National

New Obamacare Regulations mandate contraception, re-define pregnancy as disease

Tomorrow is the last day to comment on the Contraceptives mandate that is included in the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as “Obamacare.” I believe that it’s okay to use real contraceptives – the kind that don’t kill anyone. I’m also cautiously convinced that Plan B doesn’t prevent implantation. (See “Plan B, How It Works and Doesn’t Work,” and “Plan B compared to withdrawal method.”)

However, I have real concerns that “EllaOne” might interfere due to its effect of lowering progesterone, even in post-ovulatory women, and I know that the IntraUterine Device (IUD), when placed early in the pregnancy works to prevent implantation.

The current Administration defines pregnancy as beginning at implantation, not at fertilization, in spite of the known fact that any in vitro fertilization lab tech can tell the difference between an embryo and an unfertilized egg.

Please write a brief e-mail to the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathryn Sebelius, at this address E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA@dol.gov

Here’s where to get more information:

MESSAGE TO HHS: “Pregnancy is not a disease, and drugs and surgeries to prevent it are not basic health care that the government should require all Americans to purchase. Please remove sterilization and prescription contraceptives from the list of “preventive services” the federal government is mandating in private health plans. It is especially important to exclude any drug that may cause an early abortion, and to fully respect religious freedom as other federal laws do. The narrow religious exemption in HHS’s new rule protects almost no one. I urge you to allow all organizations and individuals to offer, sponsor and obtain health coverage that does not violate their moral and religious convictions.”

WHEN: Please send in your comments to HHS by the September 30 deadline. Thanks! 9/1/11

State of Texas Economy

Texans want action on border security

From Todd Staples, Texas’ Agricultural Commissioner, via the Austin American Statesman:

Despite empty assurances from Washington, communities along the Texas-Mexico border continue to face threats and violence from Mexican drug cartels. With the release of our commissioned report, “Texas Border Security: A Strategic Military Assessment,” the Texas Department of Agriculture offers a powerful perspective into this national security breach. If President Barack Obama and his administration won’t hear the concerned voices of Texans, perhaps he will listen to high-ranking retired military generals who know a thing or two about facing foreign enemies.

Retired Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, the former U.S. drug czar under President Bill Clinton and SouthCom commander of all U.S. troops in Latin America, and retired Maj. Gen. Robert H. Scales, former commandant of the United States Army War College, were commissioned by the Agriculture Department and the Texas Department of Public Safety to utilize their vast military expertise to incorporate strategic, operational and tactical elements of securing borders and hostile territories and make recommendations to apply these elements along the Rio Grande.

First and foremost, the generals argue that Washington must shed the cloak of denial and admit there is a problem. Additionally, they say, there must be a highly organized, integrated, pro-active approach in which local, state and federal officials work together to create synergies to stop terrorists’ incursions. None of this is possible, they continue, without sufficient federal resources, support and additional boots on the ground.

The generals agree that our farmers, ranchers and rural residents — along with our urban areas — are under attack by cartels that rely daily on tactics such as killing, kidnapping, human smuggling, transnational arms shipments and blackmail to carry out their illegal trade to distributor gangs in hundreds of U.S. cities. Those same gangs help facilitate illegal commerce that pushes drugs into America while sending illegal weapons and cash into Mexico. The report says between $19 billion and $39 billion in illicit proceeds move through southwestern border “bulk smuggling” operations to Mexico each year.

The generals also conclude that Mexican cartels are seeking to create a “sanitary zone” — their own turf — inside the United States, specifically inside the southwest border, which they consider to be “vulnerable.” Texas Department of Public Safety Director Steven McCraw has testified that over a period of 18 months, six of seven cartels have established sophisticated command and control facilities in Texas cities. The report goes on to say at least 70 residential lots in Hidalgo County have been purchased with millions of dollars in drug proceeds.

This lack of security and disregard for Americans’ safety cannot be what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they penned the Constitution and specifically outlined the federal government’s responsibility to protect American soil and citizens from foreign invaders.

It’s important for the American people and the federal government to fully understand that besides being a gateway for criminal activity, the 1,200-mile Texas-Mexico border plays a critical role in the safe transportation of goods and services through our nation. Allowing this area to be under siege is not only inexcusable for the sake of our citizens’ safety, but also is detrimental to American trade, agriculture and our overall economy. The proof will be seen in your neighborhood grocery stores, as food prices increase to compensate for added security. Keep in mind, Mexico is the No. 1 trading partner for Texas and No. 2 for U.S. exports. It is this legal trade we are trying to preserve.

As the generals’ report concludes, it is imperative the federal government admits to the problem of cartel violence along the Texas-Mexico border and fulfills its duty to defend and protect Americans.

Denying the problem fails our Founding Fathers, our citizens and our nation. Are you listening, Washington? Texans want action.

via Statesman.com : Staples: Texans want action on border security.

“Judicial Hubris” exposed

TownHall.com had a column yesterday that covered some interesting news about the videos of the Proposition 8 trials in Federal Court. It seems that a couple of the Federal judges made videos of the trial proceedings public when they shouldn’t have.

Those of us who believe that marriage is a moral covenant, with moral obligations beyond legal and financial benefits, oppose renaming and redefining marriage to include same sex unions.
The fear is not that judges will face retaliation – it’s that witnesses will face harassment, loss of jobs, as reported in the article.
As to the frequent question, “what are you afraid of?” How about the decision that marriage is worth no more than a set of financial and legal benefits? That’s what the 9th Circuit decided in ruling on Arizona’s law limiting insurance benefits for State employees to spouses and children. Janet Napolitano issued an Executive Order on the way out of the State on her way to the Obama Administration, bestowing benefits on all domestic partners, married and unmarried, homo- or heterosexual. The 9th actually ruled that opposite sex couples could get married if they wanted insurance, but that Arizona law forbade same sex couples from marrying, so the law passed by the Legislature to cut costs – which affected cohabiting same sex couples – is “discrimination” against an “unpopular group.”

“Tea Party” Presses Perry on Immigration

You may hear about a media event held yesterday, when some self-proclaimed and self-promoting “Tea Party leaders” held a press conference.

Don’t forget that there really are no “Tea Party leaders.” We in the Tea Party are a very loose group, organized around the theme that we are “Taxed Enough Already.”  I seriously question whether this theme is consistent with a call for an expensive special session for a single issue.

In addition, there are no “sanctuary cities” in Texas. We have individual police chiefs and city officials who discourage law enforcement checks for citizenship status. Is it appropriate for those of us who believe in local, small government to over-ride local officials by an Executive Order or even legislative action that can’t garner wide spread support??

In this case, Governor Rick Perry put the “sanctuary cities” legislation on the emergency list for the Regular Session that began in January and then he brought it back during the Special Session called in June for the Budget Bill. During both the Regular and Special Sessions, the Governor brought pressure to bear on the Senate and the House to pass legislation. He called attention to the widow of the Houston police officer who was killed by an illegal alien. The Senate passed the Bill during the Special Session, but the House did not.

Another problem is that the so-called “leaders” can’t get their act together. During the Special Session, the “leaders” sent conflicting messages, with disagreement on the language in the Bill that had been cleared by Attorney General Greg Abbott. Take a look at this article from the same publication, “Sanctuary Cities Cause Rift.”

Build a straw man, make him die

When will the progressive left admit that ObamaCare is just one version of “spread the wealth? Because the healthcare plan mandates coverage for all illness or healthcare from first dollar, rather than only spending money for the indigent and extremely sick. Worse, the mandate enforces taxes, rather than allowing charity or compassionate care.

Slate.com has a blog post concerning ObamaCare written by Jacob Weisberg, entitled “Let him die.” The author flatly implies that one or more of the Republican Presidential candidates would let a patient die if he can not pay for needed care.

Forget that none of the candidates said any such thing. One man in the audience at Monday night’s debate for Republican Candidates  in Orlando shouted “yeah!” when one of the moderators asked Ron Paul the question. There’s dispute about whether the shout came before or after Congressman Paul answered, “No.”

This incident is being cited as “playing the death card” by another blogger, at the University of Chicago School of Law’s Richard Epstein, who  is not satisfied with calling Republicans names. He suggests that rationing is reasonable:

One telling illustration about this example is that Weisberg does not tell us whether the individual who receives this care lives or dies when the treatment is over.  If we assume the latter, the initial question is whether intensive care at, say, $10,000 to $20,000 per day represents the best use of social resources.  A bit of simple arithmetic says that society has spent $1.83 million to $3.66 million on a venture that may well have kept this person alive in a comatose state or have subjected him to repeated invasive treatments when hospice care may well have been preferable.

(Try not to think about “death panels.”)

Hat tip to Texas Medical Association and Drs.

Huntsman: Nation in “funk,” needs civil unions and embryonic stem cells

Are we sure he’s a Republican?

When asked about highly charged social issues such as abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research, Huntsman said he supported civil unions and believes stem cell research “holds out much promise.” But he said those issues will not be a priority if he becomes president and repeated a theme he hopes will resonate with voters. “I will have a singular focus on the economy,” he said.

via Huntsman: Nation in ‘deep funk’ | SeacoastOnline.com.

Texas, Redistricting, Minorities: Democrats abuse, the rest of us pay

Lest we forget, the Voting Rights Act was in response to abuses by the Democrats, who were in power at the time. However, 40 years later, we’re still trying to figure out “Latino” districts and “Black” districts, rather than “neighborhoods” or even “Parties.”

And, lest we forget, all “Latinos” are not the same. All Black voters are not the same. And all white, Indian, Vietnamese or any other “ethnic,”racial or even familial groups are not a single entity, voting as one.

Under the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, states with a history of engaging in voter suppression and segregation, including Texas, are required to submit changes to their election laws and their redistricting maps to either the U.S. Department of Justice or the federal D.C. District Court to ensure they comply with the Voting Rights Act as part of a process known as ‘preclearance.’

via Redistricting trial ends with state’s arguments – San Antonio Express-News.

‘If You Love Me’ – WSJ.com

If you don’t subscribe to “The Best of the Web” by James Taranto, here’s an example of why you ought to:

Obama says that to all the girls.

Still, he did manage to find some affection yesterday in North Carolina. The Puffington Host reports that while Obama was delivering a campaign speech there, “a lone male voice rang out: ‘I love you Barack!’ Obama responded immediately: ‘I love you back!’ ” It must’ve been Giuseppe.

Obama quickly decided he’d better play hard to get. According to Agence France-Presse, he added: “If you love me, you got to help me pass this bill.” The reference was to Stimulus Jr., the $447 billion boondoggle he proposed in a historic speech to a joint session of Congress last week.

That inspired us to write a very short piece of fiction, which we published yesterday on Twitter: ” ‘If you love me,’ she said, ‘you’ve got to help me pass this bill.’ That’s when I dumped her. My friends were right: she was a gold digger.”

via ‘If You Love Me’ – WSJ.com.

One more time: Perry, Gardasil and the facts

Governor Sarah Palin and Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann went on Greta Van Sustern’s “On the Record” show on Fox News to accuse Governor Rick Perry of “crony capitalism” because of his Executive Order RP65, which would have mandated Gardasil and which did make it much easier for parents to opt out of all mandatory vaccines.

None of the players explain one very pertinent point: Merck was the only company making the only approved vaccine against the viruses that cause the changes that cause abnormal Pap smears and which lead to cervical cancer. (The only reason to get a pap smear is to check for changes from HPV. Gardasil provides immunity to the specific strains that cause nearly 3/4 of all cervical cancer.)

The Gardasil vaccine (more, here ) was recommended the FDA’s vaccine approval committee, more than 6 months before Governor Perry’s Executive Order. All girls who qualified for the Federal Vaccines for Children program were eligible to receive the vaccine free of charge: Medicaid, CHIPs, and uninsured or those with insurance that won’t pay for vaccines. The Texas Legislature had previously delegated unconditional authority to mandate new vaccines to the Department of State Health Services, which is under Governor Perry and the Executive Branch.

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann showed her profound ignorance about the germ theory and modern medicine in general, and the Human Papilloma vaccine, Gardasil, in particular. She seems ignorant of the fact that newborns (little, innocent newborns) receive a shot against the STD, Hepatitis B, on the first or second day of their lives, before they go home from the hospital. They get 2 more of the shots by the time they are 6 months old. And (little, innocent) 12 year old boys and girls get a (measles/mumps/rubella) MMR and a tetanus and diphtheria booster (Td)  about the same time. Tetanus, or “lock jaw” is not a communicable disease.

in her zeal to attack Governor Rick Perry, Bachmann did even worse in her post-debate interview with Greta Van Sustern on Fox News. Her emotional, anti-vaccine remarks should be an embarrassment to her.

She told Greta about a conversation with a crying mom who came up to her after the debate, saying that the woman’s daughter suffered from “mental retardation” after receiving the vaccine. “Mental retardation” would not be diagnosed at 9-12 years old. In fact, in over 10 years more than 50 million doses of Gardasil have been given in the United States. There has been more than the usual scrutiny and surveillance for adverse effects. The Center for Disease Control, the FDA and the Institute of Medicine have all reached the conclusion that even with this heightened awareness and concern, there have been no adverse effects from this vaccine other than fainting and allergic reactions that can happen with any medical procedure or treatment.

At the time, Gardasil had over 5 years of history of study in boys and girls, with an official “Four Year Follow Up” article published in the British Medical Journal. To learn more, please see “A Dose of Reason.”

Marriage just for benefits?

(The title was “Marriage < (is less than) Benefits; States < Feds; Legislatures < Courts; Law = Nothing” It seemed good at the time.)

The 9th Federal Court of Appeals (that Court that is overturned more often than any of the other Federal Appeals Courts) claims that opposite sex couples will marry solely in order to qualify for health insurance. If marriage is something of so little worth,  why not set up a matchmaking service, allowing lesbians and gays to marry willing opposite sex people to “marry” for the benefits?

The Federal Courts are acting as though the Constitution gives them the power to make all the important decisions and the Legislatures only get to decide inconsequential issues.  Why have States and Legislatures – or that Bill of Rights – at all?

The 9th affirmed a lower Federal court’s injunction against a 2009 law of the State of Arizona which defined “dependent” as spouses, minor children and children in college as far as qualification for State Employee health insurance benefits. The State claims they were trying to save money and pointed out that the law did not discriminate against same-sex couples and their children, since it affected all (non-married) “domestic partners,”  including cohabiting opposite sex couples and their children.

Former Governor Janet Napolitano had arbitrarily changed the regulations by an Executive Order to cover all “domestic partnerships” on her way out of Arizona to work in the Obama administration. The State Legislature passed a bill signed into law by Governor Jan Brewer to define “dependent.”

The first point made in the Court’s ruling was that homosexuals are an “unpopular group,” so any law regarding them can be reviewed under a lower standard:  “We do not need to decide whether heightened scrutiny might be required.” So, this Court has declared that homosexuals are more equal than the rest of us, because the court has deemed them “unpopular.” They get what they want when they want it, simply by crying discrimination, which opposite sex couples can never, ever do:

The court said, however, that the cutoff had a discriminatory impact because only opposite-sex couples could restore their benefits by getting married. The ruling provides health coverage only to the domestic partners of gay and lesbian couples – the sole plaintiffs in the suit – an impact that Benson said promotes inequality.  (Read more: at SFGate.com)

The Court deems marriage of so little value that people who have made the decision to live together without marriage would suddenly change their minds for health insurance benefits.

Well. In my opinion, where you live is much less important than the covenant of marriage. There are States where it is legal for same-sex couples to marry: let the same-sex couples move to New York or Massachusetts. That way, they would underscore how important they find marriage, for its own sake, and the Courts could avoid trampling the sovereign rights of the States.

Appeals court shoots down Va. challenge to healthcare law – The Hill’s Healthwatch

Federal judges see no need for Federalism or State sovereignty. Forget that inconvenient Bill of Rights!

But the 4th Circuit panel said Virginia does not have standing to sue over the mandate because it lacks a “personal stake” in the issue.

The judges seemed concerned during oral arguments that allowing his suit to proceed would essentially allow the states to exempt themselves from whatever federal laws they might choose.

via Appeals court shoots down Va. challenge to healthcare law – The Hill’s Healthwatch.

Yellow dogs, splitting hairs and being human

Memories in the hearts and minds of others are what we leave behind. Even more than our DNA, that’s what makes us human. We are the only species having this conversation, after all!

More than I’ve noticed in the past, this nascent Presidential election is bringing out emotions, old rivalries, and pitting Conservative against Conservative as we perfect our skill of hair-splitting. We’re covering life, liberty and pursuit of happiness like the founders and many since, and reviewing changes in local politics as well as basic philosophies and world visions. (Not New World Order, how you see the world.)

And, Lord knows, we Conservatives can split hairs finer than Baptists.

Nevertheless, I think all this fussin’ is a good thing as long as we stop short of “eating our own. ” We’re proving, once again, that we are not merely reactionaries or like those old “yellow dog” Democrats or Republicans (meaning we’d vote for an old yellow dog before we’d vote for the other Party). We have arrived – and are arriving – at our opinions through thought and research. (Don’t you love the Internet?)  No one can watch us nit-pick (and cherry-pick quotes) and accuse us of blindly following some leader. Oh, no. Not us!

However new and raucous our debates have become, some of us have been reminiscing about the people who influenced our views on politics, even as we continue to engage in political arguments.   I’ve gotten to “know” some pretty impressive grandma’s and parents and been able to share my own memories of my family.*

We’re reminding one another of why Texas went from a Democrat State to a Republican State. And we still learn lessons from the people who lived that conversion before us.

What a great debate and a blessing to live in these times!

===============

*My mother passed away in August, 2006. I still miss her. Here’s an introduction in the form of the note I wrote on what would have been her 70th birthday:

Easter Sunday, April 8, 2007 would have been my mother’s 70th birthday. Helen Margaret Jernigan Burnett, “Mama,” died from complications of thymic carcinoma last August.

Mama is probably the source of my addiction to arguing and politics. Some people might think it comes from being the oldest daughter of a Baptist preacher, but I believe it comes from being the daughter of a certain Baptist preacher’s wife.

Mama was a teetotaler, prolife, conservative who believed in equal opportunity for anyone who would do the work, but also worked to help others. She and Daddy stopped to “early vote” on the way to see the chest surgeon – just in case her surgery was scheduled before the election a few weeks away. She was semi-famous in her hometown as the food demonstration lady at the local Wal-Mart, the one who handed out samples and root beer floats. She won awards at work for leading fund raising and selling at the store, and ran the early morning Senior Citizens Bingo. Most of all, she was the best “Grandmama” in the world.

As Daddy pushed her wheelchair into the hospital for what turned out to be her last admission, she suddenly looked up at the people around her and said, “I have the best insurance in the world: Jesus Christ!”

It turned out that she was suffering a series of strokes that would steal her ability to do even basic self-care and make her delirious most of the time. Daddy, my sister or I took turns to be with her most of the time; feeding her, helping with her baths and trying to help her control her pain. I wasn’t always patient and I’m afraid that I preached a few of the lessons I learned from her, back at her. But I was better at doing what I could for her than I would have ever thought.

In spite of what I knew of her condition and prognosis, Mama’s death was totally unexpected. Evidently, she had her final stroke while in the MRI, as I sat at the head of the machine, singing to her and trying to keep her (both of us) calm.

I’ve often heard people say that they wouldn’t want to be a burden to their children. Needing someone else to feed us and wipe our chin when we can’t hold the spoon, much less assist us in performing much more intimate acts of hygiene, seems to be the worst thing we can imagine.

I’ve never had a good answer for patients or family members when they express this fear to me. Now, I know that the worst thing that I can imagine is living the rest of my life without having fed Mama, washed her, and rubbed her back on that last day.

The faith that she and Daddy surrounded me with as a child makes me sure that Mama is in heaven. But it’s the memories of caring for her those last few days that let me live here on earth knowing that I loved her as best I could when I could. Mama’s last lesson was that we owe it to our loved ones to allow them to care for us, for their sakes.

Enough (or Leaving Sarahtology) | RedState

Erick Erickson is an astute observer. Remember, we’re not talking about Governor Palin, we’re talking about her fans.

For the longest time I wanted Sarah Palin to run.

Unfortunately, as I found out and as others are starting to find out, moving on from Sarah Palin is like leaving Scientology.

To not bow at the throne of Sarah you get disowned. You get attacked. You have people drum up stories attacking your credibility. “Oh, Perry announced at his event, he must be bought and paid for,” etc. Ironically, some of the very people going after this site’s and my credibility — claiming we’re pressured to do things by higher ups at Eagle Publishing — are people who were on payrolls advocating for clients while refusing to disclose potential conflicts among other things. To add comedy to irony, it seems more and more apparent that some of those who attacked this site and me for holding editorial positions based on what our corporate parent dictates (a lie designed to undermine our lack of sufficiently pro Palin bona fides among other things) are themselves engaging in projection because it is they, not RedState nor me, who must tread carefully in who they attack because their livelihoods depend on it. It’s always the kooks who project their sins on others.

via Enough | RedState.

I don’t get many comments on this blog, but when there are rants, it’s been from Governor Palin”s supporters complaining about my reporting on or – worse yet – defense of Governor Perry’s record. Some of the other Boards and Forums are worse.

I’ll be glad to see Governor Palin on the November 2012 ballot, but I’m supporting Governor Perry in the Primary for his job record and pro-life fights in Texas. Deciding on my own Governor shouldn’t bother anyone except the inept Incumbent.

Spokesman: Perry plans to attend GOP debate

Pray for Rain. 1000 homes lost in this go-around.

“I don’t know,” Perry said when asked by CBS if he will participate in the GOP debate, set for Wednesday at 8 p.m. ET at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California.

“That’s a fluid situation at the moment, so again I go back to we’re going to be taking care of the folks here,” the governor continued to say on CBS. “I got a great team of people to work with. That’s one of the things I’ve been blessed with for 10 years.”

via Spokesman: Perry plans to attend GOP debate.

Robert P. George: Serious GOP Debate

Set your video recorder to CNN at 3 PM EST on Monday, September 5 in order to watch Senator Jim DeMint, Congressman Steve King, and philosopher and bioethicist Robert P. George question the  Republican candidates for President.  The forum will not be a debate, but a series of individual interviews at the Palmetto Freedom Forum in South Carolina.

Professor George has been called the smartest man in the US and I’ve blogged about him and quoted him many times (best, here) at LifeEthics.org.  As an admitted groupie of men like Professor George and Dr. Leon Kass (sorry guys), the Palmetto forum would be my dream forum!

“I think people are aware that things are not right,” George says. “They are not technical problems to be solved by choosing the best technocrat. . . . People have a sense that the problems run deeper than that, that they have to do, in a very significant measure, with a loss of fidelity over the years, a falling away from our own principles. . . . They are looking for a conversation that goes deeper.”

via A Serious GOP Debate – Robert Costa – National Review Online.

New labor move is anti-biz, jobs – Chicago Sun-Times

For 2½ years I spent 95 percent of my union-work time defending the incompetents, the lazy, the malingers and the malcontents. And they got paid the same as my fellow workers who showed up every day and gave their all to the job. What’s more, I saw how union rules frustrated management innovations to improve our journalistic product.

A few years later I moved on to another journalistic enterprise without a union. I saw merit pay raises given to the hard workers, no salary hikes to those who didn’t or couldn’t do the job, and eventual dismissal of anyone who couldn’t measure up to the demands of the magazine. Thus began my journey from liberal to conservative.

via New labor move is anti-biz, jobs – Chicago Sun-Times.

AP MISLEADS READERS ON RICK PERRY: Cherry-Picks His Statement on Border Security & Lies About Audience Reaction | The Gateway Pundit

The AP deleleted the part of Perry’s speech that including using “strategic fencing” and National Guard troops on the border.

via AP MISLEADS READERS ON RICK PERRY: Cherry-Picks His Statement on Border Security & Lies About Audience Reaction | The Gateway Pundit.

Blogger Gateway Pundit tells us about more completel reports that tell the whole story, including “Weasel Zippers” and WHIO TV.

Kicking Rick: “Texas Cowboy” vs. “Last Responder”

Columnist Jack Kelly writes about the expected media treatment of Governor Rick Perry as the 2012 Presidential campaign heats up.

So expect lots of name calling. That may not work either. The “Texas cowboy” frightens Eastern liberals, but other Americans may find Gov. Perry’s decisiveness a refreshing change from the wuss in the White House who’s been described — cruelly but accurately — by New Hampshire’s Manchester Union Leader as “the Last Responder.”

via Kicking Rick.

WILLisms.com

The next time someone claims Texas ranks “near the bottom” in education, ask them to read this post and get back with you.

The Heritage Foundation mocks Duncan’s “crocodile tears” and explains how mediocrity has become the name of the game in the national education discussion:

68 percent of districts across the United States are below the 50th percentile in mathematics achievement. In more than half of states, no more than three districts have average student math performance that would place students in the upper third of math achievement in international comparisons.

Indeed, while beating national averages is not necessarily anything to write home about, it is still critical to acknowledge that the Texas model, far from perfect, has

via WILLisms.com.

Breaking: Obama asks EPA to withdraw proposed ozone rule | JunkScience.com

Wow, this would be great if it goes through!

From the “Junk Science” blog:

 

President Barack Obama has asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the agency’s proposed toughened ozone standards, citing “the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover.” The President’s statement is below.

These are rules that would provide no health benefits but cost $1 trillion per year in compliance and kill 7.4 million jobs by 2020.

If EPA administrator Lisa Jackson complies with Obama’s request (no guarantee), this will be a hugely important victory for American workers and the economy, as well as those of us who have been fighting the EPA’s proposed ozone standards.

via Breaking: Obama asks EPA to withdraw proposed ozone rule | JunkScience.com.

Rick Perry was right on binational health insurance – Ezra Klein – The Washington Post

Here’s an explanation about the “binational health plan that I keep reading about. Unfortunately, the Legislature only approved a study and there’s never been a law actually allowing the sale of the insurance plans.

To clarify, what Perry referenced was not a merging of Mexico and the United States’ public health systems. It was not, as Wonkette put it, “U.S.-Mexico Obamacare.” Rather, he pointed to a newly passed Texas law, which directed the state to explore allowing private health plans to cover services in Texas and Mexico. Those plans would then be available to any Mexican national or American citizen working within 62 miles of the Texas-Mexico border.

There’s a lot to like about this idea.

First, it targets a big problem in Texas: a lack of insurance. With 26 percent of Texans lacking insurance, the state has the highest rate of uninsured people in the country. Those numbers are even higher in Texas’s border region, according to a 2003 Texas State Senate report.

Second, it’s a private market approach, that would allow insurers to meet an unfilled consumer need. A 2005 study showed that 72 percent of Mexico-born residents of the United States would be interested in a product that covered medical services in Mexico, especially if they had dependents in Mexico who could use those services.

The plan Perry referenced wouldn’t have the state create such a plan. Rather,  it would alter Texas’s insurance regulations to allow private carriers to do so.

via Rick Perry was right on binational health insurance – Ezra Klein – The Washington Post.

Deja Vu All Over Again: Total US Debt Passes Debt Ceiling

See WingRight notes from early in August, here and here-  back on August 9th, when the debt was “only” 14.591 Trillion. Did y’all notice how quiet this approach to the debt ceiling it?

   Remember when

one month ago the US, to much pomp and circumstance, not to mention one downgrade, announced a grand bargain raising the debt ceiling from $14.294 trillion to something much higher, with a stop gap intermediate ceiling of $14.694 trillion, or $400 billion more. Well, as of today, or less than a month since the expansion, total US debt is at $14.697 trillion. Yep – the total debt is again over the ceiling, which means the US debt increased by $400 billion in one month. Score one for fiscal prudence. And while the total debt subject to the limit is still slightly less, at $14.652, one week of Treasury auctions and will be time for Moody’s to justify again why the US is a quadruple A credit.

via Deja Vu All Over Again: Total US Debt Passes Debt Ceiling… In Under One Month Since Extension | ZeroHedge. (Watch out for the comments, lots of little boys over there.)

State Representative Wayne Christian Endorses Governor Perry for President

Representative Wayne Christian has endorsed Governor Rick Perry for President. Representative Christian is a true conservative. He “was there,” and can tell the true story about Rick Perry:

“Fact is, as recently as a couple of decades ago, we had no Republican primary in my part of rural Texas.

“Thus, Governor Perry, who entered state politics farther back than me, was courageous enough to take a stand early on and join other statesmen like Ronald Reagan and Phil Gramm in acknowledging that the Democratic Party had left their conservative beliefs behind.

“Much has been criticized of Governor Perry’s initial support for the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC). As President of the Conservative Coalition of the Texas Legislature, I was deeply involved in that entire process. My rural district was directly in the path of the TTC and the project was largely viewed by my constituents as an abuse of the governmental power of eminent domain.

“Truth is, the TTC started as a expansion on the I-35 corridor. The plan was added to legislation by the Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) as a new “branch” of highway that ran from south Texas to the north right through my district. TXDOT presented facts that upon the completion of the Panama Canal expansion many of the trading freighters, which currently only serve the West Coast, would be able to bring their cargo to Texas ports.

“It was anticipated that this would place a tremendous burden on the current highway system as it heads north. However, the flawed TXDOT presentation of the plan and threats to private land ownership were not handled well. Citizens throughout Texas were insulted by the methods of potential property seizure, foreign control of Texas properties and other abuses.

“It was wrong, and when presented with the will of Texas citizens, Governor Perry put a stop to it.”

**********************

I applauded Governor Perry as he stood with the Texas House and Senate (and eventually the Texas Supreme Court) against some very vocal opposition to sign into law Rep. Hamilton’s bill preventing a potential land grab by the state. In this past session, Governor Perry declared eminent domain reform legislation an emergency item and saw it all the way through the legislative process until he signed it into law, strengthening the rights and protections of private property owners across Texas.

Thanks so much to Texas Insider for the story!

Texas Insider » Combs Announces Successful Short-Term Notes Sale

Texas Insider Report: AUSTIN, Texas – Today’s sale of $9.8 billion in one-year cash flow notes from the state of Texas was very well-received by the financial community. High demand for the notes drove the interest rate down to 0.27 percent – the lowest interest rate the state has received on its annual short-term notes.

“Texas had a very successful sale and the demand for these notes shows investors’ high confidence in Texas’ recovering economy and the state’s solid record of conservative fiscal management,” Texas Comptroller Susan Combs said. “Buyers bid about $31 billion – more than three times the amount offered for sale. And the resulting low interest rate is very beneficial to the state.”

Proceeds from the notes, known as Tax and Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRANs), will be used to distribute state funding to public schools early in the upcoming fiscal year and to help state government manage its cash flow between the start of the fiscal year and the arrival of tax revenues later in the year.

The TRAN notes sold today will be repaid Aug. 31, 2012.

via Texas Insider » Combs Announces Successful Short-Term Notes Sale.

Critique of Judge Sam Sparks’ Opinion on Texas Ultrasound Law (part 2)

See Part 1, here
Media reports say that due to the injunction by Federal Judge Sam Sparks, the Texas Ultrasound law will not go into effect at all until a higher court rules on it. However, the Judge does note that there is a severability clause and that his injunction is narrow. I’m waiting to see opinions from lawyers as to whether abortionists will be held to parts of the law that are not specifically under injunction.

In the meantime, I wonder how many women will meet the abortionist before they are gowned and sedated for the procedure and how many will insist on seeing their sonograms?

In the second half of the Opinion by Judge Sam Sparks, the Judge outlines the specific complaints brought against the new law, HB 15, (text of the law, here ) . Most of those complaints are dismissed, even as the Judge continues to call the new law “unwise” and ultimately imposes an injunction against enforcement.

Sparks disagrees with the Plaintiffs, the Center for Reproductive Rights out of New York, that the definitions of “medical emergency,”  “sonogram,”  “in a quality consistent with current medical practice,” and “in a manner understandable to a layperson” are unconstitutionally vague.  He also disagrees with the Plaintiffs on whether or not “visit” and “abortion-related services” are unclear to most people.

The major complaints upheld by the judge appear to be that the law doesn’t allow for multiple-physician practices or for a switch if the original doctor who informed the woman about her ultrasound cannot, “through some unforeseen circumstances,” perform the abortion, requires a woman to sign an informed consent acknowledgement, and   forces the physician to “advance an ideological agenda.”  Sparks also does not like the word “soley,” for reasons that I don’t understand.

It is true that one purpose of the law was to ensure that women were given informed consent by the physician who was to perform the abortion, “in a private and confidential setting.” Most abortionists had been satisfying the 24 hour waiting period and informed consent the same way that Dr. Alan Braid’s Reproductive Services of San Antonio,  had:  over the phone  or by referring the woman to the information on the Internet.

However, it doesn’t appear that Sparks overturned these requirements, since the injunction overturns the objection to the requirement that women receive private and confidential informed consent and the exception for those who live more than 100 miles from the abortion clinic. The opinion only finds fault with the lack of accommodations for “unplanned substitutions.”

The judge makes a surprising statement about the requirement that a copy of the informed consent be inserted in the medical record of the woman:

Compounding this problem is newly-added section 171.0121, which requires both that a copy of the above certification be placed in the pregnant woman’s medical records (presumably permanently), and that the facility that performs the abortion retain a copy for at least seven years.See H.B. 15, Sec. 3 (adding TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 171.0121). Given the nature of the certification and the Act’s retention requirements, it is difficult to avoid the troubling conclusion that the Texas Legislature either wants to permanently brand women who choose to get abortions, or views these certifications as potential evidence to be used against physicians and women.

Sparks says that the medical record is “semi-private,” and is concerned that it might someday be subpoenaed for use in a court case. The only time that these would be seen in Court is if the woman herself sues the doctor.

Sparks also engages in a bit of ideological speech of his own about the requirement for the abortionist to describe  “the presence of cardiac activity,” and “the presence of external members and internal organs.”

“ The Court does not think the disclosures required by the Act are particularly relevant to any compelling government  interest, but whatever relevance they may have is greatly diminished by the disclosures already required under Texas law, which are more directly pertinent to those interests.”

and, from page 50:

The net result of these provisions is: (1) a physician is required to say things and take expressive actions with which the physician may not ideologically agree, and which the physician may feel are medically unnecessary; (2) the pregnant woman must not only passively receive this potentially unwanted speech and expression, but must also actively participate—in the best case by simply signing an election form, and in the worst case by disclosing in writing extremely personal, medically irrelevant facts; and (3) the entire experience must be memorialized in records that are,at best, semi-private. In 7 the absence of a sufficiently weighty government interest, and a sufficiently narrow statute advancing that interest, neither of which have been argued by Defendants, the Constitution does not permit such compulsion.

Edit to add this question: How can a doctor “not ideologically agree” with the facts visible on the sonogram when describing heart or limbs?

In my opinion, the worst part of the ruling is Spark’s legal-speak on “compelling’ and his insistence on bringing back the ever-moving line of “viability:”

Second, while Casey refers to the government’s interest in potential life as “important,” “substantial,” and “legitimate,” it stops short of characterizing it as “compelling.” Indeed, one of the holdings of Roe v. Wade, and one this Court does not interpret Casey as having overruled, was that “[w]ith respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the ‘compelling’ point is at viability.”

Tell me, Judge Sparks, just what is “viability?” 24 weeks, 20 or 18 weeks?

link to Part 1 and “sticky” added September 5, 2011 12:19 PM BBN

Doing the work skilled providers won’t

Will someone tell me why it is logical for Federal Judge Sam Sparks to assume that “less-skilled providers”  will be willing to meet the “onerous requirements” that more-skilled providers won’t?

” The Court has grave doubts about the wisdom of the Act, but that is no legal basis for invalidating it. The Act’s onerous requirements will surely dissuade or prevent many competent doctors from performing abortions, making it significantly more difficult for pregnant women to obtain abortions. Forcing pregnant women to receive medical treatment from less-skilled providers certainly seems to be at odds with ‘protecting the physical and psychological health and well-being of pregnant women,’ one of the Act’s stated purposes.”

Spin on Spin (What Sarah Palin’s supporters are saying about Rick Perry)

I could be writing funny jokes about President Obama missing the bus under which he intends to throw America.

Instead, I got side tracked by a tweet claiming that Governor Perry is not honest.

“A Time for Choosing” is a pro-Sarah Palin blog that published an August 29, 2011 post titled, “Perry Campaign: Everything in “Fed Up!” Was Meaningless BS,”

Needless to say, no Perry staffer said such a thing. Instead, the author takes a mish mash of articles from the Los Angeles Times, the Hill, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal  and builds himself a strawman.

He claims the Governor lies because he repeatedly told us he had no desire to run for President, ignoring the fact that the Governor told us that conversations with his wife in June of this year led him to have a change of heart.

As for the rest of the piece, A Time for Choosing’s author, who claims to have read the Governor’s book, Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington, echoes the claims that the Perry campaign is denying the book has any relevance, and that the Governor is “walking back” or has “tempered” his stand  on the strong views expressed in it.

Perry told a Wall Street Journal reporter to read the book when the reporter repeatedly insisted that Perry

 “. . . suggested the program’s creation violated the Constitution. The program was put in place, “at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government,” he wrote, comparing the program to a “bad disease” that has continued to spread. Instead of “a retirement system that is no longer set up like an illegal Ponzi scheme,” he wrote, he would prefer a system that “will allow individuals to own and control their own retirement.”

However bad it is for SS to be “at the expense of respect for the Constitution,” nowhere in the book does it say that Social Security violates the Constitution.The reporter suggests that the Governor “suggests.”

The author quotes the Hill referring to the Washington Post’s comments on an email from Perry staffer, Mark Miner:

The 16th Amendment instituting a federal income tax starting at one percent has exploded into onerous, complex and confusing tax rates and rules for American workers over the last century. The need for job creation in the wake of the explosion of federal debt and costly entitlement programs, mean the best course of action in the near future is a simpler, flatter and broader tax system that unleashes production, creates jobs, and creates more taxpayers. We can’t undo more than 70 years of progressive taxation and worsening debt obligations overnight.

Here’s what the book actually proposes:

“Second, we should restrict the unlimited source of revenue that the federal government has used to grow beyond its constitutionally prescribed powers. One option would be to totally scrap the current tax code in favor of a flat tax, and thereby make taxation much simpler, easier to follow, and harder to manipulate. Another option would be to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution (providing the power for the income tax) altogether, and then pursue an alternative model of taxation such as a national sales tax or the Fair Tax. The time has come to stop talking about fixing the broken and burdensome tax code and to take bold action to replace it with one that is not a burden for the taxpayer and that provides only the modest revenue needed to perform the basic constitutional functions of the federal government. America needs a fairer, flatter, and simpler system, one which working families can complete without having to hire a bevy of professionals to assist them.”   Perry, Rick; Newt Gingrich (2010-11-15). Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington (pp. 182-183). Little, Brown and Company. Kindle PC Edition. (accessed 8/29/11)

I want to believe that the bloggers’ problem is using interpretations/spins from several reporters, on a book they evidently either didn’t read or didn’t understand to build your premise on. If that is the case, though, why would he a headline that appears to be a quote from a staff member when it’s an obvious, biased interpretation by the blogger?

Obama’s buses: they fly first class, too!

RedState reports that the President did not ride those million dollar buses from venue to venue for his tour last week. No, he flew the buses to area, got off Air Force One, and then rode the stage to his next show. This has got to be a joke, right?

Obama will throw America under the bus. If their plane isn’t late.

And it will be from 40,000 feet.

More here and here.

US law enforcement to expand training in Mexico

Police training has been a significant part of the Merida Initiative, which outlined the U.S. partnership with Mexico and Central America in the drug war and has committed $1.4 billion since 2008. However, the focus now shifts to historically out-gunned and ill-prepared local forces ducking bullets and facing ominous threats on a daily basis.

Mexico received $327 million for police training in fiscal 2009 from the U.S. State Department through Merida, placing it behind only Afghanistan and Iraq in total funds received for police training from the departments of State or Defense, according to a report from the Government Accountability Office in April.

via The Associated Press: US law enforcement to expand training in Mexico.