothing more than a mass of cells depersonalizes the living being that is developing in the mothers' womb. Ask any serial killer. Channel Adolph Hitler or Geobbels. They would most likely tell you that the easiest way to dispose of a human life is to first pretend that it's less than human.

    The impending death of Terri Schiavo, the first state condoned and enforced euthanasia for an otherwise physically healthy though cognitively disabled human being, marks a turningpoint for our society. Welcome, dear readers, to the New Dark Age.

    Wednesday, March 23, 2005

    The Sacrifice nearing completion.

    Mar 23, 4:52 PM (ET)


    (AP) Bob Schindler, Terri Schiavo's father, center, walks with a police escort outside the Woodside...
    Full Image

    ATLANTA (AP) - For the second time in less than a day, a federal appeals court Wednesday rejected a bid by Terri Schiavo's parents to have her feeding tube re-inserted. The Florida Senate, meanwhile, turned back another last-ditch effort to prolong her life.

    The way I see it, this and every denial of life to an innocent human being is a "black mass" for the culture of death. Every occasion in which a baby is aborted, and life to innocent, vulnerable people is sucked away, appears to be an occasion for jubilation amongst its adherents. What we are witnessing is a proverbial modern day human sacrifice to Baal. I fear that soon we will be experiencing a proverbial tossing down of the tablets, at which time, literally, all hell will be breaking loose on earth. Regrettably, I believe that what is in the works, along with its heinous conclusion, is now inevitable. I pray that I'm wrong.

    Have our courts catered to a monster?

    Witness the affadavit dated 8/23/2005 of one Carla Ayer, a nurse who once cared for Terri Schiavo:

    10. Any time Terri would be sick, like with a UTI or fluid buildup in her
    lungs, colds, or pneumonia, Michael would be visibly excited, thrilled
    even, hoping that she would die. He would say something like,

    "Hallelujah! You've made my day!" He would call me, as I was the
    nurse supervisor on the floor, and ask for every little detail about her
    temperature, blood pressure, etc., and would call back frequently
    asking if she was dead yet. He would blurt out "I'm going to be rich!"
    and would talk about all the things he would buy when Terri died,
    which included a new car, a new boat, and going to Europe, among
    other things.

    Note that this is a sworn affadavit, and being a licensed nurse, Ms. Ayer has everything to lose and nothing to gain by perjuring herself. The rest of the document makes for interesting, albeit disturbing reading, alleging everything from denial of the most basic therapy, to removal of all procedural records and positive nursing notes. Sworn testimony is also present in this affadavit suggesting that Terri was quite aware of her environment.

    Mind you, this was taken in 2003, a year and a half before this issue has come to a head. Why was it ignored? If the content of this affadavit is false, why haven't prosecutorial procedures against Ms. Ayer been initiated? Why did Mr. Schaivo deny even the most basic therapy, including range of motion?

    Why is it that the ghouls who buy in to the culture of death cast Mr. Schiavo as a hero who only wants to alleviate his wife's suffering? Judging by this sworn testimony, at best, this looks like a case of Munchausen by Proxy; at worst, this is a case of a greedy slimeball who is looking for an early demise for his estranged wife, so as to be able to collect what remains of a sizeable legal settlement.

    Tuesday, March 22, 2005

    Schiavo's tube not to be re-inserted...Usual suspects rejoice..

    A federal judge ruled against life today. Yes, a federal judge has been complicit in advocating the tortured death of Terri Schiavo to cater to her estranged husband's wishes. The culture of life has been dealt a death blow today. Literally. Predictably, the usual suspects rejoice:

    Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, praised the ruling: "What this judge did is protect the freedom of people to make their own end-of-life decisions without the intrusion of politicians."

    Isn't it something how the ACLU rejoices when the government intrudes to limit rights on other issues, such as second amendment rights, freedom of speech, or freedom of religion, rights expressly enumerated in the Constitution, and then complain when the government attempts to "intrude" to protect one of the most basic God-given rights of all--the right to live:

    "We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." - Thomas Jefferson

    Just what part of unalienable don't the Culture of Death ghouls understand? Why do they rejoice when a baby is aborted? Why do they rejoice when a vulnerable individual; by many accounts still able to experience joy and pain, is deprived of her right to live and left to die a miserable death that if visited on an animal would result in at least incarceration? Thomas Jefferson did not use the word life as a mere throwaway word. It was not placed first amongst the unalienable rights on accident. One must wonder--have those who espouse the culture of death not learned their lessons from history? Or are they, in their sick and demented minds, actually trying to emulate the darker passages of our past?

    Has the world gone completely mad?

    One could only look on in amazed disbelief, and wonder.

    Eugenics now a reality

    This woman was arrested for trying to give Terri some water..

    Question: Now that we are following in the path of the Hitlerian final solution in dealing with the problem of societal burdens, will this woman now be tried and punished as an Enemy of the State?

    Since when does one get "arrested" for trying to save a life? Not in my America.


    Gabriel Keys (foreground) is arrested by police officers for trespassing in Pinellas Park, Florida, March 23, 2005. The young protester attempted to take a glass of water into the Woodside Hospice for the brain-damaged Terri Schiavo. A federal judge rejected a request from the parents of Schiavo to order her feeding tube reinserted, dealing a blow to attempts by the U.S. Congress and the White House to prolong her life. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

    Why does it take a child to point out what is right and what is wrong?

    Monday, March 21, 2005

    Are we repeating history? ...sieg heil?

    I came across this tidbit of how the Nazi regime took care of the problem of what to do with people they deemed as the mentally and physically handicapped. Along with forced sterilizations, there was the "final" solution:

    Forced sterilization in Germany was the forerunner of the systematic killing of the mentally ill and the handicapped. In October 1939, Hitler himself initiated a decree which empowered physicians to grant a "mercy death" to "patients considered incurable according to the best available human judgment of their state of health." The intent of the socalled "euthanasia" program, however, was not to relieve the suffering of the chronically ill. The Nazi regime used the term as a euphemism: its aim was to exterminate the mentally ill and the handicapped, thus "cleansing" the Aryan race of persons considered genetically defective and a financial burden to society.

    Does this seem reminiscent of those who would see Terri Schiavo's life end via starvation and dehydration, as well as others who through the inability for self-care are deemed a burden on society? At least the Nazis tried sterilization first. Seems the culture of death in this nation has already passed go and collected their $200 on the matter. With all the comparisons being made of conservatives with nazis nowadays, one may entertain the idea that the pot is truly attempting to call the kettle black.

    Right to die? ...or right to kill?

    As Terri Schiavo's fate currently hangs in the balance of a decision by a federal District judge, so hangs the balance between the culture of life and the culture of death. It leads me to wonder; if the Schiavo execution is allowed, are the Alzheimer's patients next? Should we starve them to death? How about advanced Parkinsonian patients? Should we deny the Pope a drink of water? How about the severely developmentally disabled? Do people suffer less when their cognition is impaired?

    Let's call a spade a spade, shall we? A willful witholding of food and water, effectively causing the torture and ultimate death of a cognitively disabled though otherwise physically healthy human being, is an execution. The difference between pulling a feeding tube and holding a gun to Schiavo's head and pulling a trigger can be measured with a calendar; not to mention a week or two of torture.

    Why, again, are liberals opposed to the death penalty for cold-blooded murderers (which the death penalty is almost exclusively reserved for) and yet pro-death penalty for the most vulnerable amongst us (babies who have yet to be born, the infirmed, etc) who have committed no crimes?

    Although I am sure that there are and have been similar, though less-publicized cases, the publicity of and outcome of this can prove to be a watershed event for either side. If the outcome is in favor of Terri Schiavo, it will be a watershed event for those who argue for the sanctity and value of life, even in its most vulnerable and precarious states.

    On the other hand, if the case comes out in Michael Schiavo's favor, it will mark a watershed event for the Culture of Death. Eventually, an artificially imposed darwinism will mark the most vulnerable among us for extinction. And afterward the not-so-vulnerable. It will be morbidly interesting, dear readers, to find out how quickly you or I will be deemed "obsolete."

    Allowing this execution to pass unfettered would open up many cans of worms that, rightfully, not too many of us would be in a position to stomach. Sadly, what it comes down to, is that Terri Schiavo's fate, either way, is our own.

    Oh Where, Oh Where have the Liberals Gone?...Oh where, oh where can they be?

    On my way to Naperville last night I was able to tune in to Hannity on the radio. On it Terri Schiavo's brother related how earlier yesterday, one of Terri Schiavo's female attorneys was visiting with Terri and the family. The attorney reportedly looked Terri in the eye, saying, (paraphrased) "Terri, all you have to do to end this is say, "I want to live!" According to reports, Terri said, in a loud voice, "I waaaaaaaaaaaaaant! Waaaaaaaaant!" The police, who were standing outside the room, came in and removed the attorney. Now, this wasn't just on Hannity. On ABC's top of the hour news (around 3am CST) they had the same report. Thing is, I can't find it anywhere on the net this morning.

    One thing I did notice last night during my travels, that the top-of-the-hour newscasts predictably had many pro-death soundbites from Michael Schiavo and his attorney, and very few from the Schindler's attorneys or spokespeople. ABC News went so far as to say that they expect Terri Schiavo to experience a peaceful death. As I have stated here, death by dehydration, especially when one is able to feel pain and the body is not shutting down due to cancer, etc., is anything but peaceful. Consider this:

    "A conscious [cognitively disabled] person would feel it just as you or I would. They will go into seizures. Their skin cracks, their tongue cracks, their lips crack. They may have nosebleeds because of the drying of the mucus membranes, and heaving and vomiting might ensue because of the drying out of the stomach lining. They feel the pangs of hunger and thirst. Imagine going one day without a glass of water! Death by dehydration takes ten to fourteen days. It is an extremely agonizing death."

    Getting around to the topic of this post, where are all the liberals in this matter? Where are all the liberals who went apoplectic about Abu Ghraib? As recently as March 15, Jeff Jacoby wrote this op ed in The Boston Globe entitled Where's the Outrage on Torture? in which Jacoby outlines the alleged abuses of war prisoners in Afghanistan, Gitmo and Iraq.

    A question for Mr. Jacoby and all the other strangely silent liberal voices on the Schiavo matter: Where's the outrage on torture? Where are all these people? :

    Ohio Horse Trainer Charged With Cruelty for Starving Horses

    An Ohio horse trainer was hired to transport two horses to New Jersey, and upon their arrival, the guardians found them to be so severely emaciated that they were half their normal weights. Their ribs, spines, and hip bones were clearly visible. After PETA put pressure on authorities, the trainer was charged charged with cruelty for nearly starving the animals to death.
    Read more about how you can help horses in need:

    Terri, in her deprivation, will suffer every bit as much as those horses. Worse, Terri will die. What is the difference? Terri is a human being.

    Apparently, unless you're a terrorist hell bent on murdering Americans, or unless you are an animal, you are not worthy of life. Torture means nothing. Leave it to the liberals, "the champions of the common man" to leave the most vulnerable among us, whether it's Schiavo or an unborn child, wanting for our very lives.

    Saturday, March 19, 2005

    The Death Watch begins... Schiavo's feeding tube removed

    In an action sure to bring about pain and torture on an innocent woman, Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed in the presence of her husband:

    Michael Schiavo has been living for 10 years with his fiance, Jodi Centonze, with whom he has two children. He has said he will marry her after his wife's death.

    The move came after a Florida judge blocked an eleventh-hour end-run around the court-ordered removal, waged by members of House and Senate panels, ruling the device can be removed immediately.

    Early this morning, the House Government Reform Committee decided to launch an investigation into the case and issued subpoenas which order doctors and the administrator at the hospice facility in Pinellas Park, Fla., where the severely brain-damaged woman resides not to remove her feeding tube and keep her alive until the investigation is complete.

    At the same time, the Senate Health Committee requested Terri Schiavo and her husband appear at an official committee hearing on March 28.

    As a result, minutes before the 1 p.m. EST deadline for the tube removal passed Pinellas Circuit Court Judge David Demers ordered the feeding tube remain in place while presiding Judge George Greer addresses the matter of the congressional subpoenas in a court hearing.

    But an hour later, Greer disregarded the subpoenas and again ordered the feeding tube pulled.

    In the opinion of the Ice Palace, Judge Greer will have some 'splainin' to do, both now and in the hereafter:

    The subpoenas direct the recipients to appear at the hospice facility to give testimony to House committee members on March 25 at 10 a.m. EST.

    "No things including those things reflecting data, information, or records called for by this request shall be destroyed, modified, transferred, disconnected, discontinued, or otherwise made inaccessible to the Committee," the subpoenas read, according to Fox, which means the feeding tube must stay in place for another week.

    Ignoring the subpoenas would amount to being in contempt of Congress and would incur penalties of fines and/or imprisonment. It is unclear, however, if such penalties would hold in the face of a conflicting court order.

    The Culture of Death is smiling in Florida right now. Currently, it is the judge and Mr. Schiavo, who are doing the "end around" a congressional subpoena. Mr. Schiavo has two children and is currently living with his fiancee, the mother of his two children. He states that he will be married as soon as Terri dies. Has Mr. Schiavo ever heard of a divorce? Terri's parents have been taking care of her and have every stated intention of continuing to do so. A businessman has offered Mr. Schiavo a million dollars to walk away and let Terri live. Why do Mr. Schiavo and Judge Greer have such an obsession with seeing this woman die. Right now?? If this truly does come to pass, and Terri dies the painful, grisly death that starvation and dehydration entails, Judge Greer not only needs to be charged with contempt of Congress. He needs to be charged with murder.


    Congress has reportedly come up with a deal that will set the stage for Terri's case to be reviewed by a federal court, and in doing so buy some time for Terri while her case is again reviewed. To my understanding, as of yesterday, the House version of the legislation contained the verbiage "shall" be reviewed by a federal court, while the Senate version contained the verbiage "may". It will be interesting to see what this latest compromise entails.

    Terri Schiavo's Death Sentence..and Scientology?

    Here is a compelling and thought provoking page that explores a possible relationship between the insanity of the Schiavo situation and Scientology. Pinellas County is one of the main hotbeds for Scientology. The article makes the connection with Scientology and the key political players that hold those beliefs. Scientologists embrace a culture of death:

    Of course death is not a big deal for Scientologists. It is called "dropping the body" and the body is regarded as a hindrance and a distraction. 4

    Scientology founder, L. Ron Hubbard, believed that when a man dies it simply means that his thetan (spirit) separates from his body. The thetan then "picks up another body" and lives again. L. Ron Hubbard's belief in reincarnation—which George Felos shares—is the foundation for his frightening doctrines about death and the disabled.

    George Felos, of course, is the attorney for Michael Schiavo.

    This wouldn't be the first time the Scientologists would be involved in a case of torturing a disabled adult.

    Hat tip to Irongoat from Unto the Breach

    There before the grace of God...go we...

    My 14-year old son and I left the St. Cloud area around 5pm CST for Naperville, Illinois and drove into a major snowstorm starting in Minneapolis. It was there that I put my ol' 1995 Geo Tracker into 4-wheel drive mode and went headlong into an odyssey that would see a car or a semi (or a combination of both) in the medians and the ditches every two or three miles. My Tracker was in rare form, and handled it like a champ. I finally got out of the weather just south of Madison, where I was able to take it out of 4-wheel drive and cruise normally. A trip than normally takes seven hours took 10 and a half hours--I finally got to Naperville around 3:35am CST. I'm a bit exhausted right now, but I guess I'll live :)

    Friday, March 18, 2005

    Terri Schaivo Sentenced to Death torture

    A Florida State Judge ordered that Terri Schaivo's feeding tube be removed at 1pm EST today! (Friday). The story goes that Michael Schaivo wants his wife, who he says is in a persistive vegetative state, to die a humane death. Question: has Mr. Schaivo or the judge that sentenced Terri to death actually considered what it's like to die of starvation and dehydration?
    Nancy Harvey wrote an article in 1995 that is very applicable in these circumstances:

    Having spent a fair amount of time dehydrated and malnourished, I can confidently say that hydration is far more pleasant than the opposite. Anyone who doubts this can forgo fluids for a few days or nourishment for a few weeks and experience the reality. And after my experiences with staph infections, I would want antibiotics even if I were dying of cancer.


    My distant cousin, a man with cancer, died from the removal of his food and water. His sister was not allowed to be in on the decision, but she watched him die in torment. While he was still able to feel pain, he was racked by agonizing muscle spasms. When he was finally dead, he was so contorted that the undertaker was unable to make him presentable. His sister, a registered nurse, considered it the most horrible death she had ever seen.

    Of course, those who would remove food and fluid do not wish to torture the helpless: therefore, I can only assume that they have no idea of the quiet torment of starvation and dehydration. Doctors may say that it doesn't hurt, but knowledge of suffering cannot be gained second-hand. I do not understand how a headache feels by reading about constricted blood vessels. I know how those blood vessels feel because I have a headache. My experiences with starvation and dehydration have not encouraged me to think of them as a comfortable alternative to the "bad death" of feeding tubes, nor as a superior rival to the swift, painless, merciful death promised by those who support euthanasia.


    This is the great attraction of euthanasia: to spare ourselves the experience of the body's struggle with death. I believe that the only way to resist the seduction of euthanasia is to care-to nurse the terminal person with love, to manage pain better, to recognize and respond to the dying person as Ruth or Helen or Fred instead of as a problem to be solved. Dying people do not lose their personalities or their humanity. They still like lemon sherbet, fingernail polish, baseball news. They still need humor, consideration, loving caresses, and companionship.

    Regardless, barring congressional intervention, Terri Schaivo is sentenced to die by what all accounts could be considered torture. Her crime? Years ago Terri's brain was injured due to anoxia secondary to anorexia and bulemia. Hardly a crime worthy of death by torture.

    But in this day and age (ever since Roe v. Wade), we have embraced a culture of death. The slippery slope that we have set for ourselves, in our haste and arrogance to play the Creator, places the value of life on the currencies of convenience and functionality. Reminds me of an at-times corny, though prescient late 50s TV show; only with very real and deadly consequences for those found to be obsolete.


    Peggy Noonan has a brilliant piece regarding the possible political ramifications in today's Opinion Journal

    A Circuit Court Judge George Greer has ruled today that the feeding tube must come out. states:

    If one is truly dying, nature will soon take its course. The target of the Judge George Greer, George Felos, and the Woodside Hospice crowd in Pinellas County, Florida is someone who is not dying "quickly enough," those whom ethicist Daniel Callahan unkindly termed "biologically tenacious."

    I am biologically tenacious, aren't you? Knowing what I know now, I am extremely grateful that I have never lived under Judge George Greer's jurisdiction. I have chronic progressive multiple sclerosis, have an electric wheelchair, and have been through acute rehabilitation at the University of Utah Medical Center four times. In two of those extended stays in the hospital I was given the beautiful opportunity to learn how to swallow, speak, eat, and to continue with my life. I was treated by experts, a multidisciplinary medical team that had the experience to evaluate and rehabilitate me. All of these opportunities have been denied Terri Schiavo.

    In previous orders by Judge Greer to remove Terri's feeding tube he based the orders on the testimonies of doctors who say Terri is in a persistent vegetative state(none of which were qualified medical rehabilitation experts). But doctors employed by the Schindlers to assess her condition conclude that with therapy, she could learn to eat and drink on her own and perhaps learn to talk. However, those assessments were not allowed in court by Judge Greer.

    Dear readers, if you feel as passionately as do I regarding this subject, please call your congressman today and let him or her know how you feel, and that this abominable, cruel and unusual death sentence being imposed on Terri Schaivo cannot go uncontested.

    (I will be bumping and editing this post as circumstances and time warrant. I will be travelling to the Chicago area this evening to spend time with my ailing father this weekend.. I will continue to blog as time permits.).

    Thursday, March 17, 2005

    March of the RINOs continues.. Coleman does it again!

    Deficit??? We ain't got no stinkin deficit!! At least that's what you'd think if you were watching the democrats and the usual cadre of RINOs. Yes, our own beloved Norm Coleman, along with the usual suspects, like the venerable Lincoln Chaffee, Susan Collins of Maine, Mike DeWine of Ohio, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Olympia Snowe of Maine, and the always-available Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. This fine cadre of clowns thought it in the best interest of the taxpayers and their progeny to keep on throwing their hard-earned money (and their children's and grandchildren's hard-earned money) into an already outrageously-corrupt program. Not only did our fearless senator vote to restore the reductions in spending in opposition to our President, but he co-authored the bill and is damn proud of it!

    Hey Normie (perhaps when you start voting in a manner consistent with the wishes of those who voted for you, I'll think of a more respectable title)...Here's a hint for you: Keep the cuts. Allay the burden on the producers of this country. Allay the unnecessary burden on our kids and grandkids. Go after the millions in Medicaid fraud instead. Even in Alaska, one of our least populated states:

    Medicaid provider fraud costs American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars annually and threatens the integrity of the Medicaid program. Nationally, it is estimated that Fraud, Waste and Abuse account for 10 to 20 percent of the payments made by Medicaid. If the National trends hold true for the State of Alaska, these percentages equate to 30 million to 70 million Medicaid dollars annually, resulting in a substantial reduction in moneys available to provide necessary medical services to needy Alaskans.

    Now multiply 30 to 70 million (in a low-population state) dollars per year times every state in the Union (including high population states) and you get the picture. Not to mention benefits for illegal aliens:

    Applicants for emergency Medicaid are not required to provide information regarding their citizenship or immigration status.

    But just like the democrats Normie and his RINO pals vote with, Ol' Normie, Chaffee, Snowe, Specter and the rest of the RINOs don't want to fix anything. Rather, their shallow-minded votes denote that they are only interested in keeping their base spoon fed with the illusion that they are looking out after everyone's best interest. Fact of the matter is, the only best interest the RINOs are looking out for is their own political backside.

    Let them eat BMWs O'Rourke hits it on the head..

    On yesterday's WSJ's Opinion Journal feature article, P.J. O'Rourke "extolls the virtues" of mass transit. In the course of events, Mr. O'Rourke hits on a topic that is near and dear to my just-about bled-dry taxpaying heart:

    Then there is the cost, which is--obviously--$52 billion. Less obviously, there's all the money spent locally keeping local mass transit systems operating. The Heritage Foundation says, "There isn't a single light rail transit system in America in which fares paid by the passengers cover the cost of their own rides." Heritage cites the Minneapolis "Hiawatha" light rail line, soon to be completed with $107 million from the transportation bill. Heritage estimates that the total expense for each ride on the Hiawatha will be $19. Commuting to work will cost $8,550 a year. If the commuter is earning minimum wage, this leaves about $1,000 a year for food, shelter and clothing. Or, if the city picks up the tab, it could have leased a BMW X-5 SUV for the commuter at about the same price. (emphasis mine)

    Well, isn't that just special? Whether they're actually buying commuters BMWs or not, isn't it soothing to know that in the midst of deteriorating roads and the spectre of resultant higher gas taxes making already record high fuel prices even more so; that we here in Minnesota will be paying through our collective sinus cavities enough of our own hard-earned money for this plaything that would even make that a possibility?

    My, but it must be easy to be so generous with other people's money! P.J. O'Rourke muses that the only reason he can come up with subsidizing public transportation the way we do would be for our children. I would submit that many of us will have to sell our first-borns to pay the burdens that such largesse entails.

    Wednesday, March 16, 2005

    Wanna catch up on the Blogosphere, but don't have the time?

    Here's a great find: Rip & Read Blogger Podcast.

    It's a digest of different takes on subjects by different blogs.. and you don't even need your computer to "read" them. Just download the daily digest on your MP3 player and Charlie Quidnunc does the rest by "reading" it to you. The Podcast, though in its infancy, will no doubt be the next generation blog.

    St. Cloud's Own "Ox" going to Iraq

    Dan "The Ox" Ochsner, morning personality at 1450 KNSI's Hot Talk with the Ox, along with news director Cory "the Kamp" Kampschoerer will be broadcasting live on location in Iraq, from April 28 through May 6. They will begin in Kuwait on April 28, and commence broadcasting from Saddam's home town of Tikrit. Congrats. Their mission? To bring some of Minnesota to the troops in Iraq, and bring some of the experience from Iraq back to Minnesota. I'll be looking forward to their live broadcasts, and will be applying for the job of "roadie" for the trip. Now KNSI is only a 1000 watt station, but if you live anywhere outside of a 20 mile radius of St. Cloud, you can tune into the morning show (6a-9a CST, M-F) live on the net here

    "Human Relations" 101... N.J. High Schoolers get a taste..

    Remember the course in college entitled, "Human Relations?" It was a required course for graduation for all liberal arts majors (i.e., Fed 385 at UW-Eau Claire). Actually, the Course title of Human Relations was just code for gauntlet for liberal indoctrinations:

    385 /585 Social Foundations: Human Relations
    3 crs (3-1). F, Sp, Su.
    Admission to School of Education required
    School psychology, CDIS and nursing majors may also enroll
    Students will examine cultural contributions of racial, ethnic, cultural, gender, and economic groups. They will also examine forces of discrimination and racism on individuals, society, and education and analyze practices that promote dignity, justice, and equality.

    When taking the course, we were treated to a barrage of far-left whacko speakers, with one consistent message: Minorities and women, good. White males, bad. We were constantly admonished on how we needed to feel guilty for past wrongs committed by our ancestors, even though our ancestors may not have even been around when said transgressions took place.

    Well it just so happens that students at Paul VI High School in South Jersey were treated to similar fare when N.J. Secretary of State Regina Thomas browbeated the students:

    Tensions have been building up at Paul VI High School since Thomas' speech on racial justice last week.

    Many students and faculty members walked out of the speech offended. They said that she lambasted one student for not knowing his black history and that she insinuated that the students were racist.

    "It's, like, really crazy right now. Teachers are just standing by the doors. Kids are trying to get out. Kids are in the hallway, they won't go to class," one female student said.
    With a Secretary of State like that, who needs Ward Churchill.. or for that matter, Wes Craven? However, to all the kids at Paul VI High school who are college bound, The Ice Palace gives some sage advice borne of experience: "Get used to it"

    Coleman goes RINO.....again

    Both Senators Dayton and Coleman voted yea today on an amendment to Senate Resolution 18 that would have prohibited drilling at ANWR. It appears that Senator Coleman would prefer seeing us being held hostage energy-wise to a bunch of terrorist-funding mullahs, even if it meant that only eight one-hundredths of one percent of ANWR would be utilized for that purpose. One would expect such reckless abandonment and kowtowing to enviro-whackos from Dayton; but not from Coleman.

    Coleman's RINO tendencies are making themselves more and more apparent as time passes. As a delegate, I will continue to voice my disapproval. I would encourage all like-opinioned voters to do the same.

    Tuesday, March 15, 2005

    And if you don't give us what we want we'll stomp our feet!

    In their latest childish antic, the democrats, with their trusty leader, the ol' soft spoken, harmless little fuzzball Harry Reid, threatened to block all business in the Senate not linked to terrorism or defense (that may be an improvement; they've been stonewalling on those latter issues as well--why break precedent?) should the wascally Wepublicans exercise the (gasp!!) nuclear option to prevent further democrat fillibusters of judicial candidates:

    WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrats threatened Tuesday to slow or stop most Senate business if Republicans unilaterally change the rules to assure confirmation of President Bush's controversial court appointments.

    Any such change would mark "an unprecedented abuse of power," Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrote Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. "The power to confirm judges includes the right to use well-established Senate rules to reject nominees."

    Folks, what is a bloody unprecedented usurpation and abuse of power is the democrat fillibustering up or down action on judicial appointees, and,in effect, extra-constitutionally demanding a supermajority for approval of judicial candidates.

    What the democrats have not yet learned, as evident by the last election, is that they didn't gain any votes by stonewalling; rather they lost seats. In the words of their esteemed fearless leader, one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results. Going by their own party's definition, the members of the minority party in the Senate (soon to become even more of a minority party should their behavior continue) should be fitted for straitjackets, post-haste.

    Lady luck is surely smiling on the GOP. With this continued untoward behavior, even more Senate seats are surely to fall into GOP hands in 2006, through no additional effort on the GOPs part. After all, when your rival is in the process of making a fool of himself, it's best just to get out of the way. To say that the democrats are in the process of imploding would truly be one of the great understatements of this decade.