Yeah! We're Number One!

Not that I am really happy about it. In this WashPost article, the USA claims top dog status for the number of persons in jail or prison.

More than one in 100 adults in the United States is in jail or prison, an all-time high that is costing state governments nearly $50 billion a year, in addition to more than $5 billion spent by the federal government, according to a report released today.

With more than 2.3 million people behind bars at the start of 2008, the United States leads the world in both the number and the percentage of residents it incarcerates, leaving even far more populous China a distant second, noted the report by the nonpartisan Pew Center on the States.

But in China there is a distinct possibility that your prison sentence may be punctuated by a gunshot. In that respect perhaps the ChiComms are number one.

The ballooning prison population is largely the result of tougher state and federal sentencing imposed since the mid-1980s. Minorities have been hit particularly hard: One in nine black men age 20 to 34 is behind bars. For black women age 35 to 39, the figure is one in 100, compared with one in 355 white women in the same age group.

While studies generally find that imprisoning more offenders reduces crime, the effect is influenced by changes in the unemployment rate, wages, the ratio of police officers to residents, and the share of young people in the population.

In regards to prison populations, Last year I became involved in a project that seeks to help parolees who at high risk of re-offending.

Currently there are 62,000 prison inmates confined within the NYS Dept. of Correctional Services (DOCS). Of these, about 15% have mental health issues (some extraordinarily serious) and about 78% have substance abuse issues.

There are also about 4,000 vets currently in the system. The information I received is that some of the vets returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are having serious problems with PTSD, substance abuse and domestic violence. Unfortunately some end up in DOCS. We will be working with the VA to help these guys.

With the reform of the NYS Rockefeller drug laws and the concomitant appeals ensuing, we are looking at a serious influx of seriously screwed up people returning to our communities as they exit the state's prison system.

Right now the recidivism rate is 60% over a three year period; that is, almost two thirds of parolees are back in the state slam within three years of their release.

I'll be attending a three day training conference for this project next month.

If you want to read some really heart-breaking stuff, go here to Prison Talk and listen to some of the mothers, wives and girlfriends of DOCS prisoners. Not that the State or society is to blame, believe me, these guys had to mess up time and time again to get in the slam. But sin is sin and it affects the loved ones too. The site I selected revolves around the Oneida Hub, a constellation of state prisons in Upstate New York within an hour drive east of Syracuse.

A History Lesson

I stole copied this in its entirety from Mostly Cajun.

History Lesson
By Raymond S. Kraft

SOME OF YOU ARE NOT OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THAT NEARLY EVERY FAMILY IN AMERICA WAS GROSSLY AFFECTED BY WW II. MOST OF YOU DON’T REMEMBER THE RATIONING OF MEAT, SHOES, GASOLINE, AND SUGAR. NO TIRES FOR OUR AUTOMOBILES, AND A SPEED LIMIT OF 35 MILES AN HOUR ON THE ROAD, NOT TO MENTION, NO NEW AUTOMOBILES. READ THIS AND THINK ABOUT HOW WE WOULD REACT TO BEING TAKEN OVER BY FOREIGNERS IN 2008.

Sixty-four years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat. The Nazis had sunk more than 400 British ships in their convoys between England and America taking food and war materials.

At that time the US was in an isolationist, pacifist mood, and most Americans wanted nothing to do with the European or the Asian war.

Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on Germany, who had not yet attacked us. It was a dicey thing; we had few allies.

France was not an ally, as the Vichy government of France quickly aligned itself with its German occupiers, Germany was certainly not an ally, as Hitler was intent on setting up a Thousand Year Reich in Europe. Japan was not an ally, as it was well on its way to owning and controlling all of Asia.

Together, Japan and Germany had long-range plans of invading Canada and Mexico, as launching pads to get into the United States over our northern and southern borders, after they finished gaining control of Asia and Europe.

America’s only allies then were England, Ireland, Scotland, Canada, Australia, and Russia. That was about it. All of Europe, from Norway to Italy (except Russia in the East) was already under the Nazi heel.

The US was certainly not prepared for war. The U.S. had drastically downgraded most of its military forces after WWI because of the depression, so that at the outbreak of WWII, Army units were training with broomsticks because they didn’t have guns, and cars with “tank” painted on the doors because they didn’t have real tanks. A huge chunk of our Navy had just been sunk or damaged at Pearl Harbor. Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of $600 million in gold bullion in the Bank of England (that was actually the property of Belgium) given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler (a little known fact).

Actually, Belgium surrendered after one day, because it was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day just to prove they could. Britain had already been holding out for two years in the face of staggering losses and the near decimation of its Royal Air Force in the Battle of Britain, and was saved from being overrun by Germany only because Hitler made the mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively minor threat that could be dealt with later. Hitler first turned his attention to Russia in the late summer of 1940, at a time when England was on the verge of collapse.

Ironically, Russia saved American’s butt by putting up a desperate fight for two years, until the US got geared up to begin hammering away at Germany.

Russia lost something like 24,000,000 people in the sieges of Stalingrad and Leningrad alone . . . 99% of them from cold and starvation, mostly civilians, but also more than 1,000,000 soldiers.

Had Russia surrendered, Hitler would have been able to focus his entire war effort against the Brits, then America. If that had happened, the Nazis could have won the war.

All of this has been brought out to illustrate that turning points in history are often dicey things. Now, we find ourselves at another one of those key moments in history.

There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has, or wants, and may soon have, the ability to deliver small nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world.

The Jihadis, the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in kaffiyehs - they believe that Islam, a radically conservative form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East first, then Europe, then the world. All who do not bow to their will of thinking should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want to finish the Holocaust, destroy Israel, and purge the world of Jews. This is their mantra and their goal. There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East - for the most part not a hot war, but a war of ideas. Islam is having its Inquisition and its Reformation, but it is not yet known which side will win, - the Inquisitors, or the Reformationists.

If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, the Jihadis, will control the Middle East, the OPEC oil, and the US, European, and Asian economies.

The techno-industrial economies will be at the mercy of OPEC - not an OPEC dominated by the educated, more rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis. Do you want gas in your car? Do you want heating oil next winter? Do you want the dollar to be worth anything? You had better hope the Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition loses, and the Islamic Reformation wins.

If the Reformation movement wins, that is, the moderate Muslims who believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions, live in peace with the rest of the world, and move out of the 10th century into the 21st, then the troubles in the Middle East will eventually fade away. A moderate and prosperous Middle East will emerge.

We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to fight the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al Qaeda and the Islamic terrorist movements. We have to do it somewhere. We can’t do it everywhere at once. We have created a focal point for the battle at a time and place of our choosing . . . in Iraq, not in New York, not in London, or Paris or Berlin, but in Iraq, where we have done two important things:

First we deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in the 9/11 terrorist attack or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam was a terrorist! Saddam was a weapon of mass destruction, responsible for the deaths of probably more than 1,000,000 Iraqis and 2,000,000 Iranians.

Second we created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic terrorism in Iraq. We have focused the battle. We are killing bad people, and the ones we get there we won’t have to get here. We also have a good shot at creating a democratic, peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic change in the rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a stabilizing American military presence in the Middle East for as long as it is needed.

WWII, the war with the Japanese and German Nazis, really began with a “whimper” in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor. It began with the Japanese invasion of China. It was a war for 14 years before the U.S. joined it. It officially ended in 1945 - a 17-year war - and was followed by another decade of U.S. occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running on their own again . . . a 27-year war.

WW II cost the United States an amount equal to approximately a full year’s GDP - adjusted for inflation, equal to about $12 trillion dollars. WW II cost America more than 400,000 soldiers killed in action, and nearly 100,000 still missing in action.

The cost of not fighting and winning WW II would have been unimaginably greater - a world dominated by Japanese Imperialism and German Nazism.

The Iraq war has, so far, cost the United States about $160,000,000,000, which is roughly what the 9/11 terrorist attack cost New York. It has also cost about 3,000 American lives, which is roughly equivalent to lives that the Jihad killed (within the United States) in the 9/11 terrorist attack.

This is not a 60 Minutes TV show, or a two-hour movie in which everything comes out okay. The real world is not like that. It is messy, uncertain, and sometimes bloody and ugly. It always has been, and probably always will be.

The bottom line is that we will have to deal with Islamic terrorism until we defeat it, whenever that is. It will not go away if we ignore it.

If the U.S. can create a reasonably democratic and stable Iraq, then we have an ally, like England, in the Middle East, a platform from which we can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East. The history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the gates to conquer the world.

The Iraq War is merely another battle in this ancient and never-ending war. Now, for the first time ever, the barbarians are about to get nuclear weapons . . . unless somebody prevents them from getting them.

We have four options:
1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons.
2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons (which may be as early as next year, if Iran’s progress on nuclear weapons is what Iran claims it is).
3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the Middle East now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.
4. Or, we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has dominated France and Germany and possibly most of the rest of Europe. It will, of course, be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier.

If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today.

The history of the world is the history of civilization clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilizations should be like, and the most determined always win.

Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win. The pacifists always lose, because the anti-peace militants kill them.

Remember, perspective is everything, and America’s schools teach too little history for perspective to be clear, especially in the young American mind.

The Cold War lasted from about 1947 at least until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989; 42 years!

Europe spent the first half of the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to 1945 fighting Germany!

World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years, plus a ten- year occupation, and the U.S. still has troops in Germany and Japan. World War II resulted in the death of more than 50,000,000 people, maybe more than 100,000,000 people, depending on which estimates you accept.

The U.S. has taken more than 3,000 killed in action in Iraq. The U.S. took more than 4,000 killed in action on the morning of June 6, 1944, the first day of the Normandy invasion to rid Europe of Nazi Imperialism.

In WWII the U.S. averaged 2,000 KIA a week - for four years. Most of the individual battles of WW II lost more Americans than the entire Iraq war has done so far.

The stakes are at least as high. . . a world dominated by representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and personal freedoms or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi movement, by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia (Islamic law).

It’s difficult to understand why the average American does not grasp this. They favor human rights, civil rights, liberty and freedom, but evidently not for Iraqis.

“Peace activists” always seem to demonstrate here in America, where it’s safe. Why don’t we see peace activists demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, North Korea, in the places that really need peace activism the most? I’ll tell you why! They would be killed!

The liberal mentality is supposed to favor human rights, civil rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc., but if the Jihad wins, wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights, human rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity.

Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own worst enemy!

Please consider passing along copies of this to students in high school, college and university as it contains information about the American past that is very meaningful TODAY — history about America that very likely is completely unknown by them (and their instructors, too). By being denied the facts and truth of our history, they are at a decided disadvantage when it comes to reasoning and thinking through the issues of today. They are prime targets for misinformation campaigns beamed at enlisting them in causes and beliefs that are special-interest agenda driven.

Raymond S. Kraft is a writer and lawyer living in Northern California.

My Mom Is Running For President

My Mom is running for President and all I got was this lousy T-shirt!

Thanks and a big H/T to Charlie the ChiTown Cop

Hillary As VP?

There's a little talk on the web about Hillary running as Obama's VP. Not much, but some here and here. From the Washington Note:

I happen to think that Barack Obama should offer Hillary the Vice President slot. His "win" that seems to be in the making is impressive -- but not definitive, and there are substantial parts of the Democratic party that are still clinging to the Clinton franchise.

If Obama can acquire the Clinton infrastructure and consolidate it with the Kennedy franchise and then fasten in the many newcomers to his "movement", he'd then be creating something quite new and different -- and sustainable.

I happen to think that if Obama accepts Hillary as his VP, he is signing his death warrant. If he wins the Presidential election he'll be dead within a year, probably less.

Obama's head could be found in Fort Marcy, his ass in Robert Byrd's front yard in West Virgina and his balls in Baltimore but the Klinton Kamp will scream "Suicide." Bill will wag his finger at the cameras once again proclaiming, "I did not have sex with that meat cleaver."

Kosovo and California

For a short history of the 900 year old Kosovo mess, read this. Needless to say, this balls up in the Balkans has been brewing for almost a millenium, but at the dirty end of the stick the issue comes down to this:

Emigration and immigration.

Serbs living in Kosovo have been intimidated and threatened (and murdered) for decades by ethnic Albanians. In response, the Serbs left Kosovo for safer areas by the thousands. A majority of Kosovars are ethnic Albanian and this majority has only increased over the years.

I am not choosing sides. Whether the Serbs or the Kosovors are right or wrong in this respect is not an issue in this discussion. But this is the result when an ethnic majority decides that they no longer want to be part of an already established nation.

And this is what can happen in California, Arizona and New Mexico if our slack brained politicians don't get their collective heads out of their asses and insist on maintaining American sovereign control over our southern border.

We have allowed political correctness to dictate a completely inappropriate response to a literal invasion from another country, Mexico. Mexican nationals (see La Raza and Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan or MEChA) have already established a presense that insists that California must be returned to its former masters - as specified in the following:

"Chicano is our identity; it defines who we are as people. It rejects the notion that we...should assimilate into the Anglo-American melting pot...Aztlan was the legendary homeland of the Aztecas ... It became synonymous with the vast territories of the Southwest, brutally stolen from a Mexican people marginalized and betrayed by the hostile custodians of the Manifest Destiny." (Statement on University of Oregon MEChA Website, Jan. 3, 2006)

And this:

"In the spirit of a new people that is conscious not only of its proud historical heritage but also of the brutal gringo invasion of our territories, we, the Chicano inhabitants and civilizers of the northern land of Aztlan from whence came our forefathers, reclaiming the land of their birth and consecrating the determination of our people of the sun, declare that the call of our blood is our power, our responsibility, and our inevitable destiny. ... Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and gather the crops and not to the foreign Europeans. ... We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan. For La Raza todo. Fuera de La Raza nada."

We are already experiencing an eruption of Kosovo style intimidation in our border states. It will only get worse as our politicians seek to appease Mexican radicals.

Angry White Guys

I read an article in the Aspen Times Weekly regarding the effects of marginalized, disenfranchised Caucasian males on the next election. It got me to thinking about the guys.

The guys the cops don't have to chase to pay their child support or parking tickets.

The guys who buy their wives the exact same box of chocolate on Valentine's Day for years because that's her favorite chocolate and they're not gonna take a chance and screw that up and by God the restaurant cook better not mess up her chicken dinner this time.

The guys who punch the clock, put in their time, pay their dues and keep their mouths shut - because that's what their Dads did.

The guys who bust their asses day after day, month after month and year after year just so they can go home, relax with a beer, play with their kids, maybe watch the tube for a bit and then go to bed so they can get up early and do it all over again; day after day, week after week...

And these guys are fine with it.

The Angry White Guys. And we're all over the map.

What do we want? What do I want?

First and foremost I want my three remaining daughters to marry the kind of man my oldest daughter married and give me more grandkids that the wife and I can fuss over.

I want my kids to have half way decent jobs that pay them enough not to be tempted to steal but not so much that they think they don't need God.

I want them all to grow up and grow old in a country where:

1) Greedy, self serving politicians are known exactly for what they are and summarily strung up from utility poles (ain't that a dream).
2) The Constitution is honored for what it is, a document that ensures the greatest amount of protection from government interference for an entire nation.
3) Men work for their families instead of spending four or five months (see your tax freedom day here) working instead just to pay taxes; taxes used so that others may slide over an unregulated national border and live off your dollar. And it is never enough.

I don't see this coming from the less than stellar choices I'll have on the ballot this year.

The Angry White Guys. That's us.

We threw the British out for less. We fought for the right to petition the government for redress of grievances. And they'd better start listening.

That's why we have National Ammo Day on November 19th.

Back Up - Almost

I've seen sick as a dog almost all week. I don't think I've been hit by a cold this bad in over a dozen years. Feeling a little better today but I'm still awfully blah.

I see that Russian President Vladimir V. Putin has responded to the Hildabeest -

... Mr. Putin swept aside a remark by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who said that as a former K.G.B. officer, Mr. Putin “has no soul.”

“As a minimum, a state official must at least have a head,” he said.

Funny, but as I recollect, it seems like Hildy kept her big mouth shut when she was visiting Palestine and said nada about the murder of children and other assorted innocents by Arafat and his terrorist cohorts. I don't think it is a matter of her entire head so much as it is the lack of a brain.

And be sure to check out BisW's blog for this little tidbit on anal rocket powered gerbils - coming soon to a pet store near you.

Now I'm gonna lay down.

Red Neck Power Windows

Whoda thunk it?

H/T to my SIL

Sha'ria Law - In Texas?

There has been quite a flap over the Archbishop of Canterbury saying that sha'ria law in England is "unavoidable." In a Rotti thread, LC Maxxdog posted a Pet Jawa link reporting that a Texas Court has recently approved a contract specifying that sha'ria law can apply in private contracts:

The Second Court of Appeals of the State of Texas has rendered a ruling on the enforceability of shari'a judgments rendered by imams. According to the Texas appeals court, it's all good.

You've heard of the Texas Courts. Ladies and gentlemen, make way for the Texas Islamic Courts!!! The parties will ask the courts to refer the cases for arbitration to Texas Islamic court within "Seven Days" from the establishment of the Texas Islamic Court panel of Arbitrators. The assignment must include ALL cases, including those filed against or on behalf of other family members related to the parties.

Each party will notify the other party, Texas Islamic Court, and their respective attorneys, in writing of the assignment of all the above Cause Numbers from the above appropriate District Court to Texas Islamic Court. In general, private arbitration agreements are enforceable by government courts.

Shari'a arbitration agreements are one type of private arbitration agreement. Without a theory as to why shari'a arbitration agreements shouldn't be enforced by the courts, I'm not sure what else the appeals court could have done in this case. Still, this is not a welcome development.

No indeed. Does this mean that felafels with BBQ sauce will become the staple for millions of Texans? I doubt it, but Americans should be aware of what they are signing. God forbid you enter into a contract with a Muslim and you are unaware that the contract calls for sha'ria law to decide how contract disputes will be settled.

Jawa then linked to a thread at the Volokh Conspiracy where the comments seemed to favor the notion that this was acceptable because the courts were issuing an opinion on whether or not a private contract could specify that sha'ria law would be used to interpret the contract should any issues arise. A link to this article dispelled any such notion for me. From the Times On Line:

Has the Archbishop gone bonkers?

Forgive the stark clarity of my headline, but sometimes when writing about the Archbishop of Canterbury, clarity is what is needed. I ask this of readers here, because this is the question put to me time after time this afternoon by incredulous commentators of every variety, stunned into blunt expression by the Archbishop of Canterbury's uncharacteristically clear comments on Sharia in Britain. The Archbishop believes adopting aspects of sharia law into British law would help maintain social cohesion. But who exactly is asking for this? No Muslim organisation in Britain has requested it, I could not find any who even wanted it. Instead, Muslims I spoke to this afternoon seem fearful of the effects the Archbishop's latest remarks will have on those already prejudiced against their community. As well they might be. His speech was delivered this evening at the Royal Courts of Justice in Strand, London. (Update: do read this interesting analaysis from Propaganda Box.)

The Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, responded: 'English law is rooted in the Judaeo-Christian tradition and, in particular, our notions of human freedoms derive from that tradition. In my view, it would be simply impossible to introduce a tradition, like sharia into this corpus without fundamentally affecting its integrity.' Read his full comments here. Also see here for a legal opinion from barrister Dr James Behrens.

Sheikh Michael Mumisa, an Islamic scholar at Cambridge University and who is affiliated to Centre for the Study of Muslim-Jewish Relations at the Woolf Institute, said: 'I do understand that by sharia law here he means only the personal status laws of Islam such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and not its penal code.”

Mumisa, author of the book Islamic Law: Theory and Interpretation, continued: 'I disagree and believe that the introduction of such laws within the UK will undermine the rights of Muslim women. Moreover, some senior Muslim clerics in the UK want more than just the personal status laws and would prefer that the penal laws were introduced as well.'

A few days ago, the Archbishop argued also for the abolition of the blasphemy law -as long as it was replaced by something even more severe. People should be punished for daring to voice thoughts that were hurtful to others, he said, even when that hurt was unintentional. Now it seems he wants women, children, all of us in fact, to have to kow-tow to some of the strictest, harshest and most draconian laws dreamed up by any religious system, ever, anywhere in the world.

There might not be no-go areas for non-Muslims in Britain, as he recently argued against the Bishop of Rochester. But this is certainly the way to go about creating them.

Is the Archbishop of Canterbury unaware of the history of the Church he has been chosen to lead? Coming from Wales is no excuse, as until the early years of the last century, Wales was part of the Church of England as well. The Church of England was born out of an express desire to rid Britain of a foreign, ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Article 37 of the 39 says: 'The Bishop of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this realm of England.' Queen Elizabeth I early in her reign decreed that the Crown had restored to it 'the ancient jurisdiction over the state ecclesiastical and spiritual, abolishing all foreign power repugnant to the same'.

And now Queen Elizabeth II's very own Archbishop - and let's not forget she is his Church's Supreme Governor - wants to introduce a new 'jurisdiction into this realm of England.' And an Islamic one at that!

It is one thing for judges to take Sharia into account, as has happened in Germany. It is quite another to follow the line the Archbishop is suggesting. It led to near disaster in Ontario, Canada two years ago [this happened in 2005 - here is a link to one of the protest sites ~sig94] and would created untold and unnecessary distress here were it to be implemented here.

The Archbishop has staked everything on trying to maintain unity in his own Anglican Communion. At the same time, he is advocating a policy that could only fragment the society around him.

This is a very powerful statement. But another even more moving account of Sha'ria law in England can be found at the end of the article.

A few weeks ago, I was chatting to a woman who works in an advocacy role for Muslim women in an area that, quite independently of the Bishop of Rochester, she described as a 'no-go area' for non-Muslims. Her clients were women in the process of being sectioned into mental health units in the NHS. This woman, who for obvious reasons begged not to be identified, told me: 'The men get tired of their wives. Or bored. Or maybe the wife objects to her daughter being forced into a marriage she doesn't want. Or maybe she starts wearing western clothes.

There can be many reasons. The women are sent for asssessment to a hospital. The GP referring them is Muslim. The psychiatrist assessing them is Muslim and male. I have sat in these assessments where the psychiatrist will not look the woman patient in the eye because she is a woman. Can you imagine! A psychiatrist refusing to look his patient in the eye? The woman speaks little or no English. She is sectioned. She is divorced. There are lots of these women in there, locked up in these hospitals. Why don't you people write about this?'

My interlocuter went very red and almost started to cry. Instead, she began shouting at me. I was a member of the press. 'You must write about this,' she begged.

'I can't,' I said. 'Not unless you become a whistle-blower. Or give me some evidence. Or something.'She shook her head. 'I can't be identified,' she said. 'I would be killed. And so would the women.'

So there you have it. After weeks of wondering what to do, inspired by the Archbishop, I've taken her word that she is telling the truth, respected her anonymity, and written it anyway.

And this, I imagine, is what the Archbishop wants for the whole of England. As they used to say in my father's country parish: 'Heaven preserve us!' I wonder what they're saying there today. Expressions somewhat shorter and sweeter, I fear.

I don't think the Archbishop is bonkers. I think he is an idiot.

More Doug Patton

BHO is no JFK

By Doug Patton
February 4, 2008

With several members of the now largely irrelevant Kennedy family endorsing the most radically left-wing, least experienced candidate in this year’s race for president, perhaps it is time to introduce some reason into the ridiculous argument that Barack Hussein Obama is the new John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

JFK supported tax cuts, knowing they would spur economic growth. BHO thinks he can somehow tax us into prosperity.

JFK was a foreign policy hawk who stood up to the Soviet Union and let it be known that the United States of America was a superpower to be reckoned with. BHO is a foreign policy wimp whose proclivity toward appeasement in a very dangerous world would signal weakness to our enemies and invite them to attack us.

JFK told us to ask what we could do for our country. BHO tells us to expect that our country will do everything for us.

JFK was a genuine hero who very nearly died in World War II. The closest BHO has ever gotten to a war zone was when he was working as a “community organizer” on the mean streets of Chicago.

By the time JFK was elected to the presidency, he had already served six years in the U.S. House of Representatives and eight years in the U.S. Senate. BHO spent a few years in the Illinois State Legislature and lost a bid for a U.S. House seat before winning the 2004 U.S. Senate race. He spent one year in the senate before launching a bid for the presidency.

It is impossible to imagine JFK endorsing the radical idea that homosexuals should be allowed to marry each other, or even have the rights of marriage, as BHO believes.

It is also impossible to imagine JFK supporting the murder of the unborn. BHO’s position goes much further.

With terrorism and the economy taking center stage in our politics, it was relatively easy for most Americans to allow the tragic 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade to slip past them on the 22nd of last month. One third of a generation — fifty million Americans — are not here because of this holocaust, and two generations now have no memory of a nation without legalized murder of the unborn.

For various political and financial reasons, today’s Democrats — and far too many Republicans — are invested in keeping abortion legal in the United States. But few Americans with a conscience are willing to allow abortionists the right to kill a baby up to and beyond the moment of birth.

Barack Obama is.

Back in 2006, in a column about Barack Obama titled, “The Most Dangerous Man in America,” I wrote, “Most important to the liberal extremists who run the Democratic Party, this man’s moderate demeanor would successfully belie his leftist political ideology.”

A few weeks ago, in a piece about moderate, pro-life Democrat Sen. Ben Nelson, D-NE, endorsing Obama for president, I pointed out that Obama was the most radically left-wing member of the United States Senate on the issue of the sanctity of life. As it becomes increasingly possible that this man could become president, it is time to examine the ramifications of Obama’s position on the issue.

Jill Stanek, formerly a registered nurse at Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, Illinois, led the fight in that state to stop the practice of killing babies born alive during an abortion. She testified in favor of legislation in the Illinois State Legislature that would give protection to such children. Barack Obama, then a state senator, opposed it.

When a similar piece of legislation worked its way through the U.S. Senate, even Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer voted for it. These are among the most liberal, pro-abortion leaders in the Democratic Party, and they concluded that protection of a child who survives an abortion was no threat to Roe vs. Wade. Not so BHO. He believes an abortionist should have the right to kill a baby after he or she has been born!

In this relativistic brave new world in which we now live, how long would it take medical science to begin experimentation or organ harvesting on newborns if BHO had had his way?

To paraphrase the late Lloyd Bentsen, on virtually any issue you can name, but especially on the issue of life, BHO is no JFK.

____________________________________________________________________________

© Copyright 2008 by Doug Patton

____________________________________________________________________________
Doug Patton is a freelance columnist who has served as a political speechwriter and public policy advisor. His weekly columns are published in newspapers across the country and on selected Internet web sites, including Human Events Online, TheConservativeVoice.com and GOPUSA.com, where he is a senior writer and state editor. Readers may e-mail him at dougpatton@cox.net.

Public Service Announcement

Chris Rock delivers an important PSA on how not to get your ass kicked by the police.







H/T to Charlie the Cop

Happy Berfday Mom

Last Friday, 1 FEB 08, the wife and I packed up and took a trip to Smithtown, Long Island, to celebrate my mom's 80th berfday. My sister Caren drove up from MD also.

I have been making this trip since August of 1967. And this was the worst one. We left Syracuse in freezing rain and sleet. And it stayed that way for almost 200 miles. I came very close to turning around at Binghamton and heading back home. The weather slowed us down so much that I hit NYC right at peak traffic. A trip that normally involves five hours of driving took over eight.

But it was worth it. My mom looks great, hardly a wrinkle on her. My sister is aging gracefully too. She'll be 60 this year. Eight days less than a year separates us. As kids I always got on her case because for eight days we were the same age. I don't do that any more.

WHile my mom was getting ready to go out for dinner with us, my sister casually dropped a small bomb on me. My brother-in-law (ex-brother-in-law since my sister died four years ago) was going to dinner with us. And he was bringing his girl friend.

I didn't know what to think so I said nothing. I wasn't offended. My sister Jean is gone and there is nothing that will change that. I had wondered about her husband and what he would do. I assumed that sooner or later he may want to start dating; it was none of my business.

We drove to a spot on Jericho Turnpike, an Italian jpoint named Mariscio's. My brother-in-law was already there; he was alone. We chatted for about ten minutes waiting for his date to arrive and when she did I was floored.

I was afraid to say anything to my wife or my mother - but from the very first time Carol walked up to us she reminded me of my sister. She was small, pretty, and had long straight hair just like Jean. And her mannerisms were like her also. She is a very nice lady and has a very pleasant way about her. And for such a little thing she eats like a house on fire.

We had a truly great dinner. There were waiters all over the place. We had the best service I ever experienced at a restaurant. None of the waiters spoke English as a primary language and when one of them asked me want I wanted I started to say, "Let's see a Green Card please." But I didn't.

After dinner we went back to Mom's house and my wife, Mom and Caren said the exact same thing. Carol reminded them of Jean. In a way that is a fitting commentary to my sister.

We all had a nice breakfast the next morning at a Greek diner and were on the road by noon. It took only four hours and fifty minutes of driving to get home.