I read this today. I thought it was amazing that this was written over 100 years ago. It sounds like something that could have been written today.
In his essay “The Contest In America,” 19th-century libertarian philosopher and economist John Stuart Mill wrote, “[W]ar... is not the greatest evil which a nation can suffer. War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks nothing worth a war, is worse.”
Mill added, “A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.”
Friday, December 07, 2007
Thursday, December 06, 2007
One more reason to keep our military strong.
The news out of England is rather disturbing. Read this story about the Royal Navy.
This is especially disturbing when Russia is ramping up its Navy. That story is here.
Thanks to Hot Air for this story.
This is especially disturbing when Russia is ramping up its Navy. That story is here.
Thanks to Hot Air for this story.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Quote of the Day
I came across this quote today and just had to post it!!!
“The Founding Fathers established a system which meant a radical break from that which preceded it. A written constitution would provide a permanent form of government, limited in scope, but effective in providing both liberty and order. Government was not to be a matter of self-appointed rulers, governing by whim or harsh ideology. It was not to be government by the strongest or for the few. Our principles were revolutionary. We began as a small, weak republic. But we survived. Our example inspired others, imperfectly at times, but it inspired them nevertheless. This constitutional republic, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, prospered and grew strong. To this day, America is still the abiding alternative to tyranny. That is our purpose in the world—nothing more and nothing less.” —Ronald Reagan
“The Founding Fathers established a system which meant a radical break from that which preceded it. A written constitution would provide a permanent form of government, limited in scope, but effective in providing both liberty and order. Government was not to be a matter of self-appointed rulers, governing by whim or harsh ideology. It was not to be government by the strongest or for the few. Our principles were revolutionary. We began as a small, weak republic. But we survived. Our example inspired others, imperfectly at times, but it inspired them nevertheless. This constitutional republic, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, prospered and grew strong. To this day, America is still the abiding alternative to tyranny. That is our purpose in the world—nothing more and nothing less.” —Ronald Reagan
Thursday, November 22, 2007
George Washington's Thanksgiving Proclamation
Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor -- and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me "to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness."
Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be -- That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks -- for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation -- for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the tranquility [sic], union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed -- for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted -- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.
And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions -- to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually -- to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed -- to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn [sic] kindness onto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord -- To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease [sic] of science among them and us -- and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.
Given under my hand at the City of New York
the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.
George Washington
Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be -- That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks -- for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation -- for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the tranquility [sic], union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed -- for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted -- for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.
And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions -- to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually -- to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed -- to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn [sic] kindness onto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord -- To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease [sic] of science among them and us -- and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.
Given under my hand at the City of New York
the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.
George Washington
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Friday, November 16, 2007
The 2nd Amendment
I thought the following article was well worth the read. It is from the Patriot Post.
The Patriot Post and The 2nd Amendment.
The Patriot Post and The 2nd Amendment.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Vietnam vet gets '2nd tour' decades after his first one
Another great article by Katherine Kersten.
By Katherine Kersten, Star Tribune
Last update: November 11, 2007 – 11:27 PM
For 35 years, Clyde Lewandowski of St. Cloud didn't talk much about his service in Vietnam. Lewandowski served in 1968 with the Army's 6th Battalion, 33rd Artillery, which provided fire support to infantry troops. "There were too many ghosts," he says.
But this Veterans Day, things have changed. Now Lewandowski can't stop talking about Vietnam. He's found a way to purge the dark memories and reconnect with the distant land where he fought.
The transformation began in 2003, when he was rummaging in his basement and happened on an old suitcase filled with letters from his Army days. "They brought it all back -- the people I hadn't thought about for 30 years, the homesickness, the jokes we played," he said. He began to feel a tug to revisit memories he had thrust aside for decades.
His interest was sparked enough to scour his old unit's records at the National Archives in Washington and to start tracking down his former buddies. But when he ran across contact information for his closest Army friend, Ollie Bishop, he wrestled with whether to follow through. He and Bishop had shared the agony of wounded friends and the horror of being jolted awake at night by the scream of incoming rockets. Did he really want to revisit all that?
Lewandowski took a chance.
He arranged to visit Bishop at his home in Massachusetts. But when he arrived, hesitation seized him once again.
"I drove by Ollie's house and saw him on the steps," he recalled. "I drove another half mile before I decided to turn around and go back."
The two talked for hours like long-lost brothers. To Lewandowski's surprise, the bond forged years before sprang quickly to life as they pored over old pictures and reminisced about their comrades.
At an artillery reunion later that year, said Lewandowski, he and Bishop talked with other brothers-in-arms about "all the fun we'd had with the kids in Vietnam."
He couldn't forget the kids
"We'd give them gum and candy, trade things with them," he said. The vets shared photos of an orphanage they had often visited, and Lewandowski couldn't get the children's faces out of his mind.
"I said, 'if I can find an orphanage there to support, are you with me?'" They were.
In 2006, Lewandowski discovered Friends of VSO, an organization established by vets like himself to support Vinh Son Orphanages in Vietnam's Central Highlands. He signed on for a trip to Vietnam to deliver supplies. (www.friendsofvso.org) On the trip, he revisited scenes from his past -- the sandy beach where his troop ship had landed, a mountain pass near Da Nang where his convoy had come under devastating mortar fire.
"I began to see that the ghosts weren't so fearful after all," he said.
When the group reached Kon Tum, site of the orphanages, Lewandowski knew he had found what he was looking for. Vinh Son serves about 450 children. They are Montagnards, an ethnic minority so poor that parents must often leave one of a set of twins to die.
Lewandowski was overcome by the children's warmth, gratitude and kindness toward each other. They grow their own food, and the older kids constantly help the younger ones. "The kids have almost nothing, and the few things they have they want to share with you," he said. "One little girl had a barrette, and she wanted to give it to me in return for a tennis ball I gave her to play with." You Tube video
But the orphanages in the village were paradise compared with two primitive orphanages in the bush. Children there lived in bamboo huts and their water supply was a muddy river. The former GIs dug down and donated the last $1000 they had brought to enable the Catholic sisters who run the orphanages to finish digging a well and supplement the children's diet with rice for the rest of the year.
Spreading the word
Back in St. Cloud, Lewandowski has devoted himself to spreading the word about VSO, and raising money for projects that have included donating computers and sewing machines, and rebuilding a kitchen destroyed by fire. A few months ago, he obtained a $25,000 challenge grant from another St. Cloud Vietnam vet, Bruce Meyer.
Lewandowski is proud of his 1968 service in Vietnam. But he's one of those rare vets who gets a second tour of duty decades after the first. This time the tracers and napalm are gone. He sees only the wide eyes and bright smiles of the children.
Katherine Kersten • kkersten@startribune.com Join the conversation at my blog, Think Again, which can be found at www.startribune.com/thinkagain.
By Katherine Kersten, Star Tribune
Last update: November 11, 2007 – 11:27 PM
For 35 years, Clyde Lewandowski of St. Cloud didn't talk much about his service in Vietnam. Lewandowski served in 1968 with the Army's 6th Battalion, 33rd Artillery, which provided fire support to infantry troops. "There were too many ghosts," he says.
But this Veterans Day, things have changed. Now Lewandowski can't stop talking about Vietnam. He's found a way to purge the dark memories and reconnect with the distant land where he fought.
The transformation began in 2003, when he was rummaging in his basement and happened on an old suitcase filled with letters from his Army days. "They brought it all back -- the people I hadn't thought about for 30 years, the homesickness, the jokes we played," he said. He began to feel a tug to revisit memories he had thrust aside for decades.
His interest was sparked enough to scour his old unit's records at the National Archives in Washington and to start tracking down his former buddies. But when he ran across contact information for his closest Army friend, Ollie Bishop, he wrestled with whether to follow through. He and Bishop had shared the agony of wounded friends and the horror of being jolted awake at night by the scream of incoming rockets. Did he really want to revisit all that?
Lewandowski took a chance.
He arranged to visit Bishop at his home in Massachusetts. But when he arrived, hesitation seized him once again.
"I drove by Ollie's house and saw him on the steps," he recalled. "I drove another half mile before I decided to turn around and go back."
The two talked for hours like long-lost brothers. To Lewandowski's surprise, the bond forged years before sprang quickly to life as they pored over old pictures and reminisced about their comrades.
At an artillery reunion later that year, said Lewandowski, he and Bishop talked with other brothers-in-arms about "all the fun we'd had with the kids in Vietnam."
He couldn't forget the kids
"We'd give them gum and candy, trade things with them," he said. The vets shared photos of an orphanage they had often visited, and Lewandowski couldn't get the children's faces out of his mind.
"I said, 'if I can find an orphanage there to support, are you with me?'" They were.
In 2006, Lewandowski discovered Friends of VSO, an organization established by vets like himself to support Vinh Son Orphanages in Vietnam's Central Highlands. He signed on for a trip to Vietnam to deliver supplies. (www.friendsofvso.org) On the trip, he revisited scenes from his past -- the sandy beach where his troop ship had landed, a mountain pass near Da Nang where his convoy had come under devastating mortar fire.
"I began to see that the ghosts weren't so fearful after all," he said.
When the group reached Kon Tum, site of the orphanages, Lewandowski knew he had found what he was looking for. Vinh Son serves about 450 children. They are Montagnards, an ethnic minority so poor that parents must often leave one of a set of twins to die.
Lewandowski was overcome by the children's warmth, gratitude and kindness toward each other. They grow their own food, and the older kids constantly help the younger ones. "The kids have almost nothing, and the few things they have they want to share with you," he said. "One little girl had a barrette, and she wanted to give it to me in return for a tennis ball I gave her to play with." You Tube video
But the orphanages in the village were paradise compared with two primitive orphanages in the bush. Children there lived in bamboo huts and their water supply was a muddy river. The former GIs dug down and donated the last $1000 they had brought to enable the Catholic sisters who run the orphanages to finish digging a well and supplement the children's diet with rice for the rest of the year.
Spreading the word
Back in St. Cloud, Lewandowski has devoted himself to spreading the word about VSO, and raising money for projects that have included donating computers and sewing machines, and rebuilding a kitchen destroyed by fire. A few months ago, he obtained a $25,000 challenge grant from another St. Cloud Vietnam vet, Bruce Meyer.
Lewandowski is proud of his 1968 service in Vietnam. But he's one of those rare vets who gets a second tour of duty decades after the first. This time the tracers and napalm are gone. He sees only the wide eyes and bright smiles of the children.
Katherine Kersten • kkersten@startribune.com Join the conversation at my blog, Think Again, which can be found at www.startribune.com/thinkagain.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
"Thanks" just doesn't cut it.
I'm sitting here typing, waiting for today's NASCAR race to start -yes, I am a redneck- and thinking about it being Veteran's Day. Just the ability to type out what I feel, believe and think, without a government official looking over my shoulder is a wonderful feeling.
I really believe that most Americans really don't appreciate freedom. Oh sure, a lot of Americans have an idea, but I don't think they realize just how fortunate they are to live in America. How awesome freedom really is. We can do what we want, provided we don't hurt others, or impede on their freedoms. I could spew hatred on this site all day long if I truly wanted to and I would be able to.
I can also rant about our government. I can complain all day long. I can protest. I can vote!!!
Why can I do all this? Because I am an American and we in America have freedom. Why are we free? Because God has blessed us with this land. But also because of our veterans. And that is where "thanks" just doesn't seem to cut it.
The sacrifices our veterans and their families have given are beyond what many people appreciate. Dads and moms missing kids school functions, or first steps for that matter! Kids missing their parents, etc. And of course, the ultimate sacrifice.
So, on this Veterans Day, I say Thank You to all veterans and their families. Even though "Thank You" is not nearly enough...
I really believe that most Americans really don't appreciate freedom. Oh sure, a lot of Americans have an idea, but I don't think they realize just how fortunate they are to live in America. How awesome freedom really is. We can do what we want, provided we don't hurt others, or impede on their freedoms. I could spew hatred on this site all day long if I truly wanted to and I would be able to.
I can also rant about our government. I can complain all day long. I can protest. I can vote!!!
Why can I do all this? Because I am an American and we in America have freedom. Why are we free? Because God has blessed us with this land. But also because of our veterans. And that is where "thanks" just doesn't seem to cut it.
The sacrifices our veterans and their families have given are beyond what many people appreciate. Dads and moms missing kids school functions, or first steps for that matter! Kids missing their parents, etc. And of course, the ultimate sacrifice.
So, on this Veterans Day, I say Thank You to all veterans and their families. Even though "Thank You" is not nearly enough...
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Happy Birthday to the Marine Corp!!!
To the Marines and ALL those who have, and are, defending our freedom, Thank You.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Bill Clinton continues his habit of lying.
I watched Bill Clinton lie through eight years in office. I figured once he got out of office that he'd no longer need to lie, other than to defend his tenure. Well, he's at it again, lying about the Max Cleland story. Read the story here.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Proof that money doesn't buy brains
Today I bring you a story out of California. This is an article out of the LA Times. Here we have a woman that thinks that since she spent $3 million on a house, that everything should take care of itself. Or, for that matter, that everyone around her should come to her beck and call. This story is both funny and really truly sad.
Story here.
Story here.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Being overweight is now OK.
I LOVE THIS ARTICLE!!! YAY FOR FAT PEOPLE!!! Well, within reason. At any rate, for those of us who've always struggled with weight, this is good news!
Being Overweight Isn't All Bad, Study Says
Carrying Excess Pounds Does Not Increase Risk of Dying from Cancer or Heart Disease, Researchers Say
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; 5:17 PM
Being overweight boosts the risk of dying from diabetes and kidney disease but not cancer or heart disease, and carrying some extra pounds appears actually to protect against a host of other causes of death, federal researchers reported today.
The counter-intuitive findings, based on a detailed analysis of decades of government data about more than 39,000 Americans, supports the conclusions of a study the same group conducted two years ago that suggested the dangers of being overweight may be less dire than experts believed. Read the rest of article here.
Being Overweight Isn't All Bad, Study Says
Carrying Excess Pounds Does Not Increase Risk of Dying from Cancer or Heart Disease, Researchers Say
By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 6, 2007; 5:17 PM
Being overweight boosts the risk of dying from diabetes and kidney disease but not cancer or heart disease, and carrying some extra pounds appears actually to protect against a host of other causes of death, federal researchers reported today.
The counter-intuitive findings, based on a detailed analysis of decades of government data about more than 39,000 Americans, supports the conclusions of a study the same group conducted two years ago that suggested the dangers of being overweight may be less dire than experts believed. Read the rest of article here.
When did Snopes become opinionated?
I came across an interesting discovery today. I received an email and I wanted to check its authenticity so I went to Snopes to check it out. (I go to truthorfiction.com first but they had nothing on the particular subject.) Well, Snopes has the email I was looking for, but what I read disturbed me.
All I wanted to know what whether or not the email was legit, not their opinion of the subject matter, but that's what I got! I was rather surprised, but it got me to thinking. When did they become opinionated? Was it after they got $$$ from their website? I wonder. At any rate, I will continue to only go there if truthorfiction doesn't have what I'm looking for. I find enough opinions in the media.
That is all.
All I wanted to know what whether or not the email was legit, not their opinion of the subject matter, but that's what I got! I was rather surprised, but it got me to thinking. When did they become opinionated? Was it after they got $$$ from their website? I wonder. At any rate, I will continue to only go there if truthorfiction doesn't have what I'm looking for. I find enough opinions in the media.
That is all.
A great letter regarding immigration that was never published
I received the following via an email today. It was written in response to several letters to the editor of the Orange County Register. I thought it made a really good point so I decided to post it here.
Dear Editor:
So many letter writers have based their arguments on how
this land is made up of immigrants. Ernie Lujan for one,
suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because
the people now in question aren't being treated the same
as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports
of entry.
Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out
to people like Mr. Lujan why today's American is not willing
to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in
1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to
come to the United States , people had to get off a ship and
stand in a long line in New York and be documented. Some
would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the
ground.
They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their
new country in good and bad times. They made learning
English a primary rule in their new American households
and some even changed their names to blend in with their
new home. They had waved good bye to their birth place
to give their children a new life and did everything in their
power to help their children assimilate into one culture.
Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare,
no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the
skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to
trade for a future of prosperity.
Most of their children came of age when World War II
broke out. My father fought along side men whose
parents had come straight over from Germany , Italy ,
France and Japan None of these 1st generation
Americans ever gave any thought about what country
their parents had come from. They were Americans
fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan
They were defending the United States of America as one
people.
When we liberated France, no one in those villages
were looking for the French-American or the German
American or the Irish American. The people of France
saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that
represented one country. Not one of those immigrant
sons would have thought about picking up another
country's flag and waving it to represent who they were.
It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had
sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly
knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the
melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.
And here we are in 2007 with a new kind of immigrant
who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they
want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules,
one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of
being faithful to their mother country.
I'm sorry, that's not what being an American is all about.
I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in
the early 1900's deserve better than that for all the toil,
hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to
create a land that has become a beacon for those legally
searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled
that they are being used as an example by those waving
foreign country flags.
And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of
Liberty , it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are
voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn't start talking
about dismantling the United States just yet.
(signed) Rosemary LaBonte
Dear Editor:
So many letter writers have based their arguments on how
this land is made up of immigrants. Ernie Lujan for one,
suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because
the people now in question aren't being treated the same
as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports
of entry.
Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out
to people like Mr. Lujan why today's American is not willing
to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in
1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to
come to the United States , people had to get off a ship and
stand in a long line in New York and be documented. Some
would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the
ground.
They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their
new country in good and bad times. They made learning
English a primary rule in their new American households
and some even changed their names to blend in with their
new home. They had waved good bye to their birth place
to give their children a new life and did everything in their
power to help their children assimilate into one culture.
Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare,
no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the
skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to
trade for a future of prosperity.
Most of their children came of age when World War II
broke out. My father fought along side men whose
parents had come straight over from Germany , Italy ,
France and Japan None of these 1st generation
Americans ever gave any thought about what country
their parents had come from. They were Americans
fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan
They were defending the United States of America as one
people.
When we liberated France, no one in those villages
were looking for the French-American or the German
American or the Irish American. The people of France
saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that
represented one country. Not one of those immigrant
sons would have thought about picking up another
country's flag and waving it to represent who they were.
It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had
sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly
knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the
melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.
And here we are in 2007 with a new kind of immigrant
who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they
want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules,
one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of
being faithful to their mother country.
I'm sorry, that's not what being an American is all about.
I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in
the early 1900's deserve better than that for all the toil,
hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to
create a land that has become a beacon for those legally
searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled
that they are being used as an example by those waving
foreign country flags.
And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of
Liberty , it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are
voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn't start talking
about dismantling the United States just yet.
(signed) Rosemary LaBonte
Monday, November 05, 2007
Thug kills a father of four over 40 bucks.
Here is a story of out Minneapolis. A drug dealer was standing on a street corner with another thug and they see an innocent man riding a bicycle. Apparently both of the thugs were bored so they decided to attack the man with the intention of robbing him. He had a whopping 40 bucks on him.
The nickname of Minneapolis has become Murderapolis in recent years. Here is a city that has had a very rich history of liberal leadership. The previous mayor, Sharon Sayles Belton denied all through her tenure that there was a gang problem in Murderapolis, all the while crime rates kept rising. After eight years, Murderapolis had had enough!! So they elected someone even further to the left in R.T. Rybak.
Now, after another 6 years of extreme liberal leadership, murder and crime continue to rise. So far this year we've had 41 murders. We had 60 last year. Back in 2000 they said it was "time for a change" in Murderapolis and they ousted Belton for Rybak. Perhaps it time for a change in parties.
The nickname of Minneapolis has become Murderapolis in recent years. Here is a city that has had a very rich history of liberal leadership. The previous mayor, Sharon Sayles Belton denied all through her tenure that there was a gang problem in Murderapolis, all the while crime rates kept rising. After eight years, Murderapolis had had enough!! So they elected someone even further to the left in R.T. Rybak.
Now, after another 6 years of extreme liberal leadership, murder and crime continue to rise. So far this year we've had 41 murders. We had 60 last year. Back in 2000 they said it was "time for a change" in Murderapolis and they ousted Belton for Rybak. Perhaps it time for a change in parties.
The deceit behind Global Warming
I found a good article in the UK Telegraph regarding global warming. I suggest you read it.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
Mondale (Mondull) endorses Hillary
Ugh. Mondale endorses Hillary for President. Gee, thanks. Minnesota's own Walter Mondale. Possibly THE dullest human being to ever walk the face of the earth. Here was a guy when running against Reagan actually said that he would raise your taxes. The guy is a moron. Well, if I were Hillary, I'd be saying "GET OFF MY SIDE!!!"
AP Story
AP Story
Great article by George Will
I thought this was a very well written editorial. (I know, DUH! It's George Will!) Anyway, he really makes a good point. Taken from the Washington Post.
Congress's Unused War Powers
By George F. Will
Sunday, November 4, 2007; Page B07
Americans are wondering, with the lassitude of uninvolved spectators, whether the president will initiate a war with Iran. Some Democratic presidential candidates worry, or purport to, that he might claim an authorization for war in a Senate resolution labeling an Iranian Revolutionary Guard unit a terrorist organization. Some Democratic representatives oppose the president's request for $88 million to equip B-2 stealth bombers to carry huge "bunker-buster" bombs, hoping to thereby impede a presidential decision to attack Iran's hardened nuclear facilities.
While legislators try to leash a president by tinkering with a weapon, they are ignoring a sufficient leash -- the Constitution. They are derelict in their sworn duty to uphold it. Regarding the most momentous thing government does, make war, the constitutional system of checks and balances is broken.
Congress can, however, put the Constitution's bridle back on the presidency. Congress can end unfettered executive war-making by deciding to. That might not require, but would be facilitated by, enacting the Constitutional War Powers Resolution. Introduced last week by Rep. Walter B. Jones, a North Carolina Republican, it technically amends but essentially would supplant the existing War Powers Resolution, which has been a nullity ever since it was passed in 1973 over President Richard Nixon's veto.
Jones's measure is designed to ensure that deciding to go to war is, as the Founders insisted it be, a "collective judgment." It would prohibit presidents from initiating military actions except to repel or retaliate for sudden attacks on America or American troops abroad, or to protect and evacuate U.S. citizens abroad. It would provide for expedited judicial review to enforce compliance with the resolution and would permit the use of federal funds only for military actions taken in compliance with the resolution.
It reflects conclusions reached by the War Powers Initiative of the Constitution Project. That nonpartisan organization's 2005 study notes that Congress's appropriation power augments the requirement of advance authorization by Congress before the nation goes to war. It enables Congress to stop the use of force by cutting off its funding. That check is augmented by the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits any expenditure or obligation of funds not appropriated by Congress, and by legislation that criminalizes violations of the act.
All this refutes Rudy Giuliani's recent suggestion that the president might have "the inherent authority to support the troops" even if funding were cut off. Besides, American history is replete with examples of Congress restraining executive war-making. (See "Congress at War: The Politics of Conflict Since 1789," a book by Charles A. Stevenson.) Congress has forbidden:
Sending draftees outside this hemisphere (1940-41); introduction of combat troops into Laos or Thailand (1969); reintroduction of troops into Cambodia (1970); combat operations in Southeast Asia (1973); military operations in Angola (1976); use of force in Lebanon other than for self-defense (1983); military activities in Nicaragua (1980s). In 1993 and 1994, Congress mandated the withdrawal of troops from Somalia and forbade military actions in Rwanda.
When Congress authorized the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force" against those complicit in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Congress refused to adopt administration language authorizing force "to deter and preempt any future" terrorism or aggression. The wonder is that the administration bothered to seek this language.
The administration's "presidentialists" -- including the president -- believe presidents are constitutionally emancipated from all restraints regarding core executive functions, particularly those concerning defense and waging war. Clearly they think the rejected language would have added nothing to the president's inherent powers.
Congress's powers were most dramatically abandoned and ignored regarding Korea. Although President Harry S. Truman came from a Congress controlled by his party and friends, he never sought congressional authorization to send troops into massive and sustained conflict. Instead, he asserted broad authority to "execute" treaties such as the U.N. Charter.
For today's Democrats, resistance to unilateral presidential war-making reflects not principled constitutionalism but petulance about the current president. Democrats were supine when President Bill Clinton launched a sustained air war against Serbia without congressional authorization. Instead, he cited NATO's authorization -- as though that were an adequate substitute for the collective judgment that the Constitution mandates. Republicans, supposed defenders of limited government, actually are enablers of an unlimited presidency. Their belief in strict construction of the Constitution evaporates, and they become, in behavior if not in thought, adherents of the woolly idea of a "living Constitution." They endorse, by their passivity, the idea that new threats justify ignoring the Framers' text and logic about shared responsibility for war-making.
Unless and until Congress stops prattling about presidential "usurpation" of power and asserts its own, it will remain derelict regarding its duty of mutual participation in war-making. And it will merit its current marginalization.
georgewill@washpost.com
Congress's Unused War Powers
By George F. Will
Sunday, November 4, 2007; Page B07
Americans are wondering, with the lassitude of uninvolved spectators, whether the president will initiate a war with Iran. Some Democratic presidential candidates worry, or purport to, that he might claim an authorization for war in a Senate resolution labeling an Iranian Revolutionary Guard unit a terrorist organization. Some Democratic representatives oppose the president's request for $88 million to equip B-2 stealth bombers to carry huge "bunker-buster" bombs, hoping to thereby impede a presidential decision to attack Iran's hardened nuclear facilities.
While legislators try to leash a president by tinkering with a weapon, they are ignoring a sufficient leash -- the Constitution. They are derelict in their sworn duty to uphold it. Regarding the most momentous thing government does, make war, the constitutional system of checks and balances is broken.
Congress can, however, put the Constitution's bridle back on the presidency. Congress can end unfettered executive war-making by deciding to. That might not require, but would be facilitated by, enacting the Constitutional War Powers Resolution. Introduced last week by Rep. Walter B. Jones, a North Carolina Republican, it technically amends but essentially would supplant the existing War Powers Resolution, which has been a nullity ever since it was passed in 1973 over President Richard Nixon's veto.
Jones's measure is designed to ensure that deciding to go to war is, as the Founders insisted it be, a "collective judgment." It would prohibit presidents from initiating military actions except to repel or retaliate for sudden attacks on America or American troops abroad, or to protect and evacuate U.S. citizens abroad. It would provide for expedited judicial review to enforce compliance with the resolution and would permit the use of federal funds only for military actions taken in compliance with the resolution.
It reflects conclusions reached by the War Powers Initiative of the Constitution Project. That nonpartisan organization's 2005 study notes that Congress's appropriation power augments the requirement of advance authorization by Congress before the nation goes to war. It enables Congress to stop the use of force by cutting off its funding. That check is augmented by the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits any expenditure or obligation of funds not appropriated by Congress, and by legislation that criminalizes violations of the act.
All this refutes Rudy Giuliani's recent suggestion that the president might have "the inherent authority to support the troops" even if funding were cut off. Besides, American history is replete with examples of Congress restraining executive war-making. (See "Congress at War: The Politics of Conflict Since 1789," a book by Charles A. Stevenson.) Congress has forbidden:
Sending draftees outside this hemisphere (1940-41); introduction of combat troops into Laos or Thailand (1969); reintroduction of troops into Cambodia (1970); combat operations in Southeast Asia (1973); military operations in Angola (1976); use of force in Lebanon other than for self-defense (1983); military activities in Nicaragua (1980s). In 1993 and 1994, Congress mandated the withdrawal of troops from Somalia and forbade military actions in Rwanda.
When Congress authorized the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force" against those complicit in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Congress refused to adopt administration language authorizing force "to deter and preempt any future" terrorism or aggression. The wonder is that the administration bothered to seek this language.
The administration's "presidentialists" -- including the president -- believe presidents are constitutionally emancipated from all restraints regarding core executive functions, particularly those concerning defense and waging war. Clearly they think the rejected language would have added nothing to the president's inherent powers.
Congress's powers were most dramatically abandoned and ignored regarding Korea. Although President Harry S. Truman came from a Congress controlled by his party and friends, he never sought congressional authorization to send troops into massive and sustained conflict. Instead, he asserted broad authority to "execute" treaties such as the U.N. Charter.
For today's Democrats, resistance to unilateral presidential war-making reflects not principled constitutionalism but petulance about the current president. Democrats were supine when President Bill Clinton launched a sustained air war against Serbia without congressional authorization. Instead, he cited NATO's authorization -- as though that were an adequate substitute for the collective judgment that the Constitution mandates. Republicans, supposed defenders of limited government, actually are enablers of an unlimited presidency. Their belief in strict construction of the Constitution evaporates, and they become, in behavior if not in thought, adherents of the woolly idea of a "living Constitution." They endorse, by their passivity, the idea that new threats justify ignoring the Framers' text and logic about shared responsibility for war-making.
Unless and until Congress stops prattling about presidential "usurpation" of power and asserts its own, it will remain derelict regarding its duty of mutual participation in war-making. And it will merit its current marginalization.
georgewill@washpost.com
Saturday, November 03, 2007
The most Christian candidate
I thought this was pretty funny. I like Dobson, but I really disagree with his stand on the Republican candidates. Vote third party? Not smart. Anyway, check out the Red State Update video.
The most influential US conservatives
Here is the list of the 100 most influential conservatives in America according to the Telegraph in the UK. They have Rush at Number 5. I'm thinking he should be number 1. We are talking INFLUENCE here!
Friday, November 02, 2007
Personal responsibility
OK. I have a question for you. At what age are we responsible for our own actions? 18? 21? 46? I ask this question because of a story out of Minnesota. A 46 year old man was arrested for riding a bicycle while drunk. Apparently he was a diabetic. He died while in jail.
It really is a tragic story, but what struck me was that his mother was trying to get him his insulin while he was in jail. The story doesn't state that he asked her to bring it to him, but that his mother knew he needed it and tried getting it to him. This got me to thinking. He's 46 and his mom still needs to take care of him?
To me it's not that the jailers failed to pass on the insulin, as tragic as that may be. I'm stuck on a 46 year old diabetic going out, getting drunk and riding a bicycle and doing so as to get arrested. At 46 years old, his mom needs to take care of him! I have a hard time comprehending that. I can't help but think, "how sad".
Now the parents are blaming the jailers for their sons death, but I can't help but think, "what about his responsibility for himself?" If you know you have medical issues, I think you need to take care of yourself.
Story here
It really is a tragic story, but what struck me was that his mother was trying to get him his insulin while he was in jail. The story doesn't state that he asked her to bring it to him, but that his mother knew he needed it and tried getting it to him. This got me to thinking. He's 46 and his mom still needs to take care of him?
To me it's not that the jailers failed to pass on the insulin, as tragic as that may be. I'm stuck on a 46 year old diabetic going out, getting drunk and riding a bicycle and doing so as to get arrested. At 46 years old, his mom needs to take care of him! I have a hard time comprehending that. I can't help but think, "how sad".
Now the parents are blaming the jailers for their sons death, but I can't help but think, "what about his responsibility for himself?" If you know you have medical issues, I think you need to take care of yourself.
Story here
Marriage advice
For those who don't know me, I've been happily married for over 23 years. It's amazing we've stayed together all these years without the following advice.
Saudi Marriage 'Expert' Advises Men in 'Right Way' to Beat Their Wives
Friday, November 02, 2007
From Fox News.
Move over, Dr. Phil, there's a new relationship expert in town.
He's Saudi author and cleric, "Dr." Muhammad Al-'Arifi, who in a remarkable segment broadcast on Saudi and Kuwaiti television in September, counseled young Muslim men on how to treat their wives.
"Admonish them – once, twice, three times, four times, ten times," he advised. "If this doesn't help, refuse to share their beds."
And if that doesn't work?
"Beat them," one of his three young advisees responded.
"That's right," Al-'Arifi said.
Click here to view the segment at MEMRITV.org
He goes on to calmly explain to the young men that hitting their future wives in the face is a no-no.
"Beating in the face is forbidden, even when it comes to animals," he explained. "Even if you want your camel or donkey to start walking, you are not allowed to beat it in the face. If this is true for animals, it is all the more true when it comes to humans. So beatings should be light and not in the face."
His final words of wisdom?
"Woman, it has gone too far. I can't bear it anymore," he tells the men to tell their wives. "If he beats her, the beatings must be light and must not make her face ugly.
"He must beat her where it will not leave marks. He should not beat her on the hand... He should beat her in some places where it will not cause any damage. He should not beat her like he would beat an animal or a child -- slapping them right and left.
"Unfortunately, many husbands beat their wives only when they get mad, and when they start beating, it as if they are punching a wall – they beat with their hands, right and left, and sometimes use their feet. Brother, it is a human being you are beating. This is forbidden. He must not do this."
Take that, Match.com!
Direct link here.
Saudi Marriage 'Expert' Advises Men in 'Right Way' to Beat Their Wives
Friday, November 02, 2007
From Fox News.
Move over, Dr. Phil, there's a new relationship expert in town.
He's Saudi author and cleric, "Dr." Muhammad Al-'Arifi, who in a remarkable segment broadcast on Saudi and Kuwaiti television in September, counseled young Muslim men on how to treat their wives.
"Admonish them – once, twice, three times, four times, ten times," he advised. "If this doesn't help, refuse to share their beds."
And if that doesn't work?
"Beat them," one of his three young advisees responded.
"That's right," Al-'Arifi said.
Click here to view the segment at MEMRITV.org
He goes on to calmly explain to the young men that hitting their future wives in the face is a no-no.
"Beating in the face is forbidden, even when it comes to animals," he explained. "Even if you want your camel or donkey to start walking, you are not allowed to beat it in the face. If this is true for animals, it is all the more true when it comes to humans. So beatings should be light and not in the face."
His final words of wisdom?
"Woman, it has gone too far. I can't bear it anymore," he tells the men to tell their wives. "If he beats her, the beatings must be light and must not make her face ugly.
"He must beat her where it will not leave marks. He should not beat her on the hand... He should beat her in some places where it will not cause any damage. He should not beat her like he would beat an animal or a child -- slapping them right and left.
"Unfortunately, many husbands beat their wives only when they get mad, and when they start beating, it as if they are punching a wall – they beat with their hands, right and left, and sometimes use their feet. Brother, it is a human being you are beating. This is forbidden. He must not do this."
Take that, Match.com!
Direct link here.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Another E-coli incident
So here we have another national E-coli incident, this time involving frozen pizza.
I know I blogged this earlier, but dang it, WASH YOUR HANDS!!! It's pretty simple to stop spreading poop around. It's called washing your hands.
That is all.
I know I blogged this earlier, but dang it, WASH YOUR HANDS!!! It's pretty simple to stop spreading poop around. It's called washing your hands.
That is all.
Kansas church gets nailed!!!
I was VERY happy to read this. This nutcase, Fred Phelps (notice I refuse to call him Reverand) and his church in Kansas seem to think that God hates certain people. Sadly this screwball calls himself a Christian, to which I say, get off our side! He doesn't stand for what a Christian stands for. Christians don't hate homosexuals, we just don't approve of the lifestyle. Hate the sin, not the sinner.
Well, the church got sued by the father of a fallen Marine and the court sided with the father! Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside!
Read the story here.
Well, the church got sued by the father of a fallen Marine and the court sided with the father! Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside!
Read the story here.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Hillary proves where she stands...
If you watched the debate Tuesday night, or at least heard about it, you hopefully learned something about Hillary, that is if you didn't already know it. Anyway, she really showed her true colors and it was nice to see someone other than Republicans call her on her lack of a stand. She really avoided answering any questions regarding where she stands on the issues. You can read some good articles on the debate below.
Apnews
Townhall
NewsMax
Apnews
Townhall
NewsMax
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
A History Lesson
Who said it?
1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above
2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the
few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."
A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above
3) "(We) ...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something
has to be taken away from some people."
A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above
4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up
a little bit of their own .. in order to create this common ground."
A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above
5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."
A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above
6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most
profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."
A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above
Scroll down for answers . . .
Answers:
(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007
(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005
1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above
2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the
few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."
A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above
3) "(We) ...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something
has to be taken away from some people."
A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Josef Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above
4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up
a little bit of their own .. in order to create this common ground."
A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above
5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."
A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above
6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most
profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."
A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above
Scroll down for answers . . .
Answers:
(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007
(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005
Monday, October 29, 2007
More felonius activity from the Clintons.
Here is a must see.
Hillary! Uncensored - Banned By The Media
Hillary! Uncensored - Banned By The Media
Already tired of Politics
OK, so maybe this goes without saying, but I'm already tired of the 2008 presidential campaign. Sadly, we have another year of this crap to go! This feeling of dread, or perhaps loathing would be a better word has really been brewing for years. I've really grown weary of politicians in general. So many of them are so far removed from reality that they cannot relate to the "common folk" if you will.
So here we are, the 2008 presidential election run and every one of the folks running has been in politics way too long, in my opinion. I really believe that there should be a limit to how long one can be in office. Term limits? Sure, I think I'm all for them. I'm tired of pols having no clue about real life. No clue about the real struggles we have in life. And that leads me into another area...
OK, so I'm reading a story in the paper regarding a family of five struggling with bills and unable to get assistance. The reason? They make too much money. They make over the $24,500 maximum to get assistance. Just one more shining example of moronic government policy. What's sad is that they cut off all support at 25K. Don't you think it would make sense to offer partial assistance up to a certain degree? Nope. Just cut ya off. No wonder people stay on welfare for years and have no desire to try to get off of it. You start earning money, still not enough to support yourself and the government cuts you off.
So here we are, the 2008 presidential election run and every one of the folks running has been in politics way too long, in my opinion. I really believe that there should be a limit to how long one can be in office. Term limits? Sure, I think I'm all for them. I'm tired of pols having no clue about real life. No clue about the real struggles we have in life. And that leads me into another area...
OK, so I'm reading a story in the paper regarding a family of five struggling with bills and unable to get assistance. The reason? They make too much money. They make over the $24,500 maximum to get assistance. Just one more shining example of moronic government policy. What's sad is that they cut off all support at 25K. Don't you think it would make sense to offer partial assistance up to a certain degree? Nope. Just cut ya off. No wonder people stay on welfare for years and have no desire to try to get off of it. You start earning money, still not enough to support yourself and the government cuts you off.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Friday, October 26, 2007
The Hillary Scandal Train rolls on!
Will the Main Stream media notice?
Story on Fox
I recall Hillary and her husband were deeply embroiled in controversies back in the 90's and the media constantly stifled the stories. Here we go again.
Story on Fox
I recall Hillary and her husband were deeply embroiled in controversies back in the 90's and the media constantly stifled the stories. Here we go again.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
WAY TO GO ARNOLD!!!
The fires in California are just terrible, but the people are working together to make the best of it. Unlike Katrina, the Californians are seeking to help themselves rather than wait for the government to bail them out. Check out this video of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger being interviewed. She tries to sensationalize it and he just puts her in her place! Way to go Gov!!!
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
A heartwarming story of unselfishness.
Here's an article by one of my favorite columnists.
When Bad News Hit a Great Guy, She Knew a Card Just Wouldn’t Do
By: Katherine Kersten
Think Again Blog
October 22nd, 2007 – 8:09 AM
Bill Palmquist is that gem of a guy every workplace should have. He does dozens of small things for dozens of people, all the while giving you the feeling that it’s a joy to do so.
Every day Palmquist’s cart makes the rounds at Medtronic’s offices in Fridley and other northern suburbs, dispensing the basics that make an office hum: staples, pens, paper. But Palmquist, who works for Spee-Dee Delivery Service, dispenses something more.
“You can hear him coming down the hall, greeting everyone, spreading good cheer and sunshine,” says Sue Dzieweczynski of Circle Pines, an executive assistant for Medtronic’s leadership team. “He’d do anything for you.”
Palmquist often dropped by Dzieweczynski’s desk to chat. “He ‘d call me ‘Polish One’ ” — a joking reference to her hard-to-pronounce last name — “and I’d call him ‘Spee-Dee Boy,’” she says.
But in May, a shadow passed over Palmquist’s “cheer and sunshine.” His Medtronic fan club soon learned why.
Palmquist’s wife, Joy, had taken their then-8-year-old son, Aaron, to a clinic near their home in St. Cloud with what seemed like typical flu symptoms. Within hours, Aaron was airlifted to the University of Minnesota Medical Center-Fairview. He had kidney failure.
“They told us he would have had six to 12 hours to live if we hadn’t brought him in,” recalls Palmquist. The boy needed a kidney transplant.
Palmquist and his family were tested for a match, but no one qualified.
They turned in uncertain fear to face some daunting options.
If a living donor couldn’t be found, Aaron’s name would be added to the national donor waiting list. He may have to wait five or six years for a kidney. Until then, he would need dialysis in Minneapolis, three times a week, four hours a session.
Pediatric patients do not grow well on dialysis, but resume normal growth after a successful transplant, says Cathy Garvey, transplant coordinator at University of Minnesota Medical Center-Fairview.
The longer a patient must wait for a transplant, the less likely success may be, she adds.
At Medtronic, Tammy Ocel — one of Palmquist’s hundreds of friends — decided she needed to consider more than flowers and a card. Ocel e-mailed 15 or 20 colleagues about the search for a donor.
The e-mail raced from computer to computer. Soon hundreds, even thousands, of Medtronic employees knew.
“When I got it, I hollered over to another ‘admin’ — is that our Spee-Dee Boy?” Dzieweczynski recalls. “I didn’t even know Bill’s name.”
Donations poured in: $3,000 worth, including motel vouchers, gas cards and even an iPod for Aaron. He got toys and games to play with during dialysis, and every kind of fruit snack — one of the few things he could still eat.
But the greatest gift, a new kidney, remained elusive.
A few Medtronic employees offered to be tested for a match. One was Dzieweczynski. She had never met Aaron. “But my first instinct when I heard was, ‘I want to help if I can.’”
Bingo! A match
It turned out she could; she is a match for Aaron. After lengthy medical tests, Dzieweczynski got the go-ahead in early September. Her family, husband Mark and son Dan, 18, supported her decision.
“I called Bill and asked, ‘Are you sitting down?’ she says. “We both cried.”
What motivated her sacrifice? “I still can’t get my head around why people think it’s such a big deal,” she says. In the family she grew up in, “It’s just what you do,” she says.
She says working at Medtronic was a factor. Apparently, the company’s mission statement — that sometimes-numbing document you have to read at a new-job orientation — means something at Medtronic.
“We hear so many stories about people we’ve helped,” Dzieweczienski says. “We all carry around the mission on our employee identification cards: ‘alleviating pain, restoring health and extending life.’ After a while, the words just seem to become ingrained.”
Macaroni and cheese
To celebrate, Palmquist, Dzieweczynski and their families had dinner at a restaurant where Aaron could order his beloved — but now rare — macaroni and cheese. Dzieweczynski saw him for the first time that night.
“I didn’t want to put a face to his name until I knew I could help him,” she said.
On Wednesday, the Palmquist and Dzieweczynski families will meet again as their loved ones are wheeled into adjacent operating rooms. One of Dzieweczynski’s kidneys will be removed and carried to Aaron around the corner.
When Bad News Hit a Great Guy, She Knew a Card Just Wouldn’t Do
By: Katherine Kersten
Think Again Blog
October 22nd, 2007 – 8:09 AM
Bill Palmquist is that gem of a guy every workplace should have. He does dozens of small things for dozens of people, all the while giving you the feeling that it’s a joy to do so.
Every day Palmquist’s cart makes the rounds at Medtronic’s offices in Fridley and other northern suburbs, dispensing the basics that make an office hum: staples, pens, paper. But Palmquist, who works for Spee-Dee Delivery Service, dispenses something more.
“You can hear him coming down the hall, greeting everyone, spreading good cheer and sunshine,” says Sue Dzieweczynski of Circle Pines, an executive assistant for Medtronic’s leadership team. “He’d do anything for you.”
Palmquist often dropped by Dzieweczynski’s desk to chat. “He ‘d call me ‘Polish One’ ” — a joking reference to her hard-to-pronounce last name — “and I’d call him ‘Spee-Dee Boy,’” she says.
But in May, a shadow passed over Palmquist’s “cheer and sunshine.” His Medtronic fan club soon learned why.
Palmquist’s wife, Joy, had taken their then-8-year-old son, Aaron, to a clinic near their home in St. Cloud with what seemed like typical flu symptoms. Within hours, Aaron was airlifted to the University of Minnesota Medical Center-Fairview. He had kidney failure.
“They told us he would have had six to 12 hours to live if we hadn’t brought him in,” recalls Palmquist. The boy needed a kidney transplant.
Palmquist and his family were tested for a match, but no one qualified.
They turned in uncertain fear to face some daunting options.
If a living donor couldn’t be found, Aaron’s name would be added to the national donor waiting list. He may have to wait five or six years for a kidney. Until then, he would need dialysis in Minneapolis, three times a week, four hours a session.
Pediatric patients do not grow well on dialysis, but resume normal growth after a successful transplant, says Cathy Garvey, transplant coordinator at University of Minnesota Medical Center-Fairview.
The longer a patient must wait for a transplant, the less likely success may be, she adds.
At Medtronic, Tammy Ocel — one of Palmquist’s hundreds of friends — decided she needed to consider more than flowers and a card. Ocel e-mailed 15 or 20 colleagues about the search for a donor.
The e-mail raced from computer to computer. Soon hundreds, even thousands, of Medtronic employees knew.
“When I got it, I hollered over to another ‘admin’ — is that our Spee-Dee Boy?” Dzieweczynski recalls. “I didn’t even know Bill’s name.”
Donations poured in: $3,000 worth, including motel vouchers, gas cards and even an iPod for Aaron. He got toys and games to play with during dialysis, and every kind of fruit snack — one of the few things he could still eat.
But the greatest gift, a new kidney, remained elusive.
A few Medtronic employees offered to be tested for a match. One was Dzieweczynski. She had never met Aaron. “But my first instinct when I heard was, ‘I want to help if I can.’”
Bingo! A match
It turned out she could; she is a match for Aaron. After lengthy medical tests, Dzieweczynski got the go-ahead in early September. Her family, husband Mark and son Dan, 18, supported her decision.
“I called Bill and asked, ‘Are you sitting down?’ she says. “We both cried.”
What motivated her sacrifice? “I still can’t get my head around why people think it’s such a big deal,” she says. In the family she grew up in, “It’s just what you do,” she says.
She says working at Medtronic was a factor. Apparently, the company’s mission statement — that sometimes-numbing document you have to read at a new-job orientation — means something at Medtronic.
“We hear so many stories about people we’ve helped,” Dzieweczienski says. “We all carry around the mission on our employee identification cards: ‘alleviating pain, restoring health and extending life.’ After a while, the words just seem to become ingrained.”
Macaroni and cheese
To celebrate, Palmquist, Dzieweczynski and their families had dinner at a restaurant where Aaron could order his beloved — but now rare — macaroni and cheese. Dzieweczynski saw him for the first time that night.
“I didn’t want to put a face to his name until I knew I could help him,” she said.
On Wednesday, the Palmquist and Dzieweczynski families will meet again as their loved ones are wheeled into adjacent operating rooms. One of Dzieweczynski’s kidneys will be removed and carried to Aaron around the corner.
Pet Peeves...
OK, we've all got 'em, but sometimes it seems to help to vent a little so here I go. A few of my pet peeves.
1. Phone Solicitors. Yeah, I know you're just trying to make a living, but man those calls can be annoying!!! To your credit, some of you are very polite, but the majority of you come off as rude and inconsiderate! If I say no, I mean NO! The following conversation ACTUALLY happened to me once.
I got a call from some organization that sends kids with cancer on some special trip. Similar to the Miracle Network. Anyway, I get a call from this lady and she's asking me for money. I don't recall the situation, but I didn't have a whole lot of extra cash so I told her "no thank you." -Now you must know this about me. I am a polite person. I am the one that holds the door for people. I will even stand and wait for a person so I can hold the door for them. I'm not a mean person. I want people to like me so I find it difficult to be rude since it's not in my nature.- So anyway, I tell this lady no thanks and she starts going off on me! She actually said, "Don't you care about kids that are dying?" among other things. I was dumbfounded. I sat in shock on the other end of the phone. She then proceeded to hang up on me.
My wife noticed that something was going on and asked me what was up. I told her about the conversation and as I told her, anger started to well up in me. How dare she? That woman knew NOTHING about me! She knew nothing of my past and she sat there and criticized me! She didn't know that when I was only 22 years old that I had a 10 month old baby going into surgery to remove a cancerous tumor. I know how scary that is. I know what it's like to have a surgeon tell you that your child has cancer. I know what it's like to have to talk to what seems like hundreds of doctors and interns about your daughters past symptoms ad nauseam. It was a frightening ordeal. So to you phone solicitors, have a heart. If you can't find other work, at least try to be polite.
2. Pet peeve number two, Hand washing, or lack thereof. Now, I can only speak to the dudes out there since I don't frequent ladies rooms but dudes, wash your hands!!! It only takes a few moments, but many dudes fail to wash their hands. I'm especially talking to you dudes that just finished with number 2! Dudes, it freaking gross!!! I refuse to help myself to the open bowl of M&M's at work. After seeing a guy walk out of the bathroom without washing his hands, then walk over the M&M's... Uhh, no thanks. I'll go buy some of my own.
3. Pet Peeve number three. Bad Drivers. I've learned that here in Minnesota, once you're over 18, you can skip some of the lessons required of those under 18. So what happens? We get immigrants come in and get their license, yet they have no clue on really how to drive. What they lack is the common sense side of driving. Things like.
A. Learning how to merge. You don't stop at the end of the on ramp!!!!
B. The left lane is the passing lane, not the drive 45 in a 65 lane.
C. At a 4 way stop, the person that arrives first has the right of way. If the two cars arrive at the same time, the person to the right has the right of way. WRITE IT DOWN!!!
There. I feel better.
That is all.
1. Phone Solicitors. Yeah, I know you're just trying to make a living, but man those calls can be annoying!!! To your credit, some of you are very polite, but the majority of you come off as rude and inconsiderate! If I say no, I mean NO! The following conversation ACTUALLY happened to me once.
I got a call from some organization that sends kids with cancer on some special trip. Similar to the Miracle Network. Anyway, I get a call from this lady and she's asking me for money. I don't recall the situation, but I didn't have a whole lot of extra cash so I told her "no thank you." -Now you must know this about me. I am a polite person. I am the one that holds the door for people. I will even stand and wait for a person so I can hold the door for them. I'm not a mean person. I want people to like me so I find it difficult to be rude since it's not in my nature.- So anyway, I tell this lady no thanks and she starts going off on me! She actually said, "Don't you care about kids that are dying?" among other things. I was dumbfounded. I sat in shock on the other end of the phone. She then proceeded to hang up on me.
My wife noticed that something was going on and asked me what was up. I told her about the conversation and as I told her, anger started to well up in me. How dare she? That woman knew NOTHING about me! She knew nothing of my past and she sat there and criticized me! She didn't know that when I was only 22 years old that I had a 10 month old baby going into surgery to remove a cancerous tumor. I know how scary that is. I know what it's like to have a surgeon tell you that your child has cancer. I know what it's like to have to talk to what seems like hundreds of doctors and interns about your daughters past symptoms ad nauseam. It was a frightening ordeal. So to you phone solicitors, have a heart. If you can't find other work, at least try to be polite.
2. Pet peeve number two, Hand washing, or lack thereof. Now, I can only speak to the dudes out there since I don't frequent ladies rooms but dudes, wash your hands!!! It only takes a few moments, but many dudes fail to wash their hands. I'm especially talking to you dudes that just finished with number 2! Dudes, it freaking gross!!! I refuse to help myself to the open bowl of M&M's at work. After seeing a guy walk out of the bathroom without washing his hands, then walk over the M&M's... Uhh, no thanks. I'll go buy some of my own.
3. Pet Peeve number three. Bad Drivers. I've learned that here in Minnesota, once you're over 18, you can skip some of the lessons required of those under 18. So what happens? We get immigrants come in and get their license, yet they have no clue on really how to drive. What they lack is the common sense side of driving. Things like.
A. Learning how to merge. You don't stop at the end of the on ramp!!!!
B. The left lane is the passing lane, not the drive 45 in a 65 lane.
C. At a 4 way stop, the person that arrives first has the right of way. If the two cars arrive at the same time, the person to the right has the right of way. WRITE IT DOWN!!!
There. I feel better.
That is all.
Monday, October 22, 2007
A little humor...
By Dave Barry, one of my favorite humor writers.
The Trojan Twinkie caper
by: Dave Barry
I'll tell you when I start to worry. I start to worry when ''officials'' tell me not to worry. This is why I am very concerned about the following Associated Press report, which was sent to me by a number of alert readers:'RICHLAND, WASH. -- Radioactive ants, flies and gnats have been found at the Hanford nuclear complex, bringing to mind those Cold-War-era `B' horror movies in which giant mutant insects are the awful price paid for mankind's entry into the Atomic Age. Officials at the nation's most contaminated nuclear site insist there is no danger of Hanford becoming the setting for a '90s version of `Them!' the 1954 movie starring James Arness and James Whitmore in which huge, marauding ants are spawned by nuclear experiments in the desert.''
Should we trust these ''officials''? I'll let you decide for yourself what the answer is (NO). But consider:
--For years, ''officials'' insisted that our cars needed air bags for safety; then, when we GOT air bags, ''officials'' started warning us how dangerous they are, the result being that many concerned parents now strap their children to the car roof.
--For years, ''officials'' told us that marijuana was an evil, criminal drug. Now, they tell us that it has, quote, ``important medical benefits warranting further investigation, but first let's order a pizza.''
--Every year, ''officials'' tell us to turn all our clocks ahead one hour, only to turn around a few months later and tell us to turn them BACK. Make up your minds, ``officials''!
My point is that we cannot trust ''officials'' any further than we can throw them by the leg. This is especially true when it comes to the Hanford nuclear complex. When this complex was built, ''officials'' said it was safe; now the area glows like a Budweiser sign. So when ''officials'' tell us that the radioactive Hanford insects are NOT going to mutate into giant monsters like the ants depicted in the 1954 movie ''Them!'' it clearly is time to study this movie and see what happened, because it is about to happen again.
I did not see ''Them!'' but I do have a plot summary from a book called ''Guide for the Film Fanatic.'' It states that after James Whitmore and James Arness discover the giant mutant ants marauding around the New Mexico desert, they kill most of them by burning their nest; however, some ants escape, and the heroes ''trace them to Los Angeles.'' The book doesn't say why the heroes would have to ''trace'' the ants; you'd think that if marauding insects the size of houses showed up in a heavily populated area, it would be mentioned prominently in the news media, but ''Guide for the Film Fanatic'' makes it sound as though Arness and Whitmore had to track the ants down via detective techniques:
JAMES ARNESS (showing a photograph to a storekeeper): Have you seen this ant? It's 23 feet tall.
STOREKEEPER (frowning at the photograph): Hmmm ... We did have a 40-foot praying mantis in here last week, but I don't recall any ... Wait a minute! Aren't you Marshal Dillon from ``Gunsmoke''?
JAMES ARNESS: Not until 1955.
Anyway, the heroes finally locate the giant ants in the Los Angeles sewer system, where, according to ''Guide for the Film Fanatic,'' there is ''a thrilling finale.'' The Guide gives no details on this finale, so we don't know whether the ants are killed, or mutate again and become agents, or what.
But the point is this: If, as now seems likely, the radioactive insects at the Hanford complex mutate and start marauding, they will almost certainly head for Los Angeles. This is a terrifying prospect. Imagine how you would feel if you tuned in to the evening news and learned that, for example, Fran Drescher had been sucked dry by a gnat the size of a water buffalo. You'd feel pretty excited. You'd hope there was video.
But innocent people could also be hurt, and that is why we need to take action NOW. We need to construct, in the desert outside of Los Angeles, a 100-foot-high, 500-foot-long, fully functional Hostess Twinkie. The giant insects would be attracted to the Twinkie, and while they were munching on it, an Earth-orbiting manned space station would launch a rocket-propelled, laser-guided, nine-story-high, 18,000-pound man's shoe, which would, by the time it reached the Twinkie, be traveling at over 6,000 miles per hour, resulting in a Stomp of Doom that would hurl globs of cream filling as far as St. Louis.
Of course, building a weapons system this size would not be easy. There would be political considerations: Powerful members of Congress would insist on having giant Twinkies built in their states, too. But that is a small price to pay for national security. We must proceed with this! We already have the technology! Which means, of course, that so does China.
The Trojan Twinkie caper
by: Dave Barry
I'll tell you when I start to worry. I start to worry when ''officials'' tell me not to worry. This is why I am very concerned about the following Associated Press report, which was sent to me by a number of alert readers:'RICHLAND, WASH. -- Radioactive ants, flies and gnats have been found at the Hanford nuclear complex, bringing to mind those Cold-War-era `B' horror movies in which giant mutant insects are the awful price paid for mankind's entry into the Atomic Age. Officials at the nation's most contaminated nuclear site insist there is no danger of Hanford becoming the setting for a '90s version of `Them!' the 1954 movie starring James Arness and James Whitmore in which huge, marauding ants are spawned by nuclear experiments in the desert.''
Should we trust these ''officials''? I'll let you decide for yourself what the answer is (NO). But consider:
--For years, ''officials'' insisted that our cars needed air bags for safety; then, when we GOT air bags, ''officials'' started warning us how dangerous they are, the result being that many concerned parents now strap their children to the car roof.
--For years, ''officials'' told us that marijuana was an evil, criminal drug. Now, they tell us that it has, quote, ``important medical benefits warranting further investigation, but first let's order a pizza.''
--Every year, ''officials'' tell us to turn all our clocks ahead one hour, only to turn around a few months later and tell us to turn them BACK. Make up your minds, ``officials''!
My point is that we cannot trust ''officials'' any further than we can throw them by the leg. This is especially true when it comes to the Hanford nuclear complex. When this complex was built, ''officials'' said it was safe; now the area glows like a Budweiser sign. So when ''officials'' tell us that the radioactive Hanford insects are NOT going to mutate into giant monsters like the ants depicted in the 1954 movie ''Them!'' it clearly is time to study this movie and see what happened, because it is about to happen again.
I did not see ''Them!'' but I do have a plot summary from a book called ''Guide for the Film Fanatic.'' It states that after James Whitmore and James Arness discover the giant mutant ants marauding around the New Mexico desert, they kill most of them by burning their nest; however, some ants escape, and the heroes ''trace them to Los Angeles.'' The book doesn't say why the heroes would have to ''trace'' the ants; you'd think that if marauding insects the size of houses showed up in a heavily populated area, it would be mentioned prominently in the news media, but ''Guide for the Film Fanatic'' makes it sound as though Arness and Whitmore had to track the ants down via detective techniques:
JAMES ARNESS (showing a photograph to a storekeeper): Have you seen this ant? It's 23 feet tall.
STOREKEEPER (frowning at the photograph): Hmmm ... We did have a 40-foot praying mantis in here last week, but I don't recall any ... Wait a minute! Aren't you Marshal Dillon from ``Gunsmoke''?
JAMES ARNESS: Not until 1955.
Anyway, the heroes finally locate the giant ants in the Los Angeles sewer system, where, according to ''Guide for the Film Fanatic,'' there is ''a thrilling finale.'' The Guide gives no details on this finale, so we don't know whether the ants are killed, or mutate again and become agents, or what.
But the point is this: If, as now seems likely, the radioactive insects at the Hanford complex mutate and start marauding, they will almost certainly head for Los Angeles. This is a terrifying prospect. Imagine how you would feel if you tuned in to the evening news and learned that, for example, Fran Drescher had been sucked dry by a gnat the size of a water buffalo. You'd feel pretty excited. You'd hope there was video.
But innocent people could also be hurt, and that is why we need to take action NOW. We need to construct, in the desert outside of Los Angeles, a 100-foot-high, 500-foot-long, fully functional Hostess Twinkie. The giant insects would be attracted to the Twinkie, and while they were munching on it, an Earth-orbiting manned space station would launch a rocket-propelled, laser-guided, nine-story-high, 18,000-pound man's shoe, which would, by the time it reached the Twinkie, be traveling at over 6,000 miles per hour, resulting in a Stomp of Doom that would hurl globs of cream filling as far as St. Louis.
Of course, building a weapons system this size would not be easy. There would be political considerations: Powerful members of Congress would insist on having giant Twinkies built in their states, too. But that is a small price to pay for national security. We must proceed with this! We already have the technology! Which means, of course, that so does China.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Hillary Clinton's donor list
I found this one rather interesting. Hillary seems to have a rather large and generous following in China Town in New York. The funny thing is, she's getting a lot of money from people who don't make a lot of money. Seems a bit fishy to me. A couple key quotes in the linked story below;
"The Times examined the cases of more than 150 donors who provided checks to Clinton after fundraising events geared to the Chinese community. One-third of those donors could not be found using property, telephone or business records. Most have not registered to vote, according to public records."
and
"Like many who traveled this path, most of the Chinese reported as contributing to Clinton's campaign have never voted. Many speak little or no English. Some seem to lead such ephemeral lives that neighbors say they've never heard of them."
Find the story here.
That is all.
"The Times examined the cases of more than 150 donors who provided checks to Clinton after fundraising events geared to the Chinese community. One-third of those donors could not be found using property, telephone or business records. Most have not registered to vote, according to public records."
and
"Like many who traveled this path, most of the Chinese reported as contributing to Clinton's campaign have never voted. Many speak little or no English. Some seem to lead such ephemeral lives that neighbors say they've never heard of them."
Find the story here.
That is all.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
What's worse? Texting and driving or drinking and driving?
I don't get. Here's a story where a man hit a train while driving and texting. OK, I fully agree that cell phones and driving can be a distraction for some, but what is the real story here? Here is the headline.
Man texting while driving hits train Read the story and you will find this line; Gillespie, who had turned 38 the day before, was charged with drunken driving... Shouldn't that be the headline? Drunk drives into train? Or perhaps Drunk hits train while texting? I find it incredible that they don't even mention this in the headline.
Maybe I'm old fashioned. I don't know.
That is all.
Man texting while driving hits train Read the story and you will find this line; Gillespie, who had turned 38 the day before, was charged with drunken driving... Shouldn't that be the headline? Drunk drives into train? Or perhaps Drunk hits train while texting? I find it incredible that they don't even mention this in the headline.
Maybe I'm old fashioned. I don't know.
That is all.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
The pill for middle schoolers?
That's what they're proposing in Maine! Yup! Your little 11 year old daughter can get birth control pills without your consent or knowledge from school, because that's what we send our kids to school for anyway. Forget the reading and writing thing. Let's look at the possible side effects.
Side Effects
Prescribe 'the pill' at middle school?
Side Effects
Although the majority are not serious. They include:
- Nausea
- Weight gain
- Sore or swollen breasts
- Small amount of blood, or spotting, between periods
- Lighter periods
- Mood changes
The following side effects, easily remembered by the word "ACHES," are less common but more serious. If you experience any of these, contact your doctor immediately. If you cannot reach your doctor, go to an emergency room or urgent care center for evaluation. These symptoms may indicate a serious disorder, such as liver disease, gallbladder disease, stroke, blood clots, high blood pressure, or heart disease. They include:
- Abdominal pain (stomach pain)
- Chest pain
- Headaches (severe)
- Eye problems (blurred vision)
- Swelling and/or aching in the legs and thighs
Prescribe 'the pill' at middle school?
Student health officials say a broad contraceptive program is 'totally needed.'
Article here
Students who have parental permission to be treated at King Middle School's health center would be able to get birth control prescriptions under a proposal that the Portland School Committee will consider Wednesday.
The proposal would build on the King Student Health Center's practice of providing condoms as part of its reproductive health program since it opened in 2000, said Lisa Belanger, a nurse practitioner who oversees the city's student health centers.
If the committee approves the King proposal, it would be the first middle school in Maine to make a full range of contraception available to some students in grades 6 to 8, said Nancy Birkhimer, director of teen health programs for the Maine Department of Health and Human Services. Most middle schoolers are ages 11-13.
Although students must have written parental permission to be treated at Portland's school-based health centers, state law allows them to seek confidential health care and to decide whether to inform their parents about the services they receive, Belanger said.
Proponents say a small number of King students are sexually active, but those who are need better access to birth control.
Of 134 students who visited King's health center during the 2006-07 school year, five students, or 4 percent, reported having sexual intercourse, said Amanda Rowe, lead nurse in Portland's school health centers.
"This is a service that is totally needed," Rowe said. "It's about very few kids, but they are kids who don't have the same opportunities and access as other students."
The percentage of middle school students in Maine who reported having sexual intercourse dropped from 23 percent in 1997 to 13 percent in 2005, according to the Maine Youth Risk Behavior Survey.
"Thirteen percent is still more than one in 10 students," Birkhimer said.
The School Committee will meet at 7 p.m. in Room 250, Portland Arts and Technology High School, off Allen Avenue.
Robert O'Brien, who chairs the committee's policy subcommittee, said his panel has yet to discuss the proposal.
He declined to comment until after the matter has been aired.
The issue could stir controversy, as it has in the past.
"I'm personally fine with it, but I know some parents might not be," said Jennifer Southard, wife of City Councilor Edward Suslovic, who has two daughters at King. "I think information and access are good things. I would hope my children would come to me, but some students might not have that option."
The city's Division of Public Health, which made the birth- control proposal, operates seven health centers in Portland Public Schools in an effort to increase access to physical, dental and mental health care.
They are located at Portland High School, Deering High School, Casco Bay High School, King Middle School, West School special education program, and two elementary schools -- Reiche Community School and East End Community School.
The first centers opened in the high schools more than a decade ago, Belanger said.
There are 27 school-based health centers in Maine, 20 of which are funded and overseen by the state, including those in Portland, Birkhimer said.
There are more than 1,700 school-connected health centers in the United States.
One in four provides birth control ranging from condoms to prescription contraception, said Divya Mohan, spokeswoman for the National Assembly on School-Based Health Care.
Last year, Portland's program cost about $500,000 to operate, including state and foundation grants, MaineCare/Medicaid and private health insurance reimbursements, and in-kind contributions of space and services provided by the city, Belanger said.
Of 2,877 students eligible to attend Portland's seven health centers last year, 1,261, or 44 percent, were enrolled. The center at King, which has 510 students, enrolled 134 students and tallied 266 visits last year, Belanger said.
The health centers at Portland High, Deering High, Casco Bay High and West School have provided prescription contraception as part of overall primary health care since 2003, Belanger said.The King Student Health Center has provided condoms since it opened in 2000, along with counseling and testing for pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, she said.
Contraception would be prescribed after a physical examination by a physician or nurse practitioner, Belanger said.
Types of prescription birth control available through the health centers include contraceptive pills, patches or injections, as well as the morning-after pill. Diaphragms and IUDs are not usually prescribed, she said.
Belanger said health center workers encourage students to tell their parents about their health center experiences, but by law they cannot compel students to do so or inform parents without the student's consent.
King is the only one of Portland's three middle schools with a health center, primarily because it has more students who get free or reduced-price lunch, Belanger said.
Moore and Lincoln middle schools don't have health centers, and their students are ineligible for treatment at the King Student Health Center.
Belanger said the top five reasons for visits to the health center last year were, in descending order: immunizations, physical examinations, sore throat, upper respiratory infection and asthma.
Nationally, the top five reproductive health services offered at school-based health centers were, in descending order: pregnancy testing, abstinence counseling, HIV/AIDS counseling, birth control counseling, and the diagnosis and treatment of sexually transmitted diseases, according to the national assembly.
Staff Writer Kelley Bouchard can be contacted at 791-6328 or at:
kbouchard@pressherald.com
Article here
Universal Health Care
For those of you interested in Nationalized Health Care, or Universal, or whatever you want to call it, this is what you have to look forward to.
During a difficult pregnancy, Elizabeth Jones was monitored every day because doctors were worried about the health of her baby.
But on the day of the birth, she was twice turned away from the hospital because it was full - forcing her partner to deliver the baby himself at their home.
Father delivered baby after partner was turned away from NHS hospital - TWICE
Last updated at 18:04pm on 17th October 2007During a difficult pregnancy, Elizabeth Jones was monitored every day because doctors were worried about the health of her baby.
But on the day of the birth, she was twice turned away from the hospital because it was full - forcing her partner to deliver the baby himself at their home.
Miss Jones, 24, and her partner Anthony Jones - who coincidentally share the same surname - dashed to their local maternity unit when she started to have strong contractions.
However, their excitement at the prospect of the birth soon turned to horror when staff on the ward told them: "Sorry we are full. Come back later."
Medics at the Princess of Wales Hospital in Bridgend, near Cardiff, insisted the baby would not arrive for hours and suggested the couple go and have a cup of coffee while they tried to free up a bed.
Three hours later, they returned to the hospital when Miss Jones's contractions became more frequent.
This time she was given a thorough examination by a midwife who confidently sent them away for the second time, telling them the baby was still "hours away".
Once again, the frustrated couple headed back to their home in Bridgend. But within minutes Miss Jones felt the baby arriving.
Her partner's 17-year-old daughter Kirsty called 999 and relayed instructions, as he delivered the baby himself on October 12 at 11am.
"It was a great experience - but at the time I wished we were in hospital in a controlled environment," Mr Jones, 39, said. "What if something had gone wrong?
"It's worrying that the only maternity hospital for miles around had to turn us away twice just while Elizabeth was in the last stages of labour.
"You hear so much about the NHS being under pressure but you would think that maternity would be a priority. Many things can wait for a later appointment - but never a baby.
"It's very worrying that they haven't got the facilities to do the job properly when you want it.
He added: "They need more beds and at least another ward at the hospital. We've been told that it's always getting full there. We turned out to be fine - the next family may not be so lucky."
During her pregnancy, Miss Jones became a regular visitor to the hospital because the baby was growing unusually slowly. She was given scans twice a week and was monitored by the maternity team on a daily basis.
But fortunately, her new-born, who has been named Emily, arrived without complications, weighing a healthy 6lb 8oz.
She said: "It was one big shock. I wanted to have her in the hospital after all the problems we had. I knew she was coming soon because the pain was strong.
"Anthony did a fantastic job - but it's not what we expected from the NHS. I was in too much pain to be too nervous."
Mr Jones is still exhilarated at the experience of delivering a baby, although he has no plans to switch careers just yet.
"It was so quick that I didn't have time to think about it," he said. "I was shocked but just had to get on with it. I was getting instructions on the phone from the 999 operator.
"I realised Emily was coming out and there was nothing to stop her now.
"I just saw Emily's head coming out as the paramedics arrived. But they said I was doing a good job and I should just carry on.
"I delivered her into the world with the paramedic standing by to help me if anything had gone wrong. But luckily it all went well and it was an amazing experience. We just feel very thankful that there weren't any complications."
The couple, who have a four-year-old daughter Bethanne, are campaigning to prevent other pregnant women from being turned away from the hospital.
A spokesman for the hospital said: "The maternity unit from time to time experiences peaks in demand and during the last 12 months we have seen an increase in births at the Princess of Wales Hospital.
"We can confirm that it was necessary for this unit to close recently for a short time to new maternity admissions due to the unit reaching full capacity."
Article here
Monday, October 15, 2007
Why so difficult?
Ok, here's a question. When did this HTML stuff get so difficult? Oh, I know it hasn't really changed any, but I used to find it so much easier to work with when suddenly, I can't seem to do anything HTML'y without help!
I used to be such a geek! Using EDLIN, EDIT, good old DOS based programs were no problem! Write a bat file? No problem! Now I find myself asking my high school age daughter to help me edit stuff! Like my Myspace page! AGH! I'm feeling left behind in technology.
Time for me to start studying again....
That is all.
I used to be such a geek! Using EDLIN, EDIT, good old DOS based programs were no problem! Write a bat file? No problem! Now I find myself asking my high school age daughter to help me edit stuff! Like my Myspace page! AGH! I'm feeling left behind in technology.
Time for me to start studying again....
That is all.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
