Jeffrey Anderson at the Weekly Standard summarizes Rasmussen's Obamacare polling numbers of December 30:
"Rasmussen's health-care polling results since Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid orchestrated the Christmas Eve vote are full of undeniably bad news for Democrats. In roughly ascending order of bad news (if one is a Democrat)...
Likely voters oppose Obamacare by more than the (18-point) margin by which Ronald Reagan beat Walter Mondale: 58 percent to 39 percent.
There are far more likely voters who "strongly" oppose Obamacare (46 percent) than there are likely voters who support it even "somewhat" (39 percent).
Only 24 percent of likely voters think that the quality of health care would get better under Obamacare, while 54 percent think it would get worse -- a gap of 30 percent.
Only 13 percent of likely voters think that the cost of health would go down under Obamacare, while 63 percent think it would rise -- a gap of 50 percent.
Seniors oppose Obamacare by more than 2 to 1: 63 percent to 31 percent.
And the worst news of all for Democrats...
Independents oppose Obamacare by the head-turning tally of 66 percent to 28 percent."
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Thursday, December 31, 2009
HAPPY NEW YEAR
Where did the year go? Suddenly it is December ......again - and we realize that with giant strides we started in January and within a blink of an eye, 2009 is on its back!
A big "Thank You" to each and everyone of you, for any impact you had on my life this year. Especially for all the e-mails I received.......without you, I'm sure that 2009 would have been extremely boring.
May 2010 mark the beginning of a Tidal Wave of Love, Happiness and Bright Futures. And to those who need someone special, may you find that true love.
To those who need money, may your finances overflow
To those who need caring, may you find a good heart To those who need friends, I am still here for you .Thanks for being my friend!!
AND GOD'S BLESSING In 2010
(Thanks to a good friend in Canada!)
(Thanks to a good friend in Canada!)
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
The Cold Heart of Obamacare
Much of the press coverage of the Democrats' health care legislation, now fiercely embattled in Congress, focuses on the public option, the actual long-term costs and tax increases, and the amendment barring funding for abortions. But the cold heart of Obamacare is its overpowering of the doctor-patient relationship – eventually resulting in the premature ending of many Americans' lives for being too costly.
To call the dangers of this legislation "death panels" obscures the real-life consequences to Americans, not only the elderly, of a federal government-run health care bureaucracy. In the Senate bill, for instance, Medicare doctors whose treatments each year of certain, mostly elderly, patients costs more than a set government figure will be punished by losing part of their own incomes....
Moreover, President Barack Obama has made clear that eventually he desires a U.S. equivalent of the British National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), a commission that decides which drugs and procedures for patients are within the national budget for health care. The current baseline expenditure for each Briton, according to Michael Tanner, is $44,305 per year.
In this country, bureaucrats keeping tabs on patients – without actually seeing them and their condition – will mean, as Tanner notes, that "every time a doctor decides on a treatment, he or she would have to ask: 'Does the government think I'm doing this too much? Will I be penalized if I order this test?'
President Obama and his supporters in Congress insist that clinical studies prove how many needless and expensive tests and procedures are so often performed. But these are collective statistics. Individual patients are left out….
"Clinical studies routinely exclude patients with more than one medical condition and often the elderly or people on multiple medications. Conclusions about what works and what doesn't work change much too quickly for policy-makers to dictate clinical practice." Everyone, regardless of political party, should keep in mind: "If doctors and hospitals are rewarded for complying with government-mandated treatment measures or penalized if they do not comply, clearly, federal bureaucrats are directing health decisions," Groopman and Hartzband wrote.
If congressional Democrats succeed in passing their health care "reform" measure to send to the White House for President Obama's signature, then they and he are determining your health decisions….
We do not elect the president and Congress to decide how short our lives will be. That decision is way above their pay grades…
by NAT HENTOFF
Syndicated columnist in The Orange County Register
To call the dangers of this legislation "death panels" obscures the real-life consequences to Americans, not only the elderly, of a federal government-run health care bureaucracy. In the Senate bill, for instance, Medicare doctors whose treatments each year of certain, mostly elderly, patients costs more than a set government figure will be punished by losing part of their own incomes....
Moreover, President Barack Obama has made clear that eventually he desires a U.S. equivalent of the British National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), a commission that decides which drugs and procedures for patients are within the national budget for health care. The current baseline expenditure for each Briton, according to Michael Tanner, is $44,305 per year.
In this country, bureaucrats keeping tabs on patients – without actually seeing them and their condition – will mean, as Tanner notes, that "every time a doctor decides on a treatment, he or she would have to ask: 'Does the government think I'm doing this too much? Will I be penalized if I order this test?'
President Obama and his supporters in Congress insist that clinical studies prove how many needless and expensive tests and procedures are so often performed. But these are collective statistics. Individual patients are left out….
"Clinical studies routinely exclude patients with more than one medical condition and often the elderly or people on multiple medications. Conclusions about what works and what doesn't work change much too quickly for policy-makers to dictate clinical practice." Everyone, regardless of political party, should keep in mind: "If doctors and hospitals are rewarded for complying with government-mandated treatment measures or penalized if they do not comply, clearly, federal bureaucrats are directing health decisions," Groopman and Hartzband wrote.
If congressional Democrats succeed in passing their health care "reform" measure to send to the White House for President Obama's signature, then they and he are determining your health decisions….
We do not elect the president and Congress to decide how short our lives will be. That decision is way above their pay grades…
by NAT HENTOFF
Syndicated columnist in The Orange County Register
Saturday, December 26, 2009
More on Catholic Healthcare Association's Support for Abortion-Funding Bill
From yesterday's New York Times:
"WASHINGTON — In an apparent split with Roman Catholic bishops over the abortion-financing provisions of the proposed health care overhaul, the nation’s Catholic hospitals have signaled that they back the Senate’s compromise on the issue, raising hopes of breaking an impasse in Congress and stirring controversy within the church.
There is nothing "apparent" about it. The bishops have called the abortion-funding bill "morally unnacceptable."
According to the Times, the CHA was joined by the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, currently being investigated by the Vatican.
What's the impact? The Times continues:
"...in practical political terms, some Democrats — including some opponents of abortion rights — say that the Catholic hospitals’ relative openness to a compromise could play a pivotal role by providing political cover for Democrats who oppose abortion to support the health bill. Democrats and liberal groups quickly disseminated the association’s endorsement along with others from the nuns’ group, other Catholics and evangelicals."
and
"Abortion rights supporters said the signs of openness from Catholic groups were helping some Democratic abortion foes accept the Senate compromise."
“We have known for quite some time (so have we) that the Catholic hospitals and also the nuns are really breaking from these hard-line bishops and saying, ‘This really is our goal: to get more people into health care coverage,’ ” said Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado.
That is: they are willing to tolerate publically-funded abortion if that's what it takes to get the uninsured insurance.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
"WASHINGTON — In an apparent split with Roman Catholic bishops over the abortion-financing provisions of the proposed health care overhaul, the nation’s Catholic hospitals have signaled that they back the Senate’s compromise on the issue, raising hopes of breaking an impasse in Congress and stirring controversy within the church.
There is nothing "apparent" about it. The bishops have called the abortion-funding bill "morally unnacceptable."
According to the Times, the CHA was joined by the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, currently being investigated by the Vatican.
What's the impact? The Times continues:
"...in practical political terms, some Democrats — including some opponents of abortion rights — say that the Catholic hospitals’ relative openness to a compromise could play a pivotal role by providing political cover for Democrats who oppose abortion to support the health bill. Democrats and liberal groups quickly disseminated the association’s endorsement along with others from the nuns’ group, other Catholics and evangelicals."
and
"Abortion rights supporters said the signs of openness from Catholic groups were helping some Democratic abortion foes accept the Senate compromise."
“We have known for quite some time (so have we) that the Catholic hospitals and also the nuns are really breaking from these hard-line bishops and saying, ‘This really is our goal: to get more people into health care coverage,’ ” said Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado.
That is: they are willing to tolerate publically-funded abortion if that's what it takes to get the uninsured insurance.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Friday, December 25, 2009
Blessings at Christmas
“He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God's providence to lead him aright.” —Blaise Pascal (French mathematician, philosopher, physicist and writer, 1623-1662)
May the Lord show you the way and support you in fidelity to His law.
A Blessed Christmas!
May the Lord show you the way and support you in fidelity to His law.
A Blessed Christmas!
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Cardinal Laments Same-Sex "Marriage" Law
MEXICO CITY, DEC. 23, 2009 (Zenit.org).- After a law allowing same-sex "marriages" was passed by Mexico City's assembly, the archbishop of that region said that no matter the legislation, these unions will always be immoral.
Cardinal Norberto Rivera, archbishop of Mexico City, stated this after the city's legislative assembly voted Monday to legalize these unions, and to allow adoption by same-sex couples.
The mayor, Marcelo Ebrard, is expected to give the final approval of the measure.
It will never be a marriage, the prelate stated, but only a formal union between two persons of the same sex, and from the perspective of Christian values "it will always be immoral."
He stated that the opposition to homosexual "marriage" is not discrimination, but rather "recognizing and defending marriage as an essentially heterosexual institution."
"Our children and youth run the grave risk of seeing these types of unions as normal," the cardinal said, "and they can falsely understand that sexual differences are simply a personality type."
In this way, he said, they will fail to appreciate the duality of human sexuality, "which is a condition for procreation, and thus, for the conservation and development of humanity."
Cardinal Rivera continued: "Homosexual acts, in effect, close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not come from a true affective and sexual complementarity."
Cardinal Norberto Rivera, archbishop of Mexico City, stated this after the city's legislative assembly voted Monday to legalize these unions, and to allow adoption by same-sex couples.
The mayor, Marcelo Ebrard, is expected to give the final approval of the measure.
It will never be a marriage, the prelate stated, but only a formal union between two persons of the same sex, and from the perspective of Christian values "it will always be immoral."
He stated that the opposition to homosexual "marriage" is not discrimination, but rather "recognizing and defending marriage as an essentially heterosexual institution."
"Our children and youth run the grave risk of seeing these types of unions as normal," the cardinal said, "and they can falsely understand that sexual differences are simply a personality type."
In this way, he said, they will fail to appreciate the duality of human sexuality, "which is a condition for procreation, and thus, for the conservation and development of humanity."
Cardinal Rivera continued: "Homosexual acts, in effect, close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not come from a true affective and sexual complementarity."
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Obama on the Senate Bill
From the Washington Post's blog page:
"President Obama's Broken Health Care Promises"
"Every single criteri[on] I put forward is in this bill," said President Obama about health-care legislation.
Really? Obama promised not to raise taxes for anyone making less than $250,000. The Senate bill includes several tax increases that apply to people who make less than that.
Obama said he wanted a bill that would leave the status quo in place with respect to federal financing of abortion. The Senate bill provides federal funds to help pay for the cost of insurance plans that cover abortion.
Obama said there would be no benefit cuts. The bill cuts Medicare benefits, as the Congressional Budget Office has confirmed.
Obama said that health legislation shouldn't add a "dime" to the deficit. Unless you believe that Congress is going to allow steeper cuts in doctor payments than it has done before, it will add a lot more than a dime.
He said legislation would cut premiums. CBO reports that a lot of premiums will go up.
He said that legislation would reduce health-care costs. The administration's actuaries say it would cause national health-care spending to go up."
"President Obama's Broken Health Care Promises"
"Every single criteri[on] I put forward is in this bill," said President Obama about health-care legislation.
Really? Obama promised not to raise taxes for anyone making less than $250,000. The Senate bill includes several tax increases that apply to people who make less than that.
Obama said he wanted a bill that would leave the status quo in place with respect to federal financing of abortion. The Senate bill provides federal funds to help pay for the cost of insurance plans that cover abortion.
Obama said there would be no benefit cuts. The bill cuts Medicare benefits, as the Congressional Budget Office has confirmed.
Obama said that health legislation shouldn't add a "dime" to the deficit. Unless you believe that Congress is going to allow steeper cuts in doctor payments than it has done before, it will add a lot more than a dime.
He said legislation would cut premiums. CBO reports that a lot of premiums will go up.
He said that legislation would reduce health-care costs. The administration's actuaries say it would cause national health-care spending to go up."
NOW IS THE ONLY TIME YOU OWN
STORY NUMBER ONE
Many years ago, Al Capone virtually owned Chicago. Capone wasn't famous for anything heroic. He was notorious for enmeshing the windy city in everything from bootlegged booze and prostitution to murder.
Capone had a lawyer nicknamed 'Easy Eddie.' He was Capone's lawyer for a good reason. Eddie was very good! In fact, Eddie's skill at legal maneuvering kept Big Al out of jail for a long time.
To show his appreciation, Capone paid him very well. Not only was the money big, but Eddie got special dividends, as well. For instance, he and his family occupied a fenced-in mansion with live-in help and all of the conveniences of the day. The estate was so large that it filled an entire Chicago City block.
Eddie lived the high life of the Chicago mob and gave little consideration to the atrocity that went on around him.
Eddie did have one soft spot, however. He had a son that he loved dearly. Eddie saw to it that his young son had clothes, cars, and a good education. Nothing was withheld. Price was no object. And, despite his involvement with organized crime, Eddie even tried to teach him right from wrong. Eddie wanted his son to be a better man than he was.
Yet, with all his wealth and influence, there were two things he couldn't give his son; he couldn't pass on a good name or a good example.
One day, Easy Eddie reached a difficult decision. Easy Eddie wanted to rectify wrongs he had done.
He decided he would go to the authorities and tell the truth about Al 'Scarface' Capone, clean up his tarnished name, and offer his son some semblance of integrity. To do this, he would have to testify against The Mob, and he knew that the cost would be great.
So, he testified. Within the year, Easy Eddie's life ended in a blaze of gunfire on a lonely Chicago Street. But in his eyes, he had given his son the greatest gift he had to offer, at the greatest price he could ever pay. Police removed from his pockets a rosary, a crucifix, a religious medallion, and a poem clipped from a magazine.
The poem read: ‘The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop, at late or early hour Now is the only time you own. Live, love, toil with a will. Place no faith in time. For the clock may soon be still.'
STORY NUMBER TWO
World War II produced many heroes. One such man was Lieutenant Commander Butch O'Hare. He was a fighter pilot assigned to the aircraft carrier Lexington in the South Pacific. One day his entire squadron was sent on a mission. After he was airborne, he looked at his fuel gauge and realized that someone had forgotten to top off his fuel tank.
He would not have enough fuel to complete his mission and get back to his ship. His flight leader told him to return to the carrier. Reluctantly, he dropped out of formation and headed back to the fleet. As he was returning to the mother ship, he saw something that turned his blood cold; a squadron of Japanese aircraft was speeding its way toward the American fleet.
The American fighters were gone on a sortie, and the fleet was all but defenseless. He couldn't reach his squadron and bring them back in time to save the fleet. Nor could he warn the fleet of the approaching danger. There was only one thing to do. He must somehow divert them from the fleet.
Laying aside all thoughts of personal safety, he dove into the formation of Japanese planes. Wing-mounted 50 caliber's blazed as he charged in, attacking one surprised enemy plane and then another. Butch wove in and out of the now broken formation and fired at as many planes as possible until all his ammunition was finally spent.
Undaunted, he continued the assault. He dove at the planes, trying to clip a wing or tail in hopes of damaging as many enemy planes as possible, rendering them unfit to fly. Finally, the exasperated Japanese squadron took off in another direction. Deeply relieved, Butch O'Hare and his tattered fighter limped back to the carrier.
Upon arrival, he reported in and related the event surrounding his return. The film from the gun-camera mounted on his plane told the tale. It showed the extent of Butch's daring attempt to protect his fleet. He had, in fact, destroyed five enemy aircraft.
This took place on February 20, 1942 , and for that action Butch became the Navy's first Ace of WW II, and the first Naval Aviator to win the Congressional Medal of Honor. A year later Butch was killed in aerial combat at the age of 29. His home town would not allow the memory of this WW II hero to fade, and today, O'Hare Airport in Chicago is named in tribute to the courage of this great man.
So, the next time you find yourself at O'Hare International, give some thought to visiting Butch's memorial displaying his statue and his Medal of Honor. It's located between Terminals 1 and 2.
SO WHAT DO THESE TWO STORIES HAVE TO DO WITH EACH OTHER? Butch O'Hare was Easy Eddie's son.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Senate Vote Update: Catholic Heath Association SUPPORTS Senate Bill
I had not known this. Tom Peters reports that the Catholic Healthcare Association supports the Senate bill, including taxpayer funded abortions.
Back on August 6, Jack Smith at "The Catholic Key" wrote:
"Since the election and during the buildup toward health care reform, Sister Carol Keehan and the Catholic Health Association she leads have come up for sharp criticism from prolife advocates. For her public support of the president's pro-abortion appointees to her campaign to enact health care reform now, she is accused of being at odds with the USCCB and the prolife cause, both of which have serious reservations about current health care proposals."
On September 11, Jack took some heat from John Allen at the National Catholic Reporter for his column. Defending Sr. Keehan, Mr. Allen wrote:
"Over the years she’s emerged as an important spokesperson for Catholic health care, including the church’s unambiguously pro-life position."
Looks like Mr. Allen owes Mr. Smith an apology.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Back on August 6, Jack Smith at "The Catholic Key" wrote:
"Since the election and during the buildup toward health care reform, Sister Carol Keehan and the Catholic Health Association she leads have come up for sharp criticism from prolife advocates. For her public support of the president's pro-abortion appointees to her campaign to enact health care reform now, she is accused of being at odds with the USCCB and the prolife cause, both of which have serious reservations about current health care proposals."
On September 11, Jack took some heat from John Allen at the National Catholic Reporter for his column. Defending Sr. Keehan, Mr. Allen wrote:
"Over the years she’s emerged as an important spokesperson for Catholic health care, including the church’s unambiguously pro-life position."
Looks like Mr. Allen owes Mr. Smith an apology.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Obamacare Moves Forward in Senate. The "Party of Death" Lives up to It's Name
Democrats: all for. Republicans: all against. The Party of Death lives up to its name.
The vote reminded me of the statement columnist Micheal Sean Winters made on July 14, 2009 in the Jesuit America magazine:
"To be clear: I have never voted for a Republican in my life. My mother told me my right hand would wither and fall to the ground if I did. But, if the President or my representatives in Congress support federal funding for abortion in any way, shape or form, I will never vote for them again and I might risk my right hand in the next election by voting for their opponent.
So, call your Senators and Representatives. Call the White House. Many of us pro-life Democrats have given the President the benefit of the doubt on the abortion issue because of his repeated commitment to trying to lower the abortion rate, a commitment he reiterated to Pope Benedict XVI last week. All the good will he has earned among Catholic swing voters, and all the arguments on his behalf progressive Catholics have mounted, all could be swept away if abortion is part of a federal option in health care. Politics is the art of compromise, but on this point, there can be none."
I'm waiting to hear what "progressive Catholics" say about this vote.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
The vote reminded me of the statement columnist Micheal Sean Winters made on July 14, 2009 in the Jesuit America magazine:
"To be clear: I have never voted for a Republican in my life. My mother told me my right hand would wither and fall to the ground if I did. But, if the President or my representatives in Congress support federal funding for abortion in any way, shape or form, I will never vote for them again and I might risk my right hand in the next election by voting for their opponent.
So, call your Senators and Representatives. Call the White House. Many of us pro-life Democrats have given the President the benefit of the doubt on the abortion issue because of his repeated commitment to trying to lower the abortion rate, a commitment he reiterated to Pope Benedict XVI last week. All the good will he has earned among Catholic swing voters, and all the arguments on his behalf progressive Catholics have mounted, all could be swept away if abortion is part of a federal option in health care. Politics is the art of compromise, but on this point, there can be none."
I'm waiting to hear what "progressive Catholics" say about this vote.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Obamacare, San Francisco Style
On December 16, the left-leaning SF Weekly ran a long story about the insanity of San Francisco government: "The Worst-Run Big City in the U.S."
It's well worth reading. Here's a short excerpt showing what happens when the government get's its hand on healthcare:
"Back in 1999, San Francisco voters were pitched a $299 million bond to "save" Laguna Honda Hospital as a 1,200-bed facility for the city's frail, elderly population. Who doesn't want to help the frail and elderly? A decade later, the Department of Public Works project is still incomplete, its price tag has swelled by nearly $200 million, and the hospital is slated to hold only 780 beds — so the city is going massively overbudget to construct a hospital only 65 percent as large as promised, which is four years behind schedule.
Amazingly, this gets worse. After securing the bond funding to save Laguna Honda as a hospital for the elderly, the Department of Public Health began transferring younger, often dangerous and mentally ill patients there and mixing them among the old people. This went about as well as you'd think: A 2006 state and federal licensing survey noted numerous instances of elder abuse, staff abuse, and patients toting drugs, alcohol, and even loaded weapons. One patient was assaulted four times in four months; to address this problem, staff erected signs reading 'No Hitting.'"
It's well worth reading. Here's a short excerpt showing what happens when the government get's its hand on healthcare:
"Back in 1999, San Francisco voters were pitched a $299 million bond to "save" Laguna Honda Hospital as a 1,200-bed facility for the city's frail, elderly population. Who doesn't want to help the frail and elderly? A decade later, the Department of Public Works project is still incomplete, its price tag has swelled by nearly $200 million, and the hospital is slated to hold only 780 beds — so the city is going massively overbudget to construct a hospital only 65 percent as large as promised, which is four years behind schedule.
Amazingly, this gets worse. After securing the bond funding to save Laguna Honda as a hospital for the elderly, the Department of Public Health began transferring younger, often dangerous and mentally ill patients there and mixing them among the old people. This went about as well as you'd think: A 2006 state and federal licensing survey noted numerous instances of elder abuse, staff abuse, and patients toting drugs, alcohol, and even loaded weapons. One patient was assaulted four times in four months; to address this problem, staff erected signs reading 'No Hitting.'"
Friday, December 18, 2009
"Catholics Come Home" Initiative
Nice video from CatholisComeHome.org:
I had not heard of this before, that I remember, but it has been around for a while. The video reminds us that our civilization is the work of the Church, which I liked a lot. The Diocese of Sacramento (and others around the U.S.) will be using a variation of this video.
Our San Francisco CBS Affiliate, KPIX TV, came by today to interview Fr. John Itzaina, the pastor of Saints Peter and Paul. You can see the clip here, which also has nice shots of the church, and 94-year old Fr. Austin Conterno celebrating the Mass.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
I had not heard of this before, that I remember, but it has been around for a while. The video reminds us that our civilization is the work of the Church, which I liked a lot. The Diocese of Sacramento (and others around the U.S.) will be using a variation of this video.
Our San Francisco CBS Affiliate, KPIX TV, came by today to interview Fr. John Itzaina, the pastor of Saints Peter and Paul. You can see the clip here, which also has nice shots of the church, and 94-year old Fr. Austin Conterno celebrating the Mass.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Virginia Infanticide Case
Diogenese does justice to the story out of Virginia about the Mother who killed her child and is "free as a bird."
"A woman in Virginia suffocated her newborn last week. Because the mother and child were still connected by the umbilicus and placenta at the time the former dispatched the latter, the act is considered no different from clipping a toenail. You go, girl!
Momma is free as the breeze:
“In the state of Virginia as long as the umbilical cord is attached and the placenta is still in the mother, if the baby comes out alive the mother can do whatever she wants to with that baby to kill it,” said Investigator Tracy Emerson. “She could shoot the baby, stab the baby. As long as it’s still attached to her in some form by umbilical cord or something it’s no crime in the state of Virginia.”
The news story attributes the authorities’ inability to prosecute the murder to a 'loophole in state law.' But it isn’t a loophole. It’s a carefully crafted legal fiction whose sole purpose is to declare the unborn child as something less than human in order to permit its mother to kill it...."
"Our society tolerates the gross incoherence of these legal fictions because the fictions themselves are necessary lies, necessary to the public justification of abortion. You'll notice that even the journalists find the business difficult to report without knotting themselves in contradictions. Of this case they write, 'Because the mother and baby were still connected by the umbilical cord and placenta, state law does not consider the baby to be a separate life.' They're saying, in short, state law does not consider the baby to be a baby.
Put that way, something looks wrong."
"A woman in Virginia suffocated her newborn last week. Because the mother and child were still connected by the umbilicus and placenta at the time the former dispatched the latter, the act is considered no different from clipping a toenail. You go, girl!
Momma is free as the breeze:
“In the state of Virginia as long as the umbilical cord is attached and the placenta is still in the mother, if the baby comes out alive the mother can do whatever she wants to with that baby to kill it,” said Investigator Tracy Emerson. “She could shoot the baby, stab the baby. As long as it’s still attached to her in some form by umbilical cord or something it’s no crime in the state of Virginia.”
The news story attributes the authorities’ inability to prosecute the murder to a 'loophole in state law.' But it isn’t a loophole. It’s a carefully crafted legal fiction whose sole purpose is to declare the unborn child as something less than human in order to permit its mother to kill it...."
"Our society tolerates the gross incoherence of these legal fictions because the fictions themselves are necessary lies, necessary to the public justification of abortion. You'll notice that even the journalists find the business difficult to report without knotting themselves in contradictions. Of this case they write, 'Because the mother and baby were still connected by the umbilical cord and placenta, state law does not consider the baby to be a separate life.' They're saying, in short, state law does not consider the baby to be a baby.
Put that way, something looks wrong."
Nice to See One Man Making a Difference
Senator Ben Nelson is fighting his entire party.
The AP reports on the staunchly pro-life Nebraska Democrat:
"A moderate Democrat whose vote could be crucial said Thursday an attempted Senate compromise on abortion is unsatisfactory, raising doubts about whether the chamber can pass President Barack Obama's health care overhaul by Christmas.
"As it is, without modifications, the language concerning abortion is not sufficient," Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, a key holdout on the health care bill, said in a statement after first making his concerns known to Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev."
It is certainly nice to see one man fighting for his principles. Senator Nelson says he has other problems with the bill besides abortion, too.
The AP reports on the staunchly pro-life Nebraska Democrat:
"A moderate Democrat whose vote could be crucial said Thursday an attempted Senate compromise on abortion is unsatisfactory, raising doubts about whether the chamber can pass President Barack Obama's health care overhaul by Christmas.
"As it is, without modifications, the language concerning abortion is not sufficient," Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson, a key holdout on the health care bill, said in a statement after first making his concerns known to Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev."
It is certainly nice to see one man fighting for his principles. Senator Nelson says he has other problems with the bill besides abortion, too.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Abortion ? Health Bill?
E. Christian Brugger, a senior fellow in ethics at the Culture of Life Foundation, published an essay that gives a careful analysis of the bills and laws in question.He noted that President Barack Obama himself made a false statement to Congress on Sept. 9 when he said, "[U]nder our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.
"The falsity of the statement, Brugger explained, "is cleverly disguised."At the end of his analysis, the ethicist concludes: "[A]bortion will be available for federal funding under both the private option and the government subsidized exchange options."Presently, because of the Hyde Amendment, only abortions in extreme situations -- e.g., rape, incest, threat to the life of the mother -- can be federally funded.
"The falsity of the statement, Brugger explained, "is cleverly disguised."At the end of his analysis, the ethicist concludes: "[A]bortion will be available for federal funding under both the private option and the government subsidized exchange options."Presently, because of the Hyde Amendment, only abortions in extreme situations -- e.g., rape, incest, threat to the life of the mother -- can be federally funded.
Monday, December 14, 2009
VATICAN INVESTIGATION
The Vatican is conducting a doctrinal investigation of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious. For the past forty years, the LCWR has deliberately shaped religious life along a path of dissent and apostasy, emerging now finally as an advocacy group for “post-Christian” patterns of life.
It is difficult to imagine how the Vatican has allowed the manifest rebellion and catastrophic decline of female religious communities in the United States to continue for so long. It has been apparent from the first that women religious were hardest hit by the upheaval in values caused by “sexual liberation” and the rapid secularization of culture beginning in the 1960s. Indeed, the fundamentally anti-Christian commitments of many mainstream religious communities was already crystal clear by the 1970s, and after a long generation of ignoring and resisting every effort of the Vatican to bring order out of the chaos, the LCWR—which has always represented the vanguard of the deChristianization of religious life—is finally openly admitting that it is giving up not only on the Church but on Christ Himself.
The sordid history of the LCWR has been cogently recounted by Ann Carey in a fine article in the July 2009 issue of Catholic World Report: Post-Christian Sisters. If you read it, you’ll gasp again at the monumental failure of discipline on the part of Church leadership over the same long generation. This consistent failure to discipline is a scandal of huge proportions in itself, as I have often noted. What might have been handled far more simply, and with the support of many women religious, in the early 1970’s will now be almost impossible to manage without allowing many communities to die, or indeed actively suppressing them.
It has long since been obvious that the Leadership Conference of Women Religious should be disbanded (which, even if it persisted in its defiance, would eliminate its official connection with the Church). It is noteworthy that the doctrinal investigation of the LCWR is proceeding at the same time as the Apostolic Visitation of female religious communities. Readers may recall that two major visitations of American seminaries did help to get priestly formation back on track, but the biggest problems there continue to be with (male) religious institutes. The fact is that ecclesiastical governance and infrastructure facilitates responsiveness to Rome on the part of bishops far more than on the part of religious superiors. Moreover, typical dioceses never became as sick as female religious communities. One wonders, therefore, whether some limbs will have to be amputated to preserve the life of the body as a whole.
In 1992 Rome set up an alternative Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious to accommodate those who could no longer stomach the LCWR. The fact that only ten percent of female orders have since affiliated with the CMSWR is an outrageous testimony to the scope of the problem, though one would love to know what percentage of religious under age 40 are represented by that ten percent. Sadly, as has been typical in our time, what Rome has failed to do has made things worse. In the matter of women religious, Pope Benedict XVI may now have few options left.
Jeffrey Mirus - President of CatholicCulture.org
It is difficult to imagine how the Vatican has allowed the manifest rebellion and catastrophic decline of female religious communities in the United States to continue for so long. It has been apparent from the first that women religious were hardest hit by the upheaval in values caused by “sexual liberation” and the rapid secularization of culture beginning in the 1960s. Indeed, the fundamentally anti-Christian commitments of many mainstream religious communities was already crystal clear by the 1970s, and after a long generation of ignoring and resisting every effort of the Vatican to bring order out of the chaos, the LCWR—which has always represented the vanguard of the deChristianization of religious life—is finally openly admitting that it is giving up not only on the Church but on Christ Himself.
The sordid history of the LCWR has been cogently recounted by Ann Carey in a fine article in the July 2009 issue of Catholic World Report: Post-Christian Sisters. If you read it, you’ll gasp again at the monumental failure of discipline on the part of Church leadership over the same long generation. This consistent failure to discipline is a scandal of huge proportions in itself, as I have often noted. What might have been handled far more simply, and with the support of many women religious, in the early 1970’s will now be almost impossible to manage without allowing many communities to die, or indeed actively suppressing them.
It has long since been obvious that the Leadership Conference of Women Religious should be disbanded (which, even if it persisted in its defiance, would eliminate its official connection with the Church). It is noteworthy that the doctrinal investigation of the LCWR is proceeding at the same time as the Apostolic Visitation of female religious communities. Readers may recall that two major visitations of American seminaries did help to get priestly formation back on track, but the biggest problems there continue to be with (male) religious institutes. The fact is that ecclesiastical governance and infrastructure facilitates responsiveness to Rome on the part of bishops far more than on the part of religious superiors. Moreover, typical dioceses never became as sick as female religious communities. One wonders, therefore, whether some limbs will have to be amputated to preserve the life of the body as a whole.
In 1992 Rome set up an alternative Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious to accommodate those who could no longer stomach the LCWR. The fact that only ten percent of female orders have since affiliated with the CMSWR is an outrageous testimony to the scope of the problem, though one would love to know what percentage of religious under age 40 are represented by that ten percent. Sadly, as has been typical in our time, what Rome has failed to do has made things worse. In the matter of women religious, Pope Benedict XVI may now have few options left.
Jeffrey Mirus - President of CatholicCulture.org
Friday, December 11, 2009
Weak-kneed Leader
Representative Patrtick Kennedy’s announcement that he’s “not going to indulge in this debate any longer,” referring to his rejection of Catholic Church beliefs, was reminiscent of a strategy George Aiken floated at the height of the Vietnam War.
“Declare victory and pull out!” the late Vermont senator suggested.
Speaking at a Brown University forum Monday evening, Kennedy said he was pulling out, having milked his confrontation with Bishop Thomas J. Tobin for all it was worth after igniting it by indiscreetly disclosing a private communication he had received from the latter.
Tobin had informed him it would be inappropriate to receive Communion as a champion of abortion.
Kennedy, like other pols before him, thus discovered it was much easier to profess his faith than it was to actually practice it, so he decided to cast himself as a martyr. Why not? There’s never been a better time to beat up on the Catholic Church. It plays well to malcontents and dissidents who’ve long resisted its teachings, and to activists and anarchists who resent its disapproval of their agendas.
What’s more, everyone knows the Catholic Church is still reeling from the scandal that erupted in its midst. Indeed, it remains such a slow-moving target that WBZ radio, never known for its spirituality, conducted a poll asking its listeners whether they felt Kennedy was worthy of receiving Communion.
It brings to mind a puckish thought from Ronald Reagan: “I have wondered at times what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress.”
No one likes to be told no, which explains why God’s been told by many to take a hike today.
“Militant secular forces have succeeded in making the very mention of a divine presence in human affairs illegal,” Rabbi David Neiman, a former BC theology professor, noted. “This has led inevitably to the notion that the idea of sin has no place in our society. Without moral law, everything is permitted.”
Maybe Kennedy was right, telling the bishop to pass the Communion and mind his own business.
But the rabbi, who’s a bit wiser, gets the nod here. “No” is a word this society needs to hear a little more often because everything is obviously not OK, no matter what our weak-kneed leaders prefer us to believe.
Joe Fitzgerald in the Boston Hearld
“Declare victory and pull out!” the late Vermont senator suggested.
Speaking at a Brown University forum Monday evening, Kennedy said he was pulling out, having milked his confrontation with Bishop Thomas J. Tobin for all it was worth after igniting it by indiscreetly disclosing a private communication he had received from the latter.
Tobin had informed him it would be inappropriate to receive Communion as a champion of abortion.
Kennedy, like other pols before him, thus discovered it was much easier to profess his faith than it was to actually practice it, so he decided to cast himself as a martyr. Why not? There’s never been a better time to beat up on the Catholic Church. It plays well to malcontents and dissidents who’ve long resisted its teachings, and to activists and anarchists who resent its disapproval of their agendas.
What’s more, everyone knows the Catholic Church is still reeling from the scandal that erupted in its midst. Indeed, it remains such a slow-moving target that WBZ radio, never known for its spirituality, conducted a poll asking its listeners whether they felt Kennedy was worthy of receiving Communion.
It brings to mind a puckish thought from Ronald Reagan: “I have wondered at times what the Ten Commandments would have looked like if Moses had run them through the U.S. Congress.”
No one likes to be told no, which explains why God’s been told by many to take a hike today.
“Militant secular forces have succeeded in making the very mention of a divine presence in human affairs illegal,” Rabbi David Neiman, a former BC theology professor, noted. “This has led inevitably to the notion that the idea of sin has no place in our society. Without moral law, everything is permitted.”
Maybe Kennedy was right, telling the bishop to pass the Communion and mind his own business.
But the rabbi, who’s a bit wiser, gets the nod here. “No” is a word this society needs to hear a little more often because everything is obviously not OK, no matter what our weak-kneed leaders prefer us to believe.
Joe Fitzgerald in the Boston Hearld
Thursday, December 10, 2009
"Why Do They Have Whale Music at the Mass?"
This week's America magazine has an article by Father Michael G. Ryan, since 1988 pastor of St. James Cathedral in Seattle. Fr. Ryan is troubled by the new liturgical translations coming out of Rome:
"It has become painfully clear that the liturgy, the prayer of the people, is being used as a tool—some would even say as a weapon—to advance specific agendas."
Yeah, that's been painfully clear for about 46 years.
Father suggests: "...what if we were to trust our best instincts and defend our people from this ill-conceived disruption of their prayer life?" and directs people to a website where they can recommend the translations be put on hold.
I'm not sure who Father means by "we" but speaking of "ill-conceived disruptions," I will say St. James Cathedral has the distinction of being the church with absolutely the worst Mass I have ever attended. In 2008, I was in Seattle, donating a kidney to my cousin, who has diabetes. The hospital was only two blocks away from St. James. Two days before the operation was Pentecost. The Mass was a theatrical production that I won't even go into, except to say that the choirmaster had composed some special music "in the spirit of Pentecost." My cousin's daughter, in her twenties and anything but a traditionalist, leaned over and asked me "Why do they have whale music at the Mass?"
I went the next Sunday, too, during my recuperation. It didn't seem as bad, but of course by then I was on opiates.
h/t Good Jesuit, Bad Jesuit
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
"It has become painfully clear that the liturgy, the prayer of the people, is being used as a tool—some would even say as a weapon—to advance specific agendas."
Yeah, that's been painfully clear for about 46 years.
Father suggests: "...what if we were to trust our best instincts and defend our people from this ill-conceived disruption of their prayer life?" and directs people to a website where they can recommend the translations be put on hold.
I'm not sure who Father means by "we" but speaking of "ill-conceived disruptions," I will say St. James Cathedral has the distinction of being the church with absolutely the worst Mass I have ever attended. In 2008, I was in Seattle, donating a kidney to my cousin, who has diabetes. The hospital was only two blocks away from St. James. Two days before the operation was Pentecost. The Mass was a theatrical production that I won't even go into, except to say that the choirmaster had composed some special music "in the spirit of Pentecost." My cousin's daughter, in her twenties and anything but a traditionalist, leaned over and asked me "Why do they have whale music at the Mass?"
I went the next Sunday, too, during my recuperation. It didn't seem as bad, but of course by then I was on opiates.
h/t Good Jesuit, Bad Jesuit
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
The Manhattan Declaration
"Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense. In this declaration we affirm: 1) the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life; 2) marriage as a conjugal union of man and woman, ordained by God from the creation, and historically understood by believers and non-believers alike, to be the most basic institution in society and; 3) religious liberty, which is grounded in the character of God, the example of Christ, and the inherent freedom and dignity of human beings created in the divine image."Click on the image above to sign!
Canadian Crackpot Sounds Like John Holdren in Drag
Diane Francis, writing in Canada's Financial Post makes the same arguments Obama's science czar John Holdren made in "Ecoscience." Excerpts:
"The Real Inconvenient Truth"
The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child policy
"A planetary law, such as China's one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days....
The fix is simple. It's dramatic. And yet the world's leaders don't even have this on their agenda in Copenhagen. Instead there will be photo ops, posturing, optics, blah-blah-blah about climate science and climate fraud, announcements of giant wind farms, then cap-and-trade subsidies.
None will work unless a China one-child policy is imposed.Unfortunately, there are powerful opponents. Leaders of the world's big fundamentalist religions preach in favor of procreation and fiercely oppose birth control...
For those who balk at the notion that governments should control family sizes, just wait until the growing human population turns twice as much pastureland into desert as is now the case, or when the Amazon is gone, the elephants disappear for good and wars erupt over water, scarce resources and spatial needs."
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
"The Real Inconvenient Truth"
The whole world needs to adopt China's one-child policy
"A planetary law, such as China's one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate currently, which is one million births every four days....
The fix is simple. It's dramatic. And yet the world's leaders don't even have this on their agenda in Copenhagen. Instead there will be photo ops, posturing, optics, blah-blah-blah about climate science and climate fraud, announcements of giant wind farms, then cap-and-trade subsidies.
None will work unless a China one-child policy is imposed.Unfortunately, there are powerful opponents. Leaders of the world's big fundamentalist religions preach in favor of procreation and fiercely oppose birth control...
For those who balk at the notion that governments should control family sizes, just wait until the growing human population turns twice as much pastureland into desert as is now the case, or when the Amazon is gone, the elephants disappear for good and wars erupt over water, scarce resources and spatial needs."
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
New Video Features Walk for Life West Coast 2010 Speakers
That would be Lila Rose, of Live Action, and Abby Johnson, the former Director of Planned Parenthood in Bryant, Texas.
Lila continues to nail Planned Parenthood:
Both women will be speaking at the Sixth Annual Walk for Life West Coast here in San Francisco on January 23, 2010.
Lila continues to nail Planned Parenthood:
Both women will be speaking at the Sixth Annual Walk for Life West Coast here in San Francisco on January 23, 2010.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Senate Rejects Nelson Amendment
Healthcare bill now includes taxpayer funded abortion. Time to kill it.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
"New Jesuit Review"
A new Jesuit publication has just released its first issue. It's called, aptly enough, "The New Jesuit Review"
"The New Jesuit Review has as its goals the recovery of Jesuit spirituality from its authentic sources and reflection by contemporary Jesuits on its significance for their lives. The writings of St. Ignatius and the First Companions, the lives of Jesuit saints and martyrs, and classics of Jesuit spirituality are examined in the spirit of Perfectae Caritatis, the Decree on the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life of the Second Vatican Council:
It redounds to the good of the Church that institutes have their own particular characteristics and work. Therefore let their founders' spirit and special aims they set before them as well as their sound traditions -- all of which make up the patrimony of each institute -- be faithfully held in honor. (Perfectae Caritatis, 2)"
In addition to the articles, each issue of the NJR will feature excerpts from the Founding Documents of the Society, the works of St. Ignatius and other Jesuit saints, and classic works on Ignatian spirituality.
God bless 'em!
h/t Father Z.
"The New Jesuit Review has as its goals the recovery of Jesuit spirituality from its authentic sources and reflection by contemporary Jesuits on its significance for their lives. The writings of St. Ignatius and the First Companions, the lives of Jesuit saints and martyrs, and classics of Jesuit spirituality are examined in the spirit of Perfectae Caritatis, the Decree on the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life of the Second Vatican Council:
It redounds to the good of the Church that institutes have their own particular characteristics and work. Therefore let their founders' spirit and special aims they set before them as well as their sound traditions -- all of which make up the patrimony of each institute -- be faithfully held in honor. (Perfectae Caritatis, 2)"
In addition to the articles, each issue of the NJR will feature excerpts from the Founding Documents of the Society, the works of St. Ignatius and other Jesuit saints, and classic works on Ignatian spirituality.
God bless 'em!
h/t Father Z.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Why We Love John Heard
In the November 13 issue of America magazine, Father James Martin, SJ has an article called "What should a gay Catholic Do?" Father Martin lists all the things the Church says same-sex attracted Catholics can't do, and then asks:"What kind of life remains for these brothers and sisters in Christ, those who wish to follow the teachings of the church?"
On Dreadnought, John Heard answers:
"...as millions of same sex attracted men and women will attest, the Church offers same sex attracted individuals the same life she offers all men and women: eternal life via the Cross. Those who go about their daily lives, those who go to Mass, and struggle to model obedience, and fail, and try again – these are Christians. That is all, and miraculously. We understand, indeed, that a Christian is not to look for life beyond obedience, rather obedience – even obedience unto death on the Cross – is true life."
Read both articles.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Thursday, December 3, 2009
More Good News: Ninth Circuit Says Prop 8 Case Judge "Probably Violated Constitution"
A late breaking story from the San Francisco Chronicle.
A three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has suspended Judge Vaughn Walker's order that backers of Prop 8 had to disclose their internal campaign communications. Even the ACLU thought Judge Walker was out of bounds.
"Prop. 8 backers likely to win disclosure fight
(12-03) 17:48 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge probably violated the Constitution when he ordered backers of Proposition 8, the initiative that banned same-sex marriage in California, to give their campaign strategy documents to opponents trying to overturn the measure, an appeals court said Thursday.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit of Appeals in San Francisco suspended the order that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker issued in October against backers of Prop. 8, which state voters approved in November 2008.
Walker said lawyers for two same-sex couples and a gay-rights group were entitled to see internal memos and e-mails between Yes on 8 strategists to look for evidence that the campaign had sought to exploit anti-gay bias. Such evidence would strengthen the plaintiffs' claim that the ballot measure was discriminatory and thus unconstitutional.
Prop. 8 sponsors argued that their discussions were constitutionally protected and that orders such as Walker's would discourage candid communications in political campaigns.
The three-judge appeals court panel said the sponsors "have made a strong showing that they are likely to succeed" in their arguments. The court, which held a hearing on Walker's order on Tuesday, said it would issue a ruling soon."
A three-judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has suspended Judge Vaughn Walker's order that backers of Prop 8 had to disclose their internal campaign communications. Even the ACLU thought Judge Walker was out of bounds.
"Prop. 8 backers likely to win disclosure fight
(12-03) 17:48 PST SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge probably violated the Constitution when he ordered backers of Proposition 8, the initiative that banned same-sex marriage in California, to give their campaign strategy documents to opponents trying to overturn the measure, an appeals court said Thursday.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit of Appeals in San Francisco suspended the order that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker issued in October against backers of Prop. 8, which state voters approved in November 2008.
Walker said lawyers for two same-sex couples and a gay-rights group were entitled to see internal memos and e-mails between Yes on 8 strategists to look for evidence that the campaign had sought to exploit anti-gay bias. Such evidence would strengthen the plaintiffs' claim that the ballot measure was discriminatory and thus unconstitutional.
Prop. 8 sponsors argued that their discussions were constitutionally protected and that orders such as Walker's would discourage candid communications in political campaigns.
The three-judge appeals court panel said the sponsors "have made a strong showing that they are likely to succeed" in their arguments. The court, which held a hearing on Walker's order on Tuesday, said it would issue a ruling soon."
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Good News: New York legislators reject same-sex "marriage."
The vote to reject was bipartisan: 30 Republicans 8 Democrats. All 24 legislators voting to legalize same-sex "marriage" were Democrats.
From the AP:
"ALBANY, N.Y. — New York lawmakers rejected a bill Wednesday that would have made their state the sixth to allow gay marriage, stunning advocates who weathered a similar decision by Maine voters just last month.
The New York measure needed 32 votes to pass and failed by a wider-than-expected margin, falling eight votes short in a 24-38 decision by the state Senate. The Assembly had earlier approved the bill, and Gov. David Paterson, perhaps the bill's strongest advocate, had pledged to sign it."
Richard Barnes, Executive Director of the New York State Catholic Conference, said:
“While the Catholic Church rejects unjust discrimination against homosexual men and women, there is no question that marriage by its nature is the union of one man and one woman. Advocates for same-sex ‘marriage’ have attempted to portray their cause as inevitable. However, it has become clear that Americans continue to understand marriage the way it has always been understood, and New York is not different in that regard. This is a victory for the basic building block of our society.”
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
From the AP:
"ALBANY, N.Y. — New York lawmakers rejected a bill Wednesday that would have made their state the sixth to allow gay marriage, stunning advocates who weathered a similar decision by Maine voters just last month.
The New York measure needed 32 votes to pass and failed by a wider-than-expected margin, falling eight votes short in a 24-38 decision by the state Senate. The Assembly had earlier approved the bill, and Gov. David Paterson, perhaps the bill's strongest advocate, had pledged to sign it."
Richard Barnes, Executive Director of the New York State Catholic Conference, said:
“While the Catholic Church rejects unjust discrimination against homosexual men and women, there is no question that marriage by its nature is the union of one man and one woman. Advocates for same-sex ‘marriage’ have attempted to portray their cause as inevitable. However, it has become clear that Americans continue to understand marriage the way it has always been understood, and New York is not different in that regard. This is a victory for the basic building block of our society.”
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
What's Wrong With ObamaCare?
Here's What Others Are Saying.
Conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer recently said ObamaCare "should not only be defeated. It should be immolated, its ashes scattered over the Senate swimming pool." Calling ObamaCare an "overregulated, overbureaucratized system of surpassing arbitrariness and inefficiency," Krauthammer points out that the Senate and House versions of ObamaCare together are over "4000-plus" pages and call for "118 new boards, commissions and programs."
The Wall Street Journal said the Pelosi version of ObamaCare "may well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced." According to the Journal: "Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually all medicine will be rationed via politics."
And the Journal adds: "Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine bipartisan 'reform' and moved into the realm of pure power politics as they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be 'universal coverage.' The result will be destructive on every level -- for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity."
And according to a chilling analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), the Pelosi version of ObamaCare requires you to purchase a government-approved plan or face a penalty of up to 2.5 percent of your income (collected by the IRS, of course) if you fail to maintain "acceptable health insurance coverage." And refusal to pay the penalty "is punishable by a fine of up to 250,000 dollars and/or imprisonment for up to five years."
This draconian provision led Congressman Dave Camp (R-MI), Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee, to say: "This is the ultimate example of the Democrats' command-and-control style of governing - buy what we tell you or go to jail."
Need we say more? ObamaCare must be defeated. Socialized medicine, rationing of care, and inferior care at a higher cost must be defeated.
GOPUSA
Conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer recently said ObamaCare "should not only be defeated. It should be immolated, its ashes scattered over the Senate swimming pool." Calling ObamaCare an "overregulated, overbureaucratized system of surpassing arbitrariness and inefficiency," Krauthammer points out that the Senate and House versions of ObamaCare together are over "4000-plus" pages and call for "118 new boards, commissions and programs."
The Wall Street Journal said the Pelosi version of ObamaCare "may well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced." According to the Journal: "Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually all medicine will be rationed via politics."
And the Journal adds: "Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine bipartisan 'reform' and moved into the realm of pure power politics as they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be 'universal coverage.' The result will be destructive on every level -- for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity."
And according to a chilling analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), the Pelosi version of ObamaCare requires you to purchase a government-approved plan or face a penalty of up to 2.5 percent of your income (collected by the IRS, of course) if you fail to maintain "acceptable health insurance coverage." And refusal to pay the penalty "is punishable by a fine of up to 250,000 dollars and/or imprisonment for up to five years."
This draconian provision led Congressman Dave Camp (R-MI), Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee, to say: "This is the ultimate example of the Democrats' command-and-control style of governing - buy what we tell you or go to jail."
Need we say more? ObamaCare must be defeated. Socialized medicine, rationing of care, and inferior care at a higher cost must be defeated.
GOPUSA
Surprise, surprise: SF Tax Appeals Board Rules Against Archdiocese
As we predicted.
From today's San Francisco Chronicle:
Board backs city over archdiocese in tax matter
Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer
"San Francisco's tax fight with the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco is headed to court.
The city's Transfer Tax Appeals Board unanimously ruled Monday in favor of San Francisco Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting's position that the archdiocese owes City Hall $14.4 million in unpaid property transfer taxes.
The panel determined that the church, in moving properties from one Catholic nonprofit corporation to another, was required to pay property transfer taxes. The taxes are collected when properties are sold or transferred to a separate and distinct legal entity.
The archdiocese maintains that the transfers were not subject to the tax because they were part of an internal reorganization to create "simple ownership models" for schools, parishes and the larger archdiocese.
Ting, however, disagreed and said the corporations involved in the transactions have different boards of directors and are legally separate.
A church spokesman called the ruling disappointing and suggested it may have been motivated by greed and politics.
"The board members, all of whom are City Hall administrators rather than members of the judiciary, apparently faced tremendous pressure in view of the city's desperate need for revenue," said Maurice Healy, spokesman for the archdiocese.
The city faces a $550 million projected deficit over the next 1 1/2 years.
The board, which held four hearings on the matter, is made up of the city controller, the city real estate director and the city tax collector, or their designees.
Healy went on to accuse Ting's office of "inexcusable delays, and, at times, arrogance," in the handling of the case, which began in the spring of 2008 when the archdiocese requested to change ownership titles of more than 200 parcels that city officials say are valued at close to $2 billion.
"We are glad that having exhausted the required administrative process we can finally proceed to a formal, neutral civil court forum," Healy said in a prepared statement.
"We trust that the civil court will carefully consider the applicable law, devoid of the sensationalism and politics that the archdiocese thus far has faced," he said...."
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
From today's San Francisco Chronicle:
Board backs city over archdiocese in tax matter
Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer
"San Francisco's tax fight with the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of San Francisco is headed to court.
The city's Transfer Tax Appeals Board unanimously ruled Monday in favor of San Francisco Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting's position that the archdiocese owes City Hall $14.4 million in unpaid property transfer taxes.
The panel determined that the church, in moving properties from one Catholic nonprofit corporation to another, was required to pay property transfer taxes. The taxes are collected when properties are sold or transferred to a separate and distinct legal entity.
The archdiocese maintains that the transfers were not subject to the tax because they were part of an internal reorganization to create "simple ownership models" for schools, parishes and the larger archdiocese.
Ting, however, disagreed and said the corporations involved in the transactions have different boards of directors and are legally separate.
A church spokesman called the ruling disappointing and suggested it may have been motivated by greed and politics.
"The board members, all of whom are City Hall administrators rather than members of the judiciary, apparently faced tremendous pressure in view of the city's desperate need for revenue," said Maurice Healy, spokesman for the archdiocese.
The city faces a $550 million projected deficit over the next 1 1/2 years.
The board, which held four hearings on the matter, is made up of the city controller, the city real estate director and the city tax collector, or their designees.
Healy went on to accuse Ting's office of "inexcusable delays, and, at times, arrogance," in the handling of the case, which began in the spring of 2008 when the archdiocese requested to change ownership titles of more than 200 parcels that city officials say are valued at close to $2 billion.
"We are glad that having exhausted the required administrative process we can finally proceed to a formal, neutral civil court forum," Healy said in a prepared statement.
"We trust that the civil court will carefully consider the applicable law, devoid of the sensationalism and politics that the archdiocese thus far has faced," he said...."
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
