Monday, March 29, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Section 15. Prohibition of interference.
10 (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act or any
11 other law to the contrary, the State of Illinois, any
12 municipality, county, township, school district, or other
13 political subdivision of the State, or any agency, department,
14 or division of any governmental entity shall not:
15 (1) deny or interfere with an individual's right to use
16 or refuse contraception; ..
17 (2) deny or interfere with a pregnant woman's right to
18 bear a child;
19 (3) deny or interfere with a pregnant woman's right to
20 terminate a pregnancy: (i) prior to the viability of the
21 fetus or (ii) when the abortion is necessary to protect the
22 life or health of the pregnant woman; or
23 (4) require any woman to terminate pregnancy without
24 her consent.
Good night! I wish some of these pro-aborts would get excited about something that actually improved people's health -- like toothpaste! We'd see NOW converted into a group of toothbrush-wielding women saying "No one's gonna stand between me and my rights!" Yeah, that'd be the day. Instead, they've jumped onto the band-wagon of not only making up a fake right to abortion, but trying to force others to pay for these abortions, penalizing doctors who don't, and protecting quacks who perform abortions from even the thought of a malpractice suit. Oh yeah, but it's all about women's health. I keep forgetting.
BTW -- I think it's time to invest in some t-shirts that say "abortion isn't healthcare." 'Cause if abortion is healthcare, then slavery is team-building.
The battle's lost, but the war has just begun.
I found an old radio show where they interviewed aviators during WWII. It's called "Your Army Air Forces" and it's at http://www.otr.net/?p=yaaf. These aren't interviews with guys six decades after the war. And they're not mock interviews with actors in the role of bomber pilots. You hear from men on-the-job, on-location, July through November, 1945. It's not odd to hear phrases like "We've been speaking to you from a B-29 on a return mission from the Japanese homeland..." Boy, wouldn't it be cool if we heard interviews like this now, with people fighting today! It really brings it home when you hear these men speak (and sing)!
Good night and God bless.
So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.
No study this week: I'm doing some on-site testing for my boss's company, so I will be out of town.
We'll meet again next week!
P.S. Here's some advice to "Never read a Bible verse. Instead, read a paragraph, at least. Always check the context. Observe the flow of thought. Then focus on the verse." ... "Only when you are properly informed by God's Word the way it is written in its context can you be transformed by it. Every piece becomes powerful when it's working together with the whole."
So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Johnson writes on his first page, "It is a joy to write his life, and to read about it." So very, very true. I don't know about you, but I never tire of reading about Churchill — of seeing film clips of him, of hearing stories about him. I feel the same way about Lincoln (no film clips, alas). Those lives are inexhaustible, inexhaustibly interesting, and enjoyable, and edifying...
Johnson, in his bio, taught me a new word: "jujube." Actually, the word is not defined in his book: I asked him about it. A jujube — am I the last to know? — is kind of a gummy candy or lozenge. Jelly bean-ish, maybe.
Churchill attended a session of the House of Commons in 1950 — and here's Johnson:
When Hugh Gaitskell, then the new chancellor of the exchequer, a "prissy Wykehamist" in Churchill's view, who stood on his dignity a little too often, was making a solemn economic statement, Churchill began to search his pockets for something. First his trousers. Then his jacket. Then his top pocket. Then all his waistcoat pockets. This extensive search gradually attracted the attention of the House. Eventually Gaitskell, aware he had lost his audience, snapped at Churchill in irritation, "Can I help you?" Churchill replied sweetly, "I am only looking for a jujube."
The House collapsed in laughter.
Friday, March 19, 2010
I urge you to reverse your decision and vote NO on the health care bill. In the final analysis, this bill is about control, and who has control over health decisions. Having seen members of my family struggling with terminal illness, I know that health care is a serious issue. A decision is complicated enough when it's between a patient and their doctor. It's unnecessarily politicized when an impersonal committee is calling the shots. Along with many other Americans, I prefer to make my own health decisions. That's why I'm urging you to vote NO on this bill, and uphold personal freedom and responsibility.
Hi, Congressman Driehaus!
Please vote NO on the current health care legislation. I'm studying to be a doctor, and I want the field of medicine to continue improving. I'm convinced that the best way this can happen is by giving patients real choices in their health care. Health care isn't one-size-fits all, and the more options a person has, the better they can choose the option that best fits them. Thank you for your commitment to allowing people to choose the health care options that best fit their needs. Just as the field of technology has thrived in a competitive, customer-driven environment, I anticipate that healthcare can thrive just as much, if people are allowed the freedom to choose.
Hi, Congresswoman Giffords!
I urge you to vote NO on the healthcare bill currently before the congress. A person's health is one of the most private aspects of their lives. I'm currently studying to be a doctor, and I've been carefully instructed to follow HIPAA guidelines so that I won't compromise a patient's privacy. The more I come to understand about this bill, I believe that, if enacted, it will compromise a patient's privacy. A patient won't be free to make a decision about his/her health with the aid of a doctor; an impersonal board will enter into the intimate details, and have the final authority in the matter. Why should such a committee intrude on the individual decision of a patient in conversation with his/her doctor? If this area of a person's life is not private, then nothing is.
Hi, Congressman Barrow!
Thank you very much for taking a stand against the current healthcare legislation. I'm studying to be a doctor, and when I graduate, I want to give my patients personalized treatment. I want them to have true-blue decision making ability in their healthcare, because I can't think of an area in life that's less "one-size-fits all." Thank you again for your commitment to retool healthcare without endorsing a blanket government plan.
Hi, Congressman Adler
Thanks so much for standing firmly against the current healthcare legislation. I'm currently in medical school, and I've very interested in the outcome of this bill. One of the hallmarks of the nurses and doctors I know is that they care about people. That's their bottom line. I'm so thankful for your work in this critical hour to preserve their ability to help their patients without the intrusion of other agencies. The decision-making process in the hospital room is complicated enough without adding committee decisions to the mix! I'm looking forward to practicing medicine in a land where the freedom of patients and doctors is valued.
Thank you again,
Hi, Congressman Boccieri!
I urge you to vote NO on the healthcare bill before the congress. Much of the criticism of the current healthcare system focuses on the money-driven decision process of private insurance companies. But will the money-driven decision processes of a public agency be any more compassionate? The solution is to transfer the decision-making authority back into the hands of the patient, freeing them from third-party payers. The technology revolution happened because consumers were free to spend their money on the product that best fit their needs. A healthcare revolution can happen in the same way. Please consider this third option, and vote NO on this healthcare bill.
Hi, Congressman Baird!
Thank you for holding strong against the current healthcare legislation! You are an example to all of us, showing us there's no substitute for freedom of conscience. I'm currently in medical school, and I've been watching this bill with interest for several months. I am very thankful for your commitment to finding the best option for Americans. I'm convinced that a healthcare revolution can happen in the same way that the technological revolution happened: that it will be driven forward as people freely spend their money on those options that best fit their needs. Health is one of the most private aspects of each one of our lives, and I look forward to practicing medicine in a country that upholds the freedom of each person to make personalized decisions about their own care, secure from the intrusion of any impersonal committee.
I urge you to rescind your decision, and vote NO on the health care bill. You and I have been born and raised in a country that values freedom. I'm sure that both of us want future generations to enjoy the kind of freedom we've enjoyed, too. While it may seem that the best way to protect health is to let the government handle health care, let's look at the example in the world of technology. A computer was once the size of a house and cost $100,000. Now one costs less than $10 and you and I have one in our cell phones! The freedom and competition that drove down the cost of computers while increasing their features can improve health care today. The answer is not in taking decisions away from everyday people like you and me, but by increasing our ability to make decisions about things that affect us, especially in issues as personal as health. Please vote for freedom. Please vote NO on the health care bill.
_________, medical student
I urge you to vote NO on the health care bill. I'm currently studying medicine here at the University of Illinois. Once I'm a licensed practitioner, I want to have the freedom to make decisions about my patients without having to consult a committee whose number one priority is money, and whose decisions can trump the decisions of patients and physicians. I'm going into medicine to celebrate and preserve life, not to deny care in the interest of a committee, or to end a life because it's the convenient thing to do. Please vote to uphold the freedom of patients and physicians. Please vote NO on the health care bill.
I urge you to vote NO on Obamacare. I'm studying to be a doctor, and what I want is the freedom to provide medical care to my patients. This bill would insert the government between the patient and his/her physician, complicating decision-making processes and making costs the ultimate concern. Not only that, but there's an incredible amount of pressure to expand the funding of abortions in this bill. The children who would be affected cannot ask that you speak up for them, but I ask you to. The bottom line in this shouldn't be politics or money -- it's got to be human life. That's why I'm asking you to vote NO on this bill, and stand up for freedom and life.
Thanks for taking the time to read this,
I urge you to vote NO on Obamacare. I'm currently in medical school, and I have no interest practicing medicine in an environment where my every decision is decided by a third party. This bill is fiscally irresponsible, and many, many of us everyday citizens want no part of it. Yes, healthcare can be reformed, but not in this way. Please do not vote to support abortions and subject the physician-patient relationship to the whims of an impersonal committee. Please vote NO. Thanks, ___________
What I'm curious to know is, why do liberals tend to flock to higher education while conservatives don't? And also, where was the tipping point when liberals first predominated on campuses?
Update Ethnicity and Race
| Recently the U.S. Department of Education revised its definitions of racial and ethnic classifications and modified the standards for reporting. Please complete the short verification form below. The information displayed was converted from the old definitions to the new standards.|
Instructions: First, identify whether or not your ethnicity is Hispanic or Latino. Then select one or more races by checking the appropriate boxes.
Note: If you do not submit a response in your current session, this form will be presented to you EVERY time you log into Web Self-Service until September 3, 2010. Once you have submitted a response this form will no longer display.
If you are both a student and faculty or staff member:
If you need assistance please contact the:
|What is your ethnicity?|
|Hispanic or Latino|
|Not Hispanic or Latino|
|Select one or more races to indicate what you consider yourself to be.|
|American Indian or Alaska Native||Asian||Black or African American||Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander||White|
| American Indian or Alaska Native || Asian || Black or African American || Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander ||White|
Saturday, March 13, 2010
"Of course, medical and dental schools have been practicing affirmative action for decades, but they've had trouble recruiting large numbers of minorities. Part of the problem is that African-Americans do not tend to gravitate to math and science (the solution to which is to be found in families and schools). Still, for the past few decades, less qualified minorities have been offered spots in medical schools, with the result that: 1) those minority professionals who would have qualified without affirmative action bear a stigma, and 2) less qualified minority graduates fail licensing exams at much higher rates than their classmates. Is it a service to the African-American or Hispanic communities to provide them with physicians and dentists who are less capable than others? Will it improve health outcomes for them to be treated by less qualified professionals?"
Like Mom and Dad were telling me last night, this quotas thing is going to be engrained in law if the healthcare bill passes. Triple UGH!
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
Browsing Fox News, I found these quote to be extremely disturbing. I expect the world to be worldly, but I expect those who say they support Scripture to support Scripture. You're killin' me!!!!
(March 9, 2010) "Abortion opponent Rev. Derrick Harkins, pastor of the Nineteenth St. Baptist Church in Washington, said he believes it ultimately could hurt the anti-abortion cause if the health care bill collapses because of the divisive issue.
"'You can't be blanket pro-life and not address those things that encourage women to make the choice of having an abortion,' said Harkins, a board member of World Relief, the humanitarian arm of the National Association of Evangelicals. 'If you are really looking to reduce the number of abortions in America, one of the things that will make that happen is to have comprehensive health care coverage.'"
That's so sick. Mr. Harkins, since when did you sell out to socialized medicine? Evangelicalism is not enough. You've got to realize that the church has got to be the church. This is a divisive issue because there's issues of right and wrong at stake. Satan hates it when we take a stand, and that's why he's working on us so we'll give in. Get a backbone!
How firmly are you against abortion if the slightest opposition makes you step down?
(March 9, 2010) "The Bible supported polygamy. A man could have many wives," Rabbi Arthur Blecher of Temple Beth Chai said. "Religious institutions have changed the concept of marriage over time, and the biblical precedent does not apply. Nobody in America is supporting polygamy."
If the Biblical precedent doesn't apply here, it doesn't apply anywhere. C'mon -- how can you say that the Bible support polygamy? I remember a Christian on campus telling me that once. Biblical marriage -- the kind of marriage God describes -- is the uniting of one man to one woman. End of story.
Folks, read Romans 1. We're trying to erradicate the presence and the knowledge of God. C'mon, church, be the church!!! It's time that we wake up before it's too late!! Don't be afraid. God is the one we're uniting with!! He knows the truth, and His Son Jesus -- not us -- is the champion!!!! We're not fighting this battle alone!!! God is fighting it, and we're just joining Him!!!!!
Monday, March 08, 2010
Robin Hood (starring Russell Crowe & Cate Blanchett, to be released May 14th, 2010)
Toy Story 3 (to be released June 18th, 2010)
Tron Legacy (to be released Dec. 17th, 2010)
WOW! I had no idea three good films were coming our way!
Though, I've got to ask. Is anyone else out there tired of redos of books/movies that just fail to get it right? Case in point: I saw Tim Burton's disturbing adaptation of Alice in Wonderland. Boy, let me tell you: Best Option -- stick to the books; Next Best Option -- stick to the original Disney cartoon. I knew something was off when Alice's tumble down the hole was no longer a peaceful sip of tea, a glance at a clock, or a resigned decrescendo. It became a painful, crazy crash-a-thon that she was lucky to get out of alive. From there on out, I quickly learned that this was not a journey I'd ever care to take again.
Virtually every review will tell you the visuals are stunning. They are. But what's wrong here? There's no heart, little plot, and way too much redundancy. Okay, I've got to correct myself. There's plenty of hearts, just no heart. Thanks to the Red Queen, hearts are everywhere. Since the plot was nothing engaging, I started looking for all the clever ways that hearts were included in the film. The one part in the movie (the one part!) was when Tweedledum and Tweedledee show up with hearts hastily spraypainted on their foreheads. Whoever did it was in a hurry, and we can clearly see the outline of the stencil square. As far as their being no heart, there's no connection between most of the characters, save one of the monsters and Alice. And between us and the characters? They're not endearing. They're creepy! Depp gives the Hatter character, but I can't get over my desire to run away.
Even though I wasn't the one running around Underland, I quickly grew weary. What little plot there is stems from Carroll's poem "The Jabberwocky," a poem I enjoy, but a poem that just doesn't make sense to build a movie upon. (Especially given Carroll's rich material in Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass). As happens each time I watch a loser film, I go into it with high expectations, and gradually lower them until by the end I'm just thankful the writer put in an ending.
Redundancy? Sure, many films have recurring phrases, words that take on new significance to a character through the course of the film. Problem was, without enough substance, the recurring phrases became incredibly distracting. How many times did the Hatter ask Alice about a raven and a writing desk? And yes, we realize that the best people are a little crazy. But when there's no substance between the repetitions of these significant phrases, we get tired of fluff. Really, Tim Burton. If you'd just opened Lewis Caroll's books for 10 minutes you could have found riveting (if nonsensical) conversations to draw on. Meat!
And not dead meat. What sickened me most were the macabre props. We have the supposed "good guy" -- the White Queen -- mixing potions out of literal "buttered fingers." Sure, it may have started out with Alice eating cakes and drinking drink me juice, but by the end of it, she's drinking dead Jabberwock blood straight. Gross me out! It seems that the White Queen is almost as creepy as her sister, the Red Queen. Not only is she way overdoing the face powder thing, but she makes a study of dead things and has no problem serving up human juices in her fare. As for the Red Queen, the cry that the original Disney cartoon rightly dismissed as an empty threat uttered by a acromegalic megalomaniac -- "Off with her head!" -- now becomes a death sentence. C'mon -- did anyone in the original Disney cartoon lose their head? Of course not. In this version, though, there's more decapitated heads around the Red Queen's court than intact ones. They're not even properly buried, but floating in the moat around the palace. And neither Alice nor we are spared the gory details. At one point, Alice, shrunken to the size of a mouse, has to cross the palace moat by stepping in or over the decapitated heads.
In Burton's hands, this story's innocence has been replaced by downright creepiness. With no good Queen, plenty of ghoul, but no heart, I'm giving this an emphatic two thumbs down.
Sunday, March 07, 2010
Saturday, March 06, 2010
To be honest, if you'd asked me yesterday what Michelle's favorite food was, I couldn't have told you. To get to know the lady a bit more, I looked up articles about her online. Today, thanks to reading the New Yorker's profile of the First Lady, in detail, I now know that her favorite food is macaroni and cheese.
I found out more than this, of course. I now know she is sometimes-refreshingly outspoken, she has an older brother, that she wore a yellow dress for a yearbook photo, that she went to prestigious schools, and that she's trained as a lawyer. What I was looking for, though, wasn't just the past. It was the outlook toward the future. What's Michelle's view of the world? After reading about her today, I have one thing to say: the woman is out of touch. There's just no other way to put it. She doesn't realize how much she has, and how much higher her standard of living was than the average American even before becoming the First Lady. She doesn't exude a sense of thankfulness; she exudes a sense of entitlement. And when someone's bitten by the entitlement bug, nothing's possible to be thankful for. All you can see is how much more you deserve, 'cause you're YOU!
When you fly to Copenhagen and tell the International Olympic Committee that you've sacrificed to ride a jet in absolute luxury to make a sales pitch (in which you make up a story about sitting in your dad's lap watching Carl Lewis play, though you would have been at least 20 years old at the time), and wait to be joined by your husband on his own little jet a few days later -- and you call that a sacrifice, there's something wrong with you. (See the text of the speech here).
When you try to tell low-income women in Ohio that you understand their plight because you, a Princeton- and Harvard-educated lawyer making millions each year -- are just like them, there's something wrong with you. Sure, they might not have had the school loans to pay off that you had, but that's 'cause they didn't get to go to college!
When you have a job in healthcare as a VP where your salary is $300k a year (where as soon as you leave, the jobs connected to your position are absorbed by others), and yet you try to act as if you're completely outside of corporate America and the healtchare business -- there's something wrong with you.
When in the sphere you had control over you've spearheaded an effort to dump low-income patients onto other hospitals, and yet you trumpet your committment to the heath of all patients across the nation (especially those getting obese), there's something wrong with you.
When you've flourished financially and personally in a country, enjoy celebrity status where people care about your favorite foods, your husband, your kids, you get interviews and fanmail, yet all you can look at is what that country didn't give you -- there's something wrong with you.
The woman is out of touch with reality.
Friday, March 05, 2010
"The term affirmative action refers to policies that take race, ethnicity, physical disabilities, military career, sex, or a person's parents' social class into consideration in an attempt to promote equal opportunity or increase ethnicity or other forms of diversity."
(Both definitions retrieved from Wikipedia, 3/5/10)
So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.
- Ayn Rand, in The New Intellectual
Wednesday, March 03, 2010
Tuesday, March 02, 2010
"Mr. President [of the Senate], the right to extended debate is never more important than when one party controls Congress and the White House. In these cases, the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government. . . . For 200 years, we've had the right to extended debate. It's not some 'procedural gimmick.' It's within the vision of the Founding Fathers of our country. They established a government so that no one person — and no single party — could have total control. Some in this Chamber want to throw out 217 years of Senate history in the quest for absolute power. They want to do away with Mr. Smith coming to Washington. They want to do away with the filibuster. They think they are wiser than our Founding Fathers. I doubt that's true" (Sen. Harry Reid, Nev., Senate floor speech, 5/18/05).
"You know, the Founders designed this system, as frustrating [as] it is, to make sure that there's a broad consensus before the country moves forward. . . . And what we have now is a president who . . . [h]asn't gotten his way. And that is now prompting, you know, a change in the Senate rules that really I think would change the character of the Senate forever. . . . And what I worry about would be you essentially have still two chambers — the House and the Senate — but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that's just not what the founders intended" (Sen. Barack Obama, Ill., remarks at the National Press Club, 4/26/05).
(As quoted by Jeffrey H. Anderson in "The Democrats on Reconciliation," National Review Online, 3/1/2010).
So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.
Monday, March 01, 2010
"If you cannot read all your books, at any rate handle, or, as it were, fondle them -- peer into them, let them fall open where they will, read from the first sentence that arrests the eye, set them back on their shelves with your own hands, arrange them on your own plan so that if you do not know what is in them, you will at least know where they are. Let them be your friends; let them at any rate be your acquaintances." -- Winston Churchill
(This is the quote on a poster showing a wealth of conservatives books. I've been reading the titles all the time I've been sitting here. Even more gloriously, I've found a treasure-trove of in-the-flesh conservative books hidden away in the upper cabinets here at the RSO complex. Finding that was the single most delightful discovery I've ever found. Now I know for sure that Heaven is a library).