SATURDAY and SUNDAY, February 28 and 29, 2004

The story is told of the situation in London, England during the early days of the "London Blitz" in 1940,  when savage nightly bombings by the Germans required sudden visits by the populace to the nearest bomb shelters, where they had to wait out the destruction going on overhead.  In those early days, the accompanying anxiety sometimes led to outbursts of terror and near-riots.   Until, that is, that someone figured out how to avoid such reaction: every 15 minutes someone made the announcement that "Ladies and Gentlemen, the news is...there is no news."  That little device kept everyone settled down.
Well, if you have been reading the offerings on this Rapid Response section regularly, there are times when "the news is...there is no news."  That is, I'm up-to-date in my reactions to recent events.  But, not to worry: there will be more soon.

GS

FRIDAY, February 27, 2004

• Marriage.  The only reason for discussing this here again is to make reference to a "pro - con" pair of articles regarding the merits of a U.S.constitutional amendment, as recommended by the President.  Please see "Marriage and Democracy", Editorial, and "Let States Decide", by John Yoo in the Opinion section, both in today's WSJ, pA8.
• This next could be entitled: "GM Fiddles While The World Burns".  A secret Pentagon report recently published by the British weekly The Observer warns that "climate change may lead to global catastrophe costing millions of lives and is a far greater threat than terrorism", with these effects possibly occurring within this decade.  But today we read in the WSJ that "Car Makers Split Over Timing of Hydrogen-Powered Vehicles" (Marketplace, pB1).  HELLO!!!   And, on a related topic, we have a chance to disagree (not an uncommon occurrence) with an editorial in today's WSJ: "Is Free Trade Immoral?"  Free trade is not immoral, but unfettered laissez faire commerce is immoral.  There are certain immutable facts: lies from Government; and greed from Business.
• Here's a topic about which I know a little bit more than about economics. "Doctors and Patients Air Grievances", by Laura Landro, WSJ Thursday, February 26, 2004, Health and Family, pD4.  Since becoming a physician in 1957, I have never done anything for patients, but rather with patients. Ours is a co-equal relationship, with individual rights and responsibilities.  It is also a "mutual admiration society", or it will not proceed.  So the recommendations embodied in this article, all very desirable, have always been S.O.P. in my medical practice.   "FOR YOUR HEALTH CARE, CHOOSE...DON'T SETTLE."

THURSDAY, February 26, 2004

Today, I saw "The Passion of the Christ".  Excellent...and true.

GS

TUESDAY and WEDNESDAY, February 24 and 25, 2004

This is a busy news cycle.

• On the issue of Marriage: a) Heavyweight: "After more than two centuries of American jurisprudence and millennia of human experience, a few judges and local authorities are presuming to change the most fundamental institution of civilization".   President George W. Bush.  b) Lightweight: "All Americans should be concerned when a president who is in political trouble tries to tamper with the Constitution of the United States at the start of his re-election campaign."  Senator John Kerry.  Also, it is curious to see Democrats and fellow -travellers expressing concern about states' rights.  Isn't their's the party of big centralized government?  And haven't we addressed the really big questions of our society through Federal law: slavery, women's suffrage, equal educational and other rights, even abortion?  The President did say, correctly I believe, that he has no objection to "civil unions".  Anything that tends to stabilize the actions of a small minority of our population from more irresponsible to more lasting relationships should be encouraged.
• Regarding Governor Rowland, The Day editorial today has it right when it notes that "It's not about the hot tub" but about the entire culture of Connecticut politics that needs reforming, at long last.
• News Flash!  The National Education Association objects to the hyperbole of being called a "terrorist organization".   I would, too.  But Education Secretary Rod Paige insisted correctly the the union uses "obstructionist scare tactics."  Has anybody heard of the principle called "the best interests of the child"?
• Jobs.  There's a problem ripe for solution...or for demagoguery.  Senators Kerry and Edwards continue to espouse what can only be termed an insular, protectionist stance.  This approach is put in perspective by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. in his Opinion article entitled "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, (Fibs, Fibs, Fibs)", in today's Wall Street Journal (pA15).  And now Senator Edward Kennedy has proposed a "U.S. Workers Protection Act of 2004" which reportedly "would deny federal contracts to companies using overseas labor to do work previously done in the United States" (The Day, today, pD5).  This sounds suspiciously like the promises of another political age: "a chicken in every pot; a car in every garage".  In this country we have a permanent loss of manufacturing jobs and a serious shortage of skilled workers in information and other technologies and in health care.  Isn't there a solution here, what has worked in every decade since the first Industrial Revolution: RE-TRAINING?  This should be the WPA and CCC of this part of the 21st century.  Everything else is demagoguery.  Will affected American workers and their unions recognize this and demand it?  Or will they simply reflexively pull the Democratic lever, in true Pavlovian fashion?  We'll see.
• Finally, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan may have decided that he needs a rest.  On the same day he is reported to have proposed that 1) the Social Security funds of the "baby boomers" should be used to reduce the Federal deficit; and 2) that Congress should consider increasing the retirement age and offering less generous increases in Social Security benefits.  Chairman Greenspan, where shall we send your mail?

MONDAY, February 23, 2004

Senator John Kerry.  There's less there than meets the eye.  The other day he was dismissive of the efforts of Senator John Edwards, an attractive candidate if you don't mind his positions.  Then he challenges President Bush to discuss their respective roles in the 1960's and early 1970's.  (Please see Rapid Response, February 5, above). Also see the following articles:

• "John Kerry's Feet Firmly Planted In His Shifting Sands", by Jeff Jacoby, The Day, Friday, February 20, 2004, Commentary, pA9)
• "Back On Top, Weary Kerry Falls Into Bad Habits", by Ron Fournier (AP), The Day, Sunday, February 22, 2004, Nation, pA4.
• "Blunt and Influential, Kerry's Wife is an X Factor", by David M. Halbfinger, The New York Times Sunday, February 22, 2004, p3.

SUNDAY, February 22, 2004

Medical Malpractice.  Now there's a subject to which you do not want to give a "rapid response".  However, since I have been writing on this and related subjects since the first "medical mal-practice crisis" in the mid-1970's, I feel less constrained.  (Please see the other offerings on this web site under the categories "Health Law", "Medical Mal-Practice Sweepstakes", and "Medical Errors").  In addition, the good set of articles embodied in today's Perspective section of The Day (the day.com., pC1) on this subject are a springboard from which to proceed.  Specific reference should be made to The Day Editorial ("Don't Rush Into A Quick Fix") and to the article by John Peter Bigos, M.D. (pC3).  All of the proposals in these two articles will have to be made part of any effective solution to the problem facing health care professionals and their patients.  Also laudable is the absence in these two offerings of the hyped importance of "caps on pain and suffering".  That is a much smaller part of the problem; and a $250,000 cap would be inadequate for the needs of both patient and representing attorneys, anyway.

As a physician and also as an attorney for many years, I have had numerous occasions to participate in medical mal-practice cases...as an expert witness and as co-counsel, for both plaintiffs and for defendants.  From this experience, the following are some observations to be added to the above proposals.  If the current level of debate on the subject reminds one of the three blind men charged with describing an elephant from three distinctly different vantage-points, the following may be considered the view from inside the belly of the beast.

• A potential case begins long before any mal-occurrence or mal-practice.  It begins with a gradual erosion in the doctor-patient relationship that leads to discontent and ultimate anger on the part of the parties.  All should avoid that...or one or both parties should end the relationship long before that occurs.
• The three attributes of a physician that are most important to a patient are ability, affability and availability...in reverse order!
• The following is difficult but important: any bad outcome, whether mal-occurrence or possible mal-practice, warrants a prompt explanation given to the patient, with every effort made - without charge - to ameliorate the situation.  And this should be done without threat of loss of insurance coverage by the insurance company alleging interference with its ability to defend a possible case.
• Alternatives to filing a court case, at least voluntarily at the outset, should be presentation before a medical mal-practice screening panel, such as exists in some states, and such as has existed in Connecticut Law since the late 1970's...without any use made of it at all.  Also, mediation and/or arbitration should be embraced by both patients and physicians as means to faster and more equitable resolutions.
• If decision is made to file a case, the filing attorney should be required to file - not only a Certificate of Good Faith Belief, as is now the law - but a certificate based upon the discoverable expert opinion of an appropriate physician who will also be required to testify at trial...which is not now the case.
• Both plaintiff and defendant should be placed under time-constraints, supported by timely access to court, to develop their cases and to go to trial.  Delays averaging 3-5 years are now Justice delayed and denied to all.
• Greater scrutiny should be placed by the Judge on the scientifically - based expert opinions offered by both sides.  "Schlock" medicine and its purveyors should be barred, and should be sanctioned where egregious.  That also means that health care professionals should consider it their duty to the public to be available as expert witnesses, except where clear conflict of interest exists.  This would be much better for all than the continuing "conspiracy of silence" still practised and tolerated by some in the profession.
• Judges should clearly instruct juries regarding the difference between "mal-occurrence" and "mal-practice", even apart from the "battle of experts", and should not tolerate sympathy awards not supported by the facts and the law.
• Health care professionals should take mistakes as experiences to learn from.  They should consider the insurance they pay for as part of their obligation  to "do no harm".  They should not take the accusation of mal-practice as a personal affront. If they believe it to be unfounded, they should defend themselves vigorously...and should also file counter - suits when appropriate.
• Mal-practice Insurance companies should be required to reveal all their financial practices that impact on the premiums they charge for levels of coverage, subject to modification by State action.  And they should be required by State law to market medical mal-practice insurance if they write any other kind of insurance in the State.  The justification for this intrusion in private industry is the central role that they play in the protection of the health and welfare of the society (under police powers and other theories).
• The public should be very careful about their health care, both preventive and interventional.  The excuse of "not knowing" no longer is tenable.  "For your health care, choose, don't settle".  And don't expect a medical national lottery to put Humpty-Dumpty back together again.  Remember: of the cases that are actually filed, over 70% are won by the defendant physician after the expenditure of vast quantities of time, money and emotion by all involved.  Furthermore, resort to some of the alternatives noted above...and even including an administrative mechanism like Workers' Compensation...could distribute a great deal more justice than is now seeing the light of day.

GS

FRIDAY and SATURDAY, February 20 and 21, 2004

Today, a local news flash.  In a surprising offering by Chuck Potter in The Day today entitled "Allegiance is private, even in public service", we are presented with a new Pledge: "The Pledge of the 'Me' Generation".  It has to do with the role of the Pledge of Allegiance, and evidently also the Star Spangled Banner, in the private and public lives of American citizens.  In this article he states personally that "military service doesn't necessarily equate with patriotism or allegiance".  He takes to task the National Anthem as "a war song about rockets' red glare and ...."  He questions its reference to our "sweet land of liberty...", listing past, current and imagined inequities that exist in  this nation, while making no reference to the vast inequities that afflict every area and nation in the world as a part of the human condition.  But the most telling parts are embodied in comments like the folliwing:
"There are no laws demanding allegiance to America".
"That is not to say I don't appreciate what America has to offer.  I do, and I want more of it".
"And allegiance surely isn't a pre-requisite for public service".
Mr. Potter then ends with an endorsement of a comment made by a friend: "The pledge is like your oath as a citizen.  It's a pledge to uphold the rights and benefits that come with being an American".

And where, Mr. Potter and other advocates of "me, me, me...", is the place for reciprocal responsibilities?  That, in a nutshell, is the central problem of this society over the last 30 years.  In this instance, I agree that recitation of the Pledge or singing of the Anthem should not be mandatory for any individual, whether in school or at public meetings.  But it should continue to be the norm; it should be expected; and failure to do so should be accompanied by appropriate social consequences in a society that long ago decided and fought for the kind of country the vast majority of Americans want.   That isn't prejudice or coercion. It follows actions that in a social order should have consequences.  Actually, the only thing about this statement that surprises me is its author.

GS

THURSDAY, February 19, 2004

Now, let's see if I have this right.  The Democratic Party platform for this year, to be inferred from the pronouncements of spokesmen like its Chairman and Senators John Kerry and Edward Kennedy, is as follows:

• "Anybody But Bush".  Al Sharpton, call your office!
• The "No Child Left Behind" law is bad educational and legal policy.  Rather, we should continue to pour billions of dollars into that black hole called "Public Education" in this country, controlled by a monopoly of mediocrities and hypocrites.
• Job losses are always a bad thing, not only for the individuals affected, but also for the nation.  Rather, let us revoke NAFTA and GATT, assume an isolationist position, trigger a world depression, but allow second and third generation steel-workers, miners, manufacturing types and all farmers to continue to stay in the same jobs despite the modern irrelevancy of some of those jobs - through an endless cascade of corporate and public welfare schemes.  Better that, than to identify problems that won't go away and re-train the affected parts of our work force for jobs that America does need.
• Do as much as possible centrally through the Federal government, no matter how inefficiently it is done, how much in taxes are assessed and wasted, and how much it stifles the engine of America called Business.
• Protect every newt and sparrow, every tree and blade of grass, and bring every flowing stream to the quality of Evian (which is "naive" spelled backwards), with no regard for the concepts of "conservation" which seek to balance rational use with preservation.  Who cares if that leads, among other things, to perpetual reliance on Mid-East oil...at least until that reliance leads to World War III.
• And let's do nothing unilaterally, certainly not without the approval of that super-power, the United Nations...and especially not national self-defense.  Rather let's wait, within our bastion of individual rights without comparable responsibilities, until this country is hit once or twice more as on 9/11 or worse - and then turns markedly to the right in ways none of us want.

GS

SUNDAY through WEDNESDAY, February 15 through 18, 2004

If nothing else, the current Democratic Primary follies have revealed the Democratic game plan: defeat George W. Bush at all cost, with any willing candidate, and especially with any methods including distortions, innuendo, demagoguery, defamation...Their main thrust has been to attack the President's truthfulness and personal integrity, so as to conjure up a "credibility gap" that no sitting President could survive.  Despite the available facts, in March of this year as well as now, and despite oral and written testimony by the likes of Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet,  Condelezza Rice, David Kay and many others,  people like Senators Kerry and Kennedy have accused the President - without facts - of actions which, if true, would constitute "high crimes and mis-demeanors" warranting impeachment.  This they have been able to do because...well, they are politicians.
Well, it's not a very effective defense for a person accused of lying to say merely that "he's a liar, too."  The President must aggressively prove to and convince the American public that he did not lie and did not mis-represent anything he dealt with during the last three years.  Otherwise, true or false, the accusation will stick.  The interview with Tim Russert was a good start; but it was only a start.  And he must do it himself, not through surrogates or web sites or television ads.  The people want to believe him.  But doubts have been effectively cast, by means which in any arena other than the political arena would be actionable in court.  Mr. President, that's your mission, if you choose to accept it.  Otherwise, you will lose this election.

GS

SATURDAY, February 14, 2004

Just when I was looking forward to a relaxing St. Valentine's Day, the newspaper arrives:

• As stated earlier in this section, there is a great difference between contractual agreements among two individuals of the same sex and their respective employers regarding dependent rights and other benefits...and any formal recognition given by society to "same-sex marriages".  Ours is a society which fought two wars to gain our independence for ourselves and then for all slaves; a society that recognizes its existence "under God" in various formal ways; and a society which reserves the formal recognition and the blessings of marriage to two people of opposite sex, for the main purpose of child bearing and child rearing in order to guarantee and perpetuate the stability and future of that society.  Tolerance and understanding of homosexuals must stop at this bright line.
• In a battle, military or political, playing "defense" is a sucker's game.  But that is exactly what this Bush Administration seems bent on doing, in a variety of areas: In Iraq, by refusing so far to deploy adequate military strength (especially personnel) to protect our own forces and the Iraqi people; in its Education initiative, wherein we read today that "Special ed students now must take standard test" and have these predictable results counted with all the other school results; in the issue of job losses in the country, many probably permanent, where President Bush seems to be allowing Senator Kerry to "eat his lunch" regarding a national program of job re-training originally proposed by the President in his State of the Union message; on the issue of military service, where the President wastes a perfectly tenable position for his actions in 1968, versus the less ambiguous situation regarding Viet Nam in 1966 and earlier; in the area of involvement with American business...where his Vice President has in effect been re-named "Dick Halliburton".  Wake up, Mr. President.  This is your election to lose.  And a loss would place this country in very poor hands indeed.

FRIDAY, February 13, 2004

For a practising Roman Catholic whose first twelve years of school education took place in Catholic schools, the child abuse scandals involving Roman Catholic priests have produced in me a variety of reactions, some of which have been shared on this web site.  However, never has it produced depression or immobilization.  Instead, I determined to learn more about my religion and about the organization that has embodied that religion over the last 2000 years.  As a result, I have read the following books, which I would recommend for the same purpose to Catholics and non-Catholics alike:

• A Concise Hostory of the Catholic Church, by Thomas Bokenkotter, Doubleday, 1977, 2004;
• The Battle for the American Church, by Msgr. George A. Kelly, Doubleday, 1979;
• Papal Sin, Structures of Deceit, by Garry Wills, Doubleday, 2000;
• Michelangelo and the Pope's Ceiling, by Ross King, Penguin Books, 2003.

• My Faith is more secure than ever;
• The religion is sacred and supernatural, a super-highway through this life and to the next, the "main event";
• The organization on which Jesus Christ founded this religion is human, and as such has been capable of the greatest good and the greatest evil;
• The fact that the Church has survived and generally thrived for over 2000 years is a tribute to both that humanity and to constant Divine intervention;
• The Church survived the attacks of the Romans to become a great temporal as well as spiritual power, actually the only stable organization to get humanity through the Dark Ages of barbarian invasions and destruction;
• That experience with temporal power corrupted Church leaders and a succession of Popes (including some terrible men) to maintain that power at almost any cost right into the 20th century;
• Despite that history, Church leaders and a succession of famous Saints always sought to define, maintain and spread the "Good News of the Gospel", a task in which they were very ably assisted by a devout monk named Martin Luther who tore them violently away from some of their more egregious activities of the time;
• Throughout that history and to the present time, the human Church has placed great store on stability and conformity, often siding with reactionary forces to insure a minimum of change; this manifested itself in the Church's reaction to the Renaissance, to the revolutionary spirit of the eighteenth century, to the explosion of science and learning of the nineteenth century, and to its halting response to the "aggiornamento" of Vatican II prompted by Pope John XXIII and thwarted by his early death.
• The Church continues to have a hard time with changing times...and that is both the bad news and the good news for an institution that has survived for 2000 years and is likely to guide the world for another 2000 years.
• And so, for those of us members of the Roman Catholic Faith and also of the Roman Catholic Church, the latter is a "necessary but not sufficient" component of our lives.  Nor is it the more important component.    The Church is human; our Faith is Divine.

THURSDAY, February 12, 2004

What's going on here?  The first priority for a government, home-grown or occupying, is to provide security.  As commented here on numerous times in the past, American forces have not been able to achieve that goal for themselves, let alone for the Iraqi people.  Not enough troops on the ground.  Not enough pain applied to collaborators.  Not enough incentives for favorably disposed Iraqis to cooperate in ferreting out the bad guys.  This has been bad enough as the count of American dead and wounded mounts.  It will totally defeat our goals in and for Iraq if we do not provide adequate protection for the new Iraq military and police forces being formed.  Witness the scores of Iraqi dead from terrorist attacks in recent days.  Are American troops protecting police stations and staging areas? Are we offering adequate rewards, including the offer of emigration to the U.S.A. for useful informants and their families?  Are we applying martial law and curfews in particularly troublesome areas? And if we do not have enough troops there to get the job done, why not?  Finally, why not work to meet the demands of the Shiite majority for early general elections to legitimize a new Iraqi government?  Does this go counter to someone's theoretical exit strategy?  These problems are reminding me more and more of recalcitrant problem-solvers and not of refractory problems.  Just what ended up producing the prolonged tragedy of Viet Nam long after our leaders should have known better.

GS

MONDAY through WEDNESDAY, February 9 through 11, 2004

• Shakespeare must have had political compaigns in mind: "'Tis a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."  The Democratic claptrap so far certainly qualifies, especially as intoned in the bass voice of Senator John Kerry, as he beats his military ribbon-festooned chest.  But "where's the beef"?  All conclusory statements, all inuendo, all demagoguery, no facts.  By contrast, his history of inconsistencies on many issues over the years is coming out.  What is also coming out is the fact that the Democratic Party has no viable alternative positions suited to present-day realities.  It is bankrupt of ideas.  Nevertheless, the true believers seem to think that that's all they need.  In a recent editorial in The Day (Tuesday, February 10, 2004) we read the following regarding President Bush's interview with Tim Russert: "In response, the president sounded patronizing occasionally, especially when he preceded his statements by saying, 'Americans have to understand....'  Mr Bush doesn't get it at all.  Americans don't have to understand; they are under no such obligation. On the contrary, he, as president, has to understand."  Ridiculous.  Americans certainly do have an obligation to understand, and to understand far more than that which can be gleaned from thirty-second sound bites or from demagogic tripe, or from any single source of information.   Fellow citizens, many Democrats have always had a low regard for our intelligence.
• Not even the dead can rest in peace these days.  This week we learned that a "medical examiner's report" - with no autopsy - on Dr. Robert Atkins (of Atkins diet fame) was negligently revealed to a group of physicians who have always been critical of his work.  It seems that, after incurring a severe head injury in a fall, and after having been in a coma and in intensive care for days before his demise, his weight was about 250 lbs. - allegedly a sign of obesity.  We then learned, in the back pages, that his weight upon admission to the hospital was about 190 lbs, and that he had been suffering from a viral cardiomyopathy for many months - and not coronary artery disease as alleged by his critics.  What is all this about?  It is about ethical misconduct by the physicians involved in this story.  Shame on all of you - and of course also on the bottom-feeding media for participating in this.  Of course, shame is in short supply these days.

SUNDAY, February 8, 2004

• This morning we had a unique opportunity to see and hear President Bush defend and articulate the reasons for his actions during the last three years, in response to stiff questioning by Tim Russert on the NBC program Meet The Press.  In substance and in manner, the President conducted himself as an articulate leader for difficult times, a man with an accurate compass - instead of a moist finger held up to the wind - to guide him.  It will be interesting to see how his remarks will be quoted and mis-quoted during the coming days and months.  Americans would be well advised to read comments such as his, as well as the recent statements of Secretary of State Colin Powell, David Kay and CIA Director Tenet in the unabridged original.  You can be sure that the Cut and Paste functions on the computers of many politicos and liberal media types will be put to heavy use during this election compaign.
• Supporting my take on the activities surrounding Connecticut Governor Rowland is an article today in The Day (The Day.com) entitled: "Backroom Government-For-Sale: A Two-Party System" (in Perspective, Section C1).  It is written by Susan Knep, President of the Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc. and a former mayor of East Hartford. "Today, Democrats control the state legislature, as they have for years.  During their reign, they never initiated a credible inquiry into corruption in Connecticut's government.  They also failed to develop strong ethic and conflict-of-interest laws or to instill a system of checks and balances to protect the taxpayers' money as evidenced by our loss of $220 million in the Enron-CRRA debacle...The strong Ethic Laws which State Democrats recently rejected must be resurrected and passed."  Another reference is the article, in the same edition, pC3, by Superior Court judge Robert Satter entitled "A Word Of Caution On Impeachment".  Now can we get on with the search for facts before passing judgment and imposing sentence?

SATURDAY, February 7, 2004

• When is "news" no such thing?  When Common Cause has to have a "study" that "shows how contributors can benefit".  (Legal Contributions Seen As A Source For Potential Problem, by Ted Mann, The Day Saturday, Jan. 31, pA1).  Then we have the recent news that Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is going to seek ethical and legal reforms regarding the dealings between the State and private parties.  Where have he and the Connecticut Legislature been all these years when patronage and cronyism have been endemic in this State?  So now they all seem to want Governor Rowland to "cop a plea" by falling on his political sword, so that the heat will be off for reform, and everybody can live happily ever after, as usual.  Sorry.  Let all the formal investigations bear fruit.  Then let's see what needs to be done, and to whose ox.
• This probably won't be the last time that I mention this.  The Wall Street Journal is an excellent newspaper for general news, and is a veritable graduate school course in public affairs day after day on its Opinion pages.  And, except for its Review and Outlook column, carrying its suitably biased editorials, the heading Opinion does not do the content justice, given the factual documentation that is embodied in each selection.  Maybe I'm particularly pleased with one offering in yesterday's edition (pA16), wherein former Senator and Presidential candidate Bob Dole wrote an article quoting Senator Kerry on being a veteran (Kerry's Own Words):  "We do not need to divide America over who served and how."  Please see my offering in this section on the previous day.  Maybe somebody IS out there...

FRIDAY, February 6, 2004

More evidence of the "Culture of Death" becoming ever more prominent in this country.  An eleven year old girl, Carlie Brucia, is abducted and killed, allegedly by a man with at least 13 convictions in the last decade.  How may times must the alarm bell be rung for decent people to answer the call?  This society's race to the bottom must be stopped by the demands of the vast majority of Americans whose "tolerance" (read also apathy, cynicism, self-centeredness) has been completely abused.  It's all related: abortion at any stage of human life; coarseness and brutality from the entertainment media; child abuse passed off as mis-guided parenting; abominable parenting by too many, including an army of "single parent families"; unfettered sex and sexuality promoted at any age; judicial leniency over-compensated for by police and prosecutorial mis-conduct; a defense bar that rejects its dual role including that as "Officer of the Court" as it strives to get its clients off with any means including mis-leading the Court....Actions must have consequences!    This is not Democrat or Republican, nor is it liberal or conservative - it is common sense.   Wake up, America.  You are losing your birthright.

GS

THURSDAY, February 5, 2004

• "Where is it written", except maybe in the most liberal state in the Union, that two persons of the same sex have a "Constitutional right" to be parties to Marriage?  This is yet another arrogant affront to the fabric of American society perpetrated by individuals who recognize no external bounds to the realization of their personal desires, and to some judges who have either a distorted understanding or a contemptuous disregard for the separation of powers that is in our Constitution.  And by the way, what is an "advisory opinion"?  Based on the Holding in the underlying "case or controversy", it would seem that the Massachusetts legislature could still pass legislation based upon its interpretation of the actual case decision, and deal with later consequences later, giving time for a State Constitutional amendment to be considered by the appropriate body - the legislature and the people - instead of the Judiciary once again run amok.
• Is it no longer enough to be a veteran?  Besides surviving, has the bar been raised to the well-earned Silver Star of Senator Kerry?  Should I be ashamed of the fact that, in 1950 while in third year of college and anticipating being called as an Army private that year for service in Korea, I applied to medical school one year ahead of time, was accepted, and seven years later entered the Army Medical Corps as a Captain, serving two years of active duty in Germany and then six years of Reserves?  Where did I go wrong?  And where did President George W. Bush go wrong in the late 1960's, when practically every thinking American - except perhaps Robert McNamara - had come to the realization that Vietnam was a travesty?  He, too, served.  Advice to Senator Kerry: don't go there.  There are a lot of voters out in the country-side with similar stories.
• Here comes another "fleecing of America".  The worst-kept secret of corporate America in recent years is the fact that they have been grossly under-funding their employee pension plan obligations in order to inflate their bottom lines and to feather their own nests.  Are those same employees going to have to bail the crooks out as well as losing their retirement pensions, as occurred similarly in the late 1980's with the "Savings and Loan" debacle?  Given the Democrats' evident determination to place an ultra-liberal in candidacy for President, this is George W. Bush's election to lose...something he can do if he does not counter the picture of being a pawn of corporate greed and arrogance.  Beware, Mr. President.    Do the right things, for the right reasons, and you will be re-elected handily.  Otherwise...

SUNDAY through WEDNESDAY, February 1 through 4, 2004

• American society continues to tolerate a race to the bottom of taste, good manners, responsibility and ethics.  It began, as did a lot of bad stuff, in the 1960's, with George Carlin's successful public media use of some nasty words, ultimately supported by the U.S. Supreme Court.  Most recently we were treated on national TV in family viewing time to Diane Keaton paraphrasing "feces", and to several luminaries using the slang word for "sexual intercourse".  Then there was the peek at Janet Jackson's right breast at the Super Bowl Half-time Show, which...if you missed it there...you could have seen fifty more times on multiple network re-plays.  These are no accidents, but rather are a concerted effort by ultra-liberals to remove all reasonable constraints on irresponsible public behavior.  Take note. You will have something to say about all that in November.
• A regular reader of these ruminations will recall that I expressed concern during and after the Spring Iraq offensive that the administration of President Bush was not emphasizing enough the several justifications for that action, especially under the rubric "pre-emptive self-defense".  The administration allowed its opponents to articulate the issue exclusively around WMD's.  Bad move, for which they are now bleeding.  A recent article by a former Director of the CIA expands on this problem ("'Kay' Sera, Sera", by R. James Woolsey, WSJ Monday, February 2, 2004, Opinion, pA18).  Unless public perception on that matter is corrected, that could be the winning issue for the Democrats in November.  In addition, having gone into Iraq, we had better get it right before we leave.
• On the continuing saga of public school vouchers, an article in the same edition of the WSJ shows how parent-power can carry the day. ("Yes, Virginia, There Is A Voucher", by William McGurn, pA19).