Archive for February, 2011
Socialized medicine? The fight for Baby Joseph.
Moe Maraachi and Baby Joseph
This is a story about baby Joseph Maraachi. He is a 13 month old Canadian boy who was born with a life threatening genetic disorder. He has been fighting for his life in a hospital in Ontario but the doctors have given him no chance to live so they want to remove his breathing tube so he can die. His parents are requesting that the doctors perform a tracheotomy so they can take him home to die. The hospital refused so the issue went to the courts and they ruled in the hospitals favor. Still…the parents refused to sign the consent to remove the breathing tube so they’re at a stand-off.
Here’s more of the story…
LONDON, Ontario, February 17, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – One-year-old Joseph Maraachli of Windsor, Ontario will have his life support removed Monday at 10 am. after the Ontario Superior Court today rejected an appeal by the parents to bring him home where he can die under their care.
A leading anti-euthanasia advocate says the decision facilitates a system where doctors are authorized to force life and death decisions on patients, warning that this is, in fact, far worse than the “death panels” recently debated in the U.S. as part of the federal health care law.
“Monday at 10 am they will kill my baby,” Moe Maraachli, Joseph’s father, told LifeSiteNews shortly after the ruling. “There’s no more humanity. There’s no more chance. I’ve tried everything for him. No more appeals, nothing.”
“I asked them: why not send him to Windsor and let him die at home?” he continued. “They said they will give him injection, but I don’t want to.”
“I ask God, and maybe he breathe,” he added.
Joseph was taken to Victoria Hospital in London, Ontario in October where he was diagnosed with severe neurological issues. Doctors gave him no chance of recovery. Moe and his wife Sana have asked doctors to perform a tracheotomy so that they could take Joseph home, but the doctors refused, saying the procedure was too risky.
The Maraachlis’ daughter died from similar complications eight years ago, but in that case doctors performed a tracheotomy and she was able to die at home. Joseph’s parents want the same for him.
But in January, the Consent and Capacity Board of Ontario sided with the hospital, and a date for removing Joseph’s respirator was set. The family was able to hold it off by filing an appeal with the Superior Court.
Today, Superior Court Justice Helen Rady also sided with the hospital, saying that Joseph is in a permanent vegetative state with no brain stem reflex. She called it “a sad and difficult case,” according to the London Free Press, and ordered the hospital to allow the parents until Monday at 10 am. “to afford the family adequate time to say their goodbyes.”
Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, who has been communicating with the parents, emphasized that they aren’t pushing for extraordinary treatment, just asking to care for their dying child at home. “They’re arguing that the best way to do that is by doing a tracheotomy so the child can somewhat breathe on his own and care for him while he’s dying,” he explained.
“I don’t get it. There’s nothing here that I get. It makes no sense,” he said. “What is in this for the hospital and the doctor? Why would they bother doing this?”
“Is it that they want to simply say, we have control?” he asked. “If it’s about their control, then we’re in serious trouble. They now control when someone lives and when someone dies, and who makes those decisions, and how those decisions are made.”
Schadenberg said the court appears to be saying that hospitals and doctors can make decisions for patients whether they like it or not. “It’s worse than the death panel concept that’s being debated in the US. It really is, it’s much worse,” he said. “They’re saying ‘we will decide’, they’re not even going to converse with you. ‘We have the weight of the Court, we have the financial bearing of a massive government institution to be able to force this on you.’”
“That has serious repercussions, because you simply cannot trust the moral authority of the health care institution or the doctors,” he added.
“It’s the hospitals and the doctors once again usurping their power over the people,” he said. “That’s what’s happening. And they have significant power – they have the money and the courts behind them. It’s absolutely ridiculous.”
Jim Hughes, national president of Campaign Life Coalition, Canada’s leading pro-life organization, called the situation “appalling.” “I don’t understand it. Do doctors’ rights now trump parental rights?” he asked. “And what about the right of the child to die in the loving arms of his parents at home?”
Is this what is known as a “death panel”?
Why wouldn’t the hospital let the parents take him home to die?
John McCain ranked as most conservative senator? Really?
Senator John McCain
According to the National Journal, John McCain is one of the most conservative senators in the senate.
The politician who once best exemplified the idea of a “maverick” independent has shifted so far to the right that he is now tied for the title of the Senate’s most conservative member, according to National Journal’s 2010 vote ratings.
According to a comprehensive examination of 96 Senate votes taken in 2010, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., along with seven of his colleagues, voted most often on the conservative side. His 89.7 composite conservative score ties him with stalwarts like Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and gives him a more conservative score than Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
McCain’s shift is emblematic of the Republican Party’s shift rightward and of the profound changes that NJ’s latest Vote Ratings reveal in Congress. A detailed analysis, including an interactive chart that will allow readers to examine and manipulate the data, will be available tomorrow.
In the early part of this decade, McCain was far closer to the ideological middle of the chamber. From 2002 to 2006, he bounced between the 44th- and 49th-most conservative member, giving him the maverick title. His 89.7 composite conservative score is the farthest to the right of any year he has served in the Senate. In past National Journal vote ratings, McCain has come close only once–in 1994, his 89.2 composite conservative score made him the eighth-most conservative member of the Senate.
When McCain began preparing for a presidential bid in 2006, he was the 46th-most conservative member of the Senate (because he was on the campaign trail, McCain missed too many votes in 2007 and 2008 to be given a rating). Then-Sen. Barack Obama, meanwhile, began his campaign at the far left end of the political spectrum. National Journal ranked Obama the Senate’s most liberal member in 2007, a year when he was launching his 2008 presidential bid.
Because he was a senator known for working across the aisle with liberal Democratic senators such as the late Edward Kennedy and the recently defeated Russ Feingold, there was some speculation that McCain, after losing to Obama in 2008, might become a key ally for the new president. Instead, McCain became one of Obama’s fiercest critics, more likely to be standing alongside Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., (a one-time adversary of McCain on campaign finance) than with any Democrat.
McCain’s conversion from Senate centrist to one of the chamber’s most conservative members came in a year that brought him a tough primary challenge from former Rep. J.D. Hayworth. Hayworth zeroed in on McCain’s advocacy of campaign finance reform and comprehensive immigration reform to portray him as too moderate for Arizona Republicans. McCain moved right on immigration and said little about campaign finance in a year when his party benefited from a huge influx of funds from donors who took advantage of a loophole in the tax code to make campaign contributions without disclosing their identity.
Though McCain’s latest NJ ranking is a stark contrast with his past record, the senator’s spokeswoman, Brooke Buchanan, said his ideology has not changed. “But I can assure you,” she added, “the legislative agenda in the Senate sure has.”
The 10 most conservative members of the Senate include:
RANK/NAME CCS*
1. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) 89.7
1. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) 89.7
1. John Cornyn (R-Texas) 89.7
1. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) 89.7
1. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) 89.7
1. John McCain (R-Ariz.) 89.7
1. Jim Risch (R-Idaho) 89.7
1. John Thune (R-S.D.) 89.7
9. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) 87.3
10. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) 86.8
I guess it all depends on which way the wind is blowing.
Saturday Open Thread: February 26th, 2011
(h/t Moonbattery)
What’s on your minds this Saturday?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
Drill here…Drill now.
Not too far from the truth.
(h/t Moonbattery)
I drive a lot. I was nearly floored when I filled up my car yesterday and it cost me almost $50. That’s a huge jump from just a few months ago and I think it’s going to get worse. Let’s face it….we almost all have to drive to get around. I can’t ride a bike to work so I have to fill up my car about every 7-10 days. That’s a lot of money. I just read an article about the vast oil reserves in Alaska that would not only help solve most of our dependency on foreign oil but it would go a long way in creating new jobs and cutting a big chunk out of our deficit.
(CNSNews.com) – A new study says drilling on Alaska’s Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) could make Alaska the eighth largest oil resource province in the world — ahead of Nigeria, Libya, Russia and Norway.
The report — by the consulting firm Northern Economics and the University of Alaska-Anchorage’s Institute of Social and Economic Research – says that developing Alaska’s OCS could produce almost 10 billion barrels of oil and 15 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, create around 55,000 new jobs and produce $145 billion in new payroll nationally, generating a total of $193 billion in government revenue through the year 2057.
A senior policy advisor with the American Petroleum Institute, the trade group for hundreds of U.S. oil and gas producers, said in a statement about the study that offshore drilling for oil and natural gas can help with the country’s energy and economic needs.
“America will need all forms of energy to get our economy back on track, and that includes oil – we can either produce it here and create more American jobs or import it and create jobs elsewhere,” Richard Ranger said. “The administration and Congress need to adopt an ‘all of the above’ energy approach that leverages our offshore resources in Alaska to create an energy plan for America that boosts, rather than inhibits, our economy.”
About 77 percent of world oil reserves are owned or controlled by national governments and the U.S. currently imports over 60 percent of its crude oil, according to API. The Northern Economics-University of Alaska study estimates that Arctic offshore development could cut U.S. imports by about 9 percent over 35 years.
Crude oil prices in New York broke through the $100-a-barrel threshold on Thursday, with rising prices linked to the unrest in the Middle East, including Libya and its vast oil reserves.
The Washington Post reported on Thursday that U.S. pump prices for regular gasoline jumped 4 cents a gallon overnight to $3.23, an 8-cent-per-gallon increase in the past week and 55 cents more than a year ago.
“Given the current political turmoil in the Middle East and increased demand from a slowly growing economy, it is more essential now than ever before that we develop Alaska’s OCS to increase domestic production,” Ranger said. “Increased OCS production in Alaska would also extend the operating life of the 800-mile Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS), a critical lifeline of domestic energy for America.”
We’ll have to out-shout Greenpeace and the Sierra Club but this seems like a must-do.
Drill here…Drill now
We need to pick our battles.
We can't have this attitude in 2012 and expect to win.
My mother has always told me to “pick my battles”. When I was young, I had no clue what she meant but as I got older, I understood exactly and now I live by this mantra. My post on the Georgia House bill yesterday caused a good bit of debate (which I knew it would). Everyone has an opinion on abortion and this issue is one that can cause a huge rift and it’s one that no one will ever agree on 100 percent. Some people jumped to the conclusion that I was pro-abortion and wanted things to stay status quo in the US but I am most definitely not pro-abortion. I didn’t mean to get into the issue of the 2012 campaign when I started that post but I just sort of went off topic and it ended up being mostly about the 2012 campaign….my mind wanders sometimes.
The point I was trying to make is that we need to pick our battles when we (by “we” I mean tea partiers, conservatives, independents etc) enter into the 2012 election. The Tea Party has done a great job with their message. It can be summed up into 2 words…less government. Almost every issue we talk about during the campaign can be wrapped around those 2 words. Less government can even be applied to the abortion issue by insisting on absolutely no federal funding for abortions and defund Planned Parenthood completely. This would put a huge dent in abortions. I would venture to say that most taxpaying voters would be happy with this platform. We can’t have a hard-nosed rigid stance with this. We can win small battles that will ultimately lead to the bigger victory.
We have a lot of things we need to fix right now and abortion isn’t one of them. We have dug ourselves into a great big financial hole and it’s going to take years to get back out. While we are trying to salvage our country financially, those in the Islamic world who want to see us go down are plotting and scheming. They smell the blood in the water. We have to get back on our feet so that we can fight.
We will win the 2012 election if we continue with the same message we had for the 2010 election. Less spending, less spending, less spending…period. That should be our top priority. The American people have had to tighten their belts and cut their budgets so they want to see the government do the same thing.
So, once again…here are the things that I would like to see our 2012 candidate tackle.
1. National debt
2. Job creation (in the private sector).
3. National security (this includes a plan for border security as well as fighting terrorism)
4. Energy independence ( by this I mean a plan to begin drilling for our own oil)
I want to see an actual plan. Not just talk, talk, talk. Kevin and I have talked about the fact that it would be a good move for the 2012 candidate to already have names of the people they plan to nominate to their cabinet. I know this could be risky but it would also show the American people that they mean business and they are ready to get to work. It would be as if we are electing a team that will take back Washington and save this country….sort of like superheroes. I know this sounds corny but I like the idea.
What do you guys think?
Who would be the members of this team?
Friday Open Thread: February 25th, 2011
A picture speaks a thousand words.
What’s on your minds this Friday?
What are your plans for the weekend?
What are people talking about in your part of the country?
Miscarriages considered murder? They could be if you live in Georgia.
GA State Rep. Bobby Franklin
Neal Boortz ( Mr. Libertarian extraordinaire) was all over this subject on his radio show this morning.
Georgia State Representative Bobby Franklin (R-Marietta) just introduced a new bill to the legislature called HB 1. This bill is basically an anti-abortion bill. It is extremely rigid with almost no wiggle room and it’s causing the lefty loons to go berserk. His bill defines the beginning of life as the moment of conception and any person who ends that life shall be guilty of murder….period. Now…I am a very devout Catholic pro-life gal and I think abortions are wrong but I think this bill goes too far.
For instance….Mr. Franklin wants all miscarriages to be investigated unless they occurred in the presence of a doctor. So in other words, if you miscarry at home, you could be investigated and you would have to prove that you did nothing to cause that miscarriage. If you took a sleeping pill or if you had a glass of wine then you would have to prove that neither of those things caused you to lose your baby…or you could be charged with murder.
That’s crazy.
This is the kind of political madness that I am worried about in 2012. I may be opening up a can of worms by saying this but…here goes….
In 2012, we (tea partiers, conservatives etc) have got to define who we are by defining what we want for our country and we have to prioritize. Abortion is an important issue for a lot of people but it will not be the downfall of this country. We can not risk losing the independent vote by supporting bills like the Georgia HB 1. Abortion has been around for a long time and there will be time to deal with it when the more dire matters are handled. We have to outline very precise goals that will put this country back on track. Here are the things that would be first and foremost on my ”to do” list…
1. National debt reduction
2. Job creation…. private sector …NOT government
3. Terrorism and Islamic extremism
4. Border security and much stricter anti illegal immigration laws
5. Drill Baby Drill
Of course, there are many other things that need to be done ( union extinction, for example) but abortion should not be a top priority. Our tremendous debt is weakening us and it’s what will cause our demise if we do not take care of it….immediately. To put it bluntly…our demise could possibly usher in the reign of Islam. As Abraham Lincoln so nobly put it…we are “the last best hope” of earth. We can’t afford to kick the can down the road where our national debt is concerned but we can kick the can down the road with the abortion issue.
Save it for another day.
