Worcester County Freedom Trail

This from Kingdom News on the budget wrangling going on in DC:

One of the few bright spots in an otherwise wasteful omnibus spending bill was [Dec 17th's] preservation of the pro-life Mexico City policy, which Democrats had threatened to strip from the $515 billion budget package. Facing a presidential veto and plummeting approval ratings, the leadership finally backed off and included the policy, which prevents U.S. tax dollars from funding overseas groups who perform or promote abortion.

While the outcome was a significant victory for the White House and validated weeks of hard work for the Hill’s pro-lifers, its effect is somewhat dulled by the bill’s increased funding of Planned Parenthood. The Title X program, which is a prime source of income for abortion organizations, received a $17 million increase–bringing its total funding to just under $300 million.

Unlike past years, abstinence education did not receive a similar raise. Instead, abstinence-until-marriage programs are under intense attack. This week in the omnibus, the President’s requirement that 33% of PEPFAR prevention funds go toward the “A” (Abstinence) and “B” (Be Faithful) approach was waived, dealing a severe blow to overseas abstinence efforts. As a result, the U.S. now faces a return to condom-based prevention programs, eroding the progress made in reducing HIV/AIDS rates abroad. Until now, America had been the only major international donor to promote the “A, B” approach in foreign countries.

Unfortunately, Congress seems more intent on preserving their pet projects in the omnibus bill than saving thousands of human lives through PEPFAR. At last count, the spending proposal had over 8,000 earmarks, including some as inane as Senator Hillary Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) “Hippie Museum” and as self-serving as Rep. Charlie Rangel’s (D-N.Y.) near-$2 million “Monument to Me.” Although (or more likely because) the proposal was chock-full of pork, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) gave the House just 24 hours to review the 3,565 page bill. In this Congress, haste really did mean waste.

…and shame on the abortion clinic receptionist who said pro-lifer Ed Snell got what he deserved when he was pushed off a car and knocked unconscious by a man going into the clinic. What a sad Christmas story this makes. From TFP:

At 6:30 am on Saturday, December 22, [2007] while most were snug in bed, resting up for Christmas activities, veteran pro-lifer Ed Snell was arriving at Hillcrest Abortion Center, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.  He had come with two other activists to persuade women entering the clinic not to abort their pre-born children.

The group customarily meets at the clinic and has saved many lives.  In fact, they have been so effective, that the clinic erected a 7-foot privacy fence to cut off all communication between the women and the pro-lifers.  However, their efforts were scuttled, when the activists began bringing ladders so they could speak over the fence.

Mr. Snell, age 69, preferred to stand on a more solid foundation, so he constructed a plywood platform on the roof of his car to elevate him above the fence.

“This platform gives him a real steady base and a commanding view,” said fellow activist and eyewitness John McTernan.  As Ed stood on his platform that morning, a man and woman exited a car in the parking lot and proceeded towards that door of the abortion mill.

When Mr. Snell tried to counsel the woman, his words were cut short when the man became furious, jumped the fence and, in the words of Mr. McTernan, “leaped on the vehicle with Ed and catapulted him off of the vehicle and onto the ground.” Mr. Snell hit his back and head on the pavement and was knocked unconscious.

His medical report outlines the extent of his injuries: “multiple trauma, right subarachnoid hemorrhage (bleeding in the area between the brain and the tissues that cover the brain), compression fractures of four vertebrae (T3, T4, T5 and T10), right scapula fracture and fracture of the fourth and fifth ribs.”  Before doctors were able to stop the bleeding in his head, they even feared Mr. Snell would die.

When asked on the phone about the vicious attack, the receptionist at Hillcrest Abortion Clinic refused to give a recorded statement and angrily shouted: “He got what he deserved!  He earned what he got!”  She then hung up the phone.

Immediately after the attack, Mr. McTernan ran over to Ed and was frightened to see that he was unconscious and breathing irregularly.  He reported the attack to “911” and then shouted to the assailant: “You assaulted him and he is unconscious.”  Agitated, the man replied: “I did not assault him, I just pushed him,” with an aggressiveness that made Mr. McTernan fearful for his own safety.

Ed was taken away in an ambulance and three police officers arrived to investigate.  They went into the clinic, where the assailant was waiting.  After a few moments, the assailant and his companion left the clinic freely, got into their car and drove away.

Shocked, Mr. McTernan shouted to the police: “What are you doing?  That’s him!  That’s the assailant!”

One cop replied: “It is none of your business!”

Mr. McTernan: “I am making it my business, Ed Snell is my good friend!”

The officer then threatened to arrest Mr. McTernan for interfering with a criminal investigation.  Mr. Mcternan replied: “Go ahead and arrest me, I am not afraid.  I want to know why the assailant walked away from this scene where an elderly man was left unconscious.  We have excellent attorneys and we will sue you if you do not do your job.”

She angrily responded: “Don’t threaten me or I will arrest you!”  She then returned to the police car and drove away.  At the time this article was written, the Harrisburg Police Department had not returned a phone call requesting a statement on the incident.

Once the extent of Mr. Snell’s injuries were discovered, the assailant was arrested.  Nevertheless, as Mr. McTernan put it: “I cannot imagine me [as a pro-lifer], striking someone connected with Hillcrest [Abortion Center], knocking them unconscious, the police coming, the injured person being taken away in an ambulance and the police letting me go.  There is something wrong with that.”

There is also something wrong with the lack of media coverage of the incident.  At the time this article was written, a google search about the attack returned no results.

Ed returned home just in time to celebrate Christmas with his family.  He was released from the hospital on Christmas Eve, just a couple of hours before Bishop Kevin Rhodes of Harrisburg arrived to pay him a visit.

We’re on our way to see relatives, so I expect we’ll be a bit busy trying to keep up with the sugared-up children and gossipy cousins. In the meantime, have a blessed Christmas. We hope Santa and the Lord are good to you this holiday season.

This just out from the office of Mass Catholic Conference regarding Beacon Hill’s rush to publicly fund embryonic stem cell research.

As the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in Massachusetts, we applaud the recent stem cell announcements from Japan and Wisconsin.  Researchers have confirmed that pluripotent stem cells can be created without need of cloning and destroying human embryos.  Scientists agree that the new techniques offer real promise for finding cures.

The approach taken in the new studies avoids the moral objections associated with research requiring the destruction of human embryos.  That unethical practice disregards human life and has not produced a single clinical benefit.  Instead, the groundbreaking discoveries advance both science and ethics.

In light of the exciting developments in the stem cell field, we renew our call for the promotion of biotechnology in the Commonwealth that abides by the highest ethical regard for the sanctity of human life.  The recent advances show that good science and respect for life can work together.

Stem cell legislation filed in the State Legislature by the Governor, similar to other bills filed by various legislators, proposes public funding to promote experiments fatal to human embryos.  These experiments are performed on embryos to acquire stem cells that the new studies now demonstrate can be created through ethical means.  We continue to oppose this legislation in its current form as unjust and unnecessary.  We ask the Legislature to craft stem cell legislation promoting only research that respects human dignity.

Moreover, there is a rush to enact this legislation within the next few months.  We urge our elected officials to conduct the legislative process at a more deliberate pace.  This would accommodate full consideration of the new research findings and their bearing on the misplaced priorities currently endorsed by the Governor’s stem cell legislation and its companion bills.  With so much at stake, careful assessment and not haste, is in order.

Cardinal Seán P. O’Malley
Archdiocese of Boston

Most Rev. George W. Coleman
Diocese of Fall River

Most Rev. Timothy A. McDonnell
Diocese of Springfield
Most Rev. Robert J. McManus
Diocese of Worcester

Listen, Gov Patrick and legislators, if embryonic stem cell research were that promising an approach to fighting disease, the venture capital community would be all over it. But the VC’s are avoiding this research like the plague, so that tells us this is just another black hole for government funds, funds that should be applied to other, more viable areas of research.

Here’s a nice nod to Christmas from the federal government. The Politico blog is whining about this one. Not sure why. Should the government be focusing on things like lowering taxes, ending the welfare state, not playing favorites with religions, etc.? Heck, yes. But given all the anti-Christianity sentiment that’s run amok at our schools — you can have a Kwanza or Chanukah celebration at school, but heaven forbid you try to have a Christmas party — I think this is a nice statement.

The vote passed 372-9. Keep reading to see how some of the legislators who voted against this resolution  whole-heartedly voted *for* a similar one regarding Ramadan.

Here’s the text of H.Res. 847, as put forth by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa):

“Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.

Whereas Christmas, a holiday of great significance to Americans and many other cultures and nationalities, is celebrated annually by Christians throughout the United States and the world;

Whereas there are approximately 225,000,000 Christians in the United States, making Christianity the religion of over three-fourths of the American population;

Whereas there are approximately 2,000,000,000 Christians throughout the world, making Christianity the largest religion in the world and the religion of about one-third of the world population;

Whereas Christians identify themselves as those who believe in the salvation from sin offered to them through the sacrifice of their savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and who, out of gratitude for the gift of salvation, commit themselves to living their lives in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible;

Whereas Christians and Christianity have contributed greatly to the development of western civilization;

Whereas the United States, being founded as a constitutional republic in the traditions of western civilization, finds much in its history that points observers back to its roots in Christianity;

Whereas on December 25 of each calendar year, American Christians observe Christmas, the holiday celebrating the birth of their savior, Jesus Christ;

Whereas for Christians, Christmas is celebrated as a recognition of God’s redemption, mercy, and Grace; and

Whereas many Christians and non-Christians throughout the United States and the rest of the world, celebrate Christmas as a time to serve others: Now, therefore be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

(1) recognizes the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world;

(2) expresses continued support for Christians in the United States and worldwide;

(3) acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and the Christian faith;

(4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization;

(5) rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and

(6) expresses its deepest respect to American Christians and Christians throughout the world.”

Nine members voted against the resolution, 10 refused to support it by voting “present” instead, and 40 others members did not vote. This from Liberty Counsel:

All but two of the representatives voting “present” or against the Christmas Resolution voted in favor of a resolution recognizing Ramadan, which passed by a 376-0 vote in October. The Ramadan Resolution stated that the House “recognizes the Islamic faith as one of the great religions of the world…expresses friendship and support for Muslims…acknowledges the onset of Ramadan…and conveys its respect to Muslims…rejects hatred, bigotry, and violence directed against Muslims…commends Muslims…who have privately and publicly rejected interpretations and movements of Islam that justify and encourage hatred, violence, and terror”.

 

The Christmas Resolution uses similar language, stating that the House recognizes “the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world…expresses continued support for Christians…acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and the Christian faith…acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization…rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians…and expresses its deepest respect to American Christians and Christians throughout the world”.

 

The nine members who voted against the Christmas Resolution were all Democrats: Ackerman (NY), Clarke (NY), DeGette (CO), Hastings (FL), Lee (CA), McDermott (WA), Scott (VA), Stark (CA) and Woolsey (CA). The 10 who answered “present” without entering a vote were also Democrats except one: Conyers (MI), Frank (MA), Holt (NJ), Payne (NJ), Pence (Republican from IN), Schakowsky (PA), Schwartz (PA), Wasserman-Schultz (FL), Welch (VT) and Yarmuth (KY).

I really didn’t even set out to post anything to this blog today, much less about Mitt Romney. Here is another endorsement today, from Judge Robert Bork (remember, the one who ought to have been a Justice of the US Supreme Court for the past 20 years). One thing in particular about his endorsement struck me. I know a number of people who are unhappy with Governor Romney’s handling of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage, who think he could have and should have done more to oppose it. I’m still not sure what I think of that, but I have to give Judge Bork’s assessment a lot of weight. In his endorsement, he wrote: “I greatly admired his leadership in Massachusetts in the way that he responded to the activist court’s ruling legalizing same-sex ‘marriage.’ His leadership on the issue has served as a model to the nation on how to respect all of our citizens while respecting the rule of law at the same time.”

Speaking of which, one of the most, perhaps the most, important factors in deciding who the next President should be is that he/she will likely appoint at least 1, and possibly up to 4 Justices to the US Supreme Court (out of 9). That’s huge. And as Bork also said in his endorsement: “[Mitt Romney] knows firsthand how the judicial branch can profoundly affect the future course of a state and a nation.” Justices who may leave the Court by the end of 2012 with their current ages: John Paul Stevens for sure (87, lefty); Ruth Bader Ginsburg (74, lefty); Anthony Kennedy (71, lefty); Antonin Scalia (71 … NO! Don’t retire!); Stephen Breyer (69, lefty); and David Souter (68, lefty).

National Review, the granddaddy and in my opinion still the most solidly reliable of (now) many fine conservative opinion journals, has endorsed former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney for President of the United States.

The magazine’s official and unsigned endorsement is well-reasoned and worth reading, especially for those with reservations about the candidate. Read it here. I myself have reservations about all of them (and downright opposition to two of them), but I’ve recently concluded the same as National Review.

This great commentary was just published, post-blizzard, by a good friend of ours, Bob Parks, commentator for the Intel Radio Network:

As some of you around the nation may or may not know… there was snow Thursday in the Northeast.

We all saw it coming.  We knew it was going to start sometime after noon.  Like a switch being flicked, the snow started, and it began to pile up quick.

“Nature” will do what nature wants to do.  That’s something most of us understand.  Be it a hurricane, high winds, or snow, “nature” has a way of putting us all in our place.  As I said, that’s something most of us understand.

Here in my neck of Massachusetts, some schools released their kids early.  Some employers let their employees go home early.  For others, it was just a snowstorm.  We’ve seen them before.  No big deal.

But the snow was falling at a rate of near three inches an hour.  Traffic stalled.  The average 15-minute commute became three hours.  People abandoned their cars along the sides of highways as the spinning of wheels depleted their gasoline supply.  Plows were entangled in the traffic mess, and for that, there will be hell to pay.

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick and Secretary of State William Galvin have announced the launching of an investigation as to why snow paralyzed the state.  I suggest the issuance of one subpoena.  Investigate God.

After all, he decided to distribute the storm without consulting the State of Massachusetts.  He knew that the amounts he was dropping on the state would create problems in transportation.  He knew children would be sitting on school busses way longer than the norm.  People were going to leave their homes and shovel their driveways, and we here all know that NOTHING happens without the expressed permission of the liberals on Beacon Hill.

God should be held accountable for the turmoil the record amount of snow falling on Boston caused.  Most businesses in the state know that anything involving their employees must be sanctioned and blessed by the state.  (Maybe that’s why most are opting to leave, but that’s another story….)

Only the state’s school committees dictate when and when students are let loose early.  God has no authority to make such decisions.  When the state is finished with him, he’ll probably be called in to answer town by town.

What will this investigation uncover?

That liberals, in their arrogance, believe that they are superior to “nature”, thus the inconvenience that occurred during yesterday’s storm should never have happened.  Our plows should have kept up with the dumping.  Our cars should have taken us from Point A to Point B unfettered.

It was only snow.

Maybe when these people begin to understand that there are things greater than themselves, they’ll understand why some of us are laughing at their call for an “investigation.”

I was only joking about investigating God.  What’s funnier is that liberals would, if they could.

I know this is going to get Dave going again, but I have to post this excerpt from Pope Benedict’s upcoming annual message for World Peace Day on January 1, 2008. As many of us have seen, global warming has, quite inappropriately, become a religion for many. Apparently the Pope has become alarmed as well.

This from the London Daily Mail:

Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.

His remarks will be made in his annual message for World Peace Day on January 1, but they were released as delegates from all over the world convened on the Indonesian holiday island of Bali for UN climate change talks.

The 80-year-old Pope said the world needed to care for the environment but not to the point where the welfare of animals and plants was given a greater priority than that of mankind.

“Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow,” he said in the message entitled “The Human Family, A Community of Peace”.

“It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances.”

I can’t say as I disagree with Michael Reagan on this. His father did indeed have a unique vision — one of freedom and opportunities and self-made men. The politician who most recently tried to do a little marketing spin on the topic, Gov. Deval Patrick, was a fraud. “Together we can,” what, give you a free pass to all the creature comforts our tax dollars can buy? And I’m not saying the Republicans are doing much better at the moment.

This from Michael Reagan’s column  in the Worcester Telegram:

Republicans keep longing for a reincarnation of Ronald Reagan to pop up and win the GOP presidential nomination, but thus far not one of the current candidates has shown that he has the vaguest notion of what made my father the great president he was — his vision of the America it is capable of becoming based on his unbounded optimism and faith in the ability of fellow Americans to do the right thing when told the truth.

They keep going off on tangents, arguing about the religious faith of one of their number, or about the legality of using lawn service companies that hire illegal aliens, or how much a former mayor spent on security for himself and his mistress, but not a single word about what matters most — a vision of what kind of America will result if they win the presidency. The American people crave to see the vision of the shining city on the hill my dad promised and went a long way toward creating, yet not a single one of the GOP candidates has said a word about how they plan to get us there, or even mentioned it’s where they want to take us, or what it would be like once we got there.