STATE OF THE ART
Re: Matthew Vadum's Yes, Canadian Health Care Helped Kill Natasha Richardson, Doctor Says:
I am a Canadian physician who has worked in various settings in Canada and around the world. I've practiced both at the Hopital Sacre-Coeur, which transiently cared for Mrs. Richardson, and one of Montreal's premier trauma centres, and in a few rural hospitals in Quebec, some as far as 7 hours drive from the nearest major metropolitan area. The tragedy that occurred to Mrs. Richardson and her family is truly regrettable, but it would be wrong to fault the medical system.
Her medical care was delayed, to a degree, by her own volition. With an intracranial hemorrhage, time matters. The first ambulance en route to transport Mrs. Richardson was cancelled as a result of her initial refusal to accept care. By the time she was in crisis, even if the helicopter was stationed at the nearest airport and ready to go instantaneously, the time it would have taken to transfer to the helipad at Sacre-Coeur hospital would have approximated the time taken to transfer via ambulance, and would not have made a significant difference in her care.
Contrary to your assertions, the Quebec medical system employs state-of-the-art medical technology, and uses an emergency airplane equipped with on-board critical care facilities on a daily basis to transport patients from our northern regions to Montreal and other major hospital centres. And it does this free of charge to all Quebec citizens, and with a more efficient, less-bureaucratic system than any found in for-profit centres in the United States.
This tragedy would truly be compounded if we fail to prevent the next head injury by not insisting that skiers wear appropriate headgear.
-- Adam Hofmann, MD
PUT IT ON THE SCOREBOARD
Re: George Neumayr's Touchdown Obama:
The One has found his Judas goats, Joe Biden and Kathleen Sebelius, to lead the Catholic masses (pun intended) to slaughter. With the sanctification of Obama, the administration of Notre Dame leads many a foolish sheep astray. Listen closely and one can hear the silence of the lambs.
-- Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York
Nice to read someone who has a little education. I am a Catholic and from my experience the whole of Catholic Priesthood has been fed the teachings of Jesus "as babes" and not had them revealed to them as though they are "wise and prudent" -- just as Jesus advised. For a look at the more wise and prudent edition of Jesus' political economics, you might enjoy my paper; Google "Jesus, the Great Economist." These "leaders" of the Catholic church are sorely lacking the understandings of what Obama's real background and agenda are, and do not grasp the real Jesus' teachings on such matters. If you want the fuller works, see my book; Amazon "The Technology of Love" by Charles E. Hansen which I released in 2004. Notre Dame is the big loser in this game, and as you state, Saul Alinsky could not be happier -- except I doubt if he made the final cut as all the tickets have gone to Catholics...all sold out.
-- Charles E. Hansen
This is so troubling on so many fronts. Father Jenkins is giving voice to the strongest proponent of the culture of death -- Barack Obama. He is putting before the captive audience of very impressionable youth a man who not only espouses but has already, in fewer than 90 days in office, lifted the ban on worldwide funding of abortion and the ban on embryo stem cell research! Father Jenkins is giving the devil his say!
Please all who truly understand the evil consequences of this action -- call, write, email, and fax Fr. Jenkins and our beloved Pope Benedict. Do not let this go unchallenged!
If Fr. Jenkins does not accept the gifts of wisdom, courage and right judgment from the Holy Spirit -- do all you can to be at this event! Plan to pray, sing and maybe just be silent in protest for this unholy event!
Point Pleasant Beach, New Jersey
The hits just keep coming.
Notre Dame's invitation and pending honorary degree to the abortion-friendly Barack Obama is merely the latest in a seemingly endless stream of actions being taken by Church officials that are thoroughly inimical to the Gospel She's supposed to defend.
Locally, Boston has lately witnessed Caritas Christi, the financially troubled health-care arm of the archdiocese, partner with a secular health care company in pursuit of a contract to provide state insurance covered health-care for low-income citizens of the Commonwealth, with state law requiring that such "care" include abortion.
In response to an outraged pro-life community, the partnership and Cardinal Sean O'Malley have tepidly pronounced that local Catholic hospitals would not perform abortions, nor make abortion referrals. At the end of the day, however, the partnership will undeniably be a dependable conduit for baby killing and baby killing referrals.
This would be like, say, the otherwise good man who would nevertheless apply for an opening as Adolph Hitler’s valet; I think that the term is "compromise." Worse, Cardinal O'Malley’s arguably one of the American Church’s better shepherds!
Unless and until the majority of the Catholic leadership in this country becomes more of the ilk of Bishop D’Arcy, with the testicular fortitude to defend the Gospel from the treachery of its enemies, be they Fr. Jenkins, President Obama, the abortion industry itself, etc., a thoroughly fraudulent form of Catholicism will continue to hold sway, a very bad thing both for the Church and for the country.
-- Francis M. Hannon, Jr.
REAL AMERICAN HEROES
Re: James Bowman's Brothers at War:
I would submit that counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations have actually restored the heroic to warfare. To be brutally honest, modern mechanized warfare was highly depersonalized and in many respects, anti-heroic. As reviews of almost all first person memoirs since World War II show, combatants rarely saw the enemy, or engaged him at close quarters; most killing was done in a random, impersonal way by artillery and mortars. Whether one lived or died was very often a matter of chance, and under the brutal pounding, all men came up against their limits.
In contrast, as we now conduct and understand it, both counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency have an intrinsically heroic orientation, beginning with the main objective in both cases: protection of innocent civilians is placed ahead of force protection; i.e., the soldier is posited as the defender of the weak and defenseless, even to the point of sacrificing his own life. That's heroic, inspirational, even -- and the men performing the job in Iraq and Afghanistan instinctively understand this, which is why support for the war is so strong among the troops fighting it, and why retention rates have been so high.
Second, counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency are intensely personal. Long-range fires from artillery, aircraft and armored vehicles count for little. Most of the fighting is at close range, with small arms -- and sometimes hand-to-hand. This is a necessary concomitant of placing the protection of civilians ahead of protection of soldiers: knowing that terrorists are hiding out in a building, it would be easier and safer by far to blow it to bits with a 500-lb bomb, but that could kill or injure civilians inside the building, and in the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, the correct approach is the most dangerous and difficult -- to enter the building and clear it room by room, whenever possible using "less than lethal" means, such as stun grenades. It doesn't get more heroic than that.
Finally, in both counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency warfare, soldiers live amongst the people whom they are protecting and form close bonds with them, which provides a tangible sense of accomplishment, a source of manly pride.
Paradoxically, then, the war on terror has regenerated the warrior ethos among American troops in a way that a prolonged conventional war would not. The heroic stature of American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines has reached such proportions that even jaded intellectuals cannot deny it, and indeed, if exposed to the military for any length of time, become seduced by it. And that may be why so many academics and intellectuals will go to any length to avoid exposure the the heroes in our midst.
-- Stuart Koehl
Falls Church, Virginia
AND A BRIDGE TO SELL YOU TOO
Re: Quin Hillyer's From a Crotchety Old Man:
I've invented a new device called Mirabile Dictu that facilitates direct interpersonal communication. It works as follows. The Bluetooth peripheral is held in the four hands of any two people wishing to communicate, who stand face to face. They plug its four earphones into their ears and fit its two microphones over their mouths. When one person speaks, every word is faithfully sent to Google, Wikipedia, Slashdot, YouTube, and the Drudge Report, where they are delayed 0.1 millisecond, before being returned over the Internet to the ears of the intended recipient. It does not record or modify the message in any way, and it costs only $199. It will be available at Amazon and via e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.
-- David Govett
HE'S READ HIS ORWELL, THOUGH
Re: G. Tracy Mehan, III's Obama Ignores His Toqueville:
Professor Feldstein, "I suspect that the administration officials who drafted this proposal did not understand that it would have this perverse effect." Professor, your naivety is showing. Obama and his administration know full well the consequences of their policies. Their priorities are not what is best for America, but what is the most effective way to transform our proud land of liberty and capitalism into a slavish land of socialism -- in the name of equality. But remember, some are more equal than others.
-- Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York
LIKE THE CHAFF
Re: James M. Thunder's The Destruction of Notre Dame:
While one is surprised at ND's invitation to Mr. Obama, let us please bear in mind that this is Catholic duplicity; one day they are for something, another day they are against it; there are so many fifth columnists there it just makes one dizzy! How sad for ND that they will be seen as supporting the most ruthless abortion leader in US leadership. May God have mercy on us all.
-- Ron Henderson
WORSE THAN YOU THINK
The real tragedy behind the $165 million dollars in AIG retention bonuses is that our political leaders have used it to take more of our rights away. Last week, the House voted 328-93 to approve a bill they didn’t read that would impose a 90% surtax on bonuses given to employees with household incomes of $250,000 or more at companies that have received at least $5 billion from the government's financial rescue program. This legislation was derived from the tremendous outrage & media sensationalism created by Congress and the Obama Administration. In other words, they justified ignoring the 16th amendment of the United States Constitution by stirring up dissent between economic classes. Sen. Christopher Dodd, the chairman of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, justified it by saying, "This is another outrageous example of executives -- including those whose decisions were responsible for the problems that caused AIG's collapse -- enriching themselves at the expense of taxpayers," President Obama’s justification was nothing more than finger pointing. He asked "How do they justify this outrage to the taxpayers who are keeping the company afloat?" he went on to declare "This is a corporation that finds itself in financial distress due to recklessness and greed." Note to Obama: When you point a finger, three are pointed back at you.
In 2007 Obama’s net worth had increased from 700k to 4.7 million dollars and he now has a $400k a year salary and all of his expenses paid. Sen. Hillary Clinton's average net worth, adjusted for inflation, grew from negative $6 million to $30.7 million between 2000 and 2006. Sen. John McCain of Arizona reported a $27.6 million surge in his average net worth during the 2008 campaign. Senator Dodd’s net worth was $101,000 in 1967 and in 2007 was 1.5 million but is now over $3.5 million. Our congress expressed such outrage and distain for a measly $165 million dollars in bonuses to executives (many of which agreed to a salary of $1 for the year) when Congress’s collective net worth is around 3.6 billion dollars. It appears as if our elected officials may be the one’s that are enriching themselves at the expense of taxpayers.
After two months, the Obama administration and our one party government have proposed legislation that will result in the worst deficits "ever." By "ever" I mean that if every deficit over the past 220 years (since George Washington) were added together, the sum would be less than the deficits their budget proposal will create ($1.8 trillion this year, $9.6 trillion over 10 years). This increased spending comes during the worst World Economic Crisis since 1933. There is a universal belief that increased spending and protectionist policies were the primary cause of the Great Depression. The recent stimulus packages, Obama’s proposed budget and protectionist policies have fostered anger and worry from most foreign leaders (G20 leaders). As a result, Obama’s ability to lead us out of an economic crisis is being questioned around the world. So, how is he in any position to be commenting on financial distress due to recklessness? Furthermore, what gives our elected officials the right to ignore History and make the same mistakes that lead to the Great Depression and WWII?
Over the past 30 years we have allowed our political leaders to make countless compromises in an effort to further their party’s agenda. These compromises are in large part the cause of the world’s worst economic crisis since 1933 (76 years) and the implications surpass those of the Great Depression. Our liberty, prosperity and security are at stake and therefore, it is not a time to debate, it’s a time to demand. Demand that our government abides by the constitution. We must demand that our unalienable rights, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness are secured and that our Government derives their just powers from the consent of the governed. It’s high time that we do our duty as American Citizens, pound our fists on the Capitol door and demand that our leaders listen or leave office. here is no excuse for our elected officials to serve themselves instead of listening to the people they serve. If our elected officials want to ignore history, the Constitution, and US Citizens by spending us into oblivion, than they need to be held accountable. There should be a 90% tax on their $170,000 a year salaries and $50,000 a year pension plans when their outrageous decisions result in an economic collapse. Their assets should be put up as collateral for the trillions of dollars that we now have to borrow primarily from communist countries. We do not work for the United States Government, Congress or The White House. They work for us and a reminder is way past due.
-- Matthew Council
Share this Article
Like this Article
Print this ArticlePrint Article