Worcester County Freedom Trail

I’m grateful for living in the USA, the land of the free and home of the brave. I’m grateful for the health and happiness of my family. I’m grateful for my wonderful friends and dedicated work colleagues.

Given my family’s larger-than-life battle with Lyme Disease the past 15 months, I am ever so grateful for the progress being made on Lyme Disease awareness and new research. From the California Lyme Disease Association:

2008 has seen much progress towards helping the cause of patients suffering from Lyme disease and other tick-borne infections. Here are some things we’re grateful for this Thanksgiving season.

Lyme Documentary “Under Our Skin”
This award-winning film powerfully depicts the plight of Lyme patients and explores the political controversy surrounding this disease. The release of the film has been a catalyst for wide-ranging news coverage of Lyme disease on TV, radio, newspapers and the internet. Find a screening near you.

Cure Unknown: Inside the Lyme Epidemic
Science journalist Pamela Weintraub thoroughly documents the history and controversy surrounding Lyme disease. Like the previously mentioned film, this book has helped raise the national level of Lyme disease awareness.

AG Finds IDSA Culpable for Lyme Guidelines
In a landmark anti-trust investigation of the Infectious Diseases Society of America’s Lyme treatment guidelines, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal found the IDSA suppressed evidence, excluded opposing viewpoints, and ignored significant financial conflicts-of-interest by several members of the guidelines panel.

In a settlement, the IDSA agreed to re-examine its guidelines with a new, conflicts-free panel and to hold a public hearing to air divergent opinions. The process of choosing the new panel is going on now.

CALDA, Time for Lyme, the Lyme Disease Association and other Lyme groups worked behind the scenes to help bring this situation to the attention of the Attorney General. It is a stellar example of how patients’ groups can join together to accomplish large goals.

More steps forward:
1. More doctors are learning to diagnose and treat patients according to the guidelines set forth by the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society (ILADS).

2. More patients are learning to help themselves and each other by joining CALDA’s network of on-line state Lyme support groups. To join a group, click here.

3. More Lyme research is being funded by CALDA and other patients groups.

4. Recently, CALDA successfully held the first Lyme activists’ training workshop in connection with the national LDA/ILADS conferences. This means more people than ever are becoming involved. Click here for the “Activism” section of CALDA’s web site.

No one who reads this column is going to be surprised to find out that President-Elect Obama elected to send his daughters to an expensive, private school in Washington, DC. What annoys me is the hypocrisy. First, Obama is for vouchers, then the unions yell and he’s against vouchers. I detest politicians who don’t know their mind and let their ideals shift in the changing winds. I detest even more, politicians who think they deserve better than the rest of us. Obama now clearly falls in that camp.

This from today’s Wall Street Journal:

Michelle and Barack Obama have settled on a Washington, D.C., school for their daughters, and you will not be surprised to learn it is not a public institution. Malia, age 10, and seven-year-old Sasha will attend the Sidwell Friends School, the private academy that educates the children of much of Washington’s elite. Vice President-elect Joe Biden’s grandchildren attend Sidwell — as did Chelsea Clinton — where tuition is close to $30,000 a year. The Obama girls have been students at the private University of Chicago Laboratory Schools, where tuition runs above $21,000. “A number of great schools were considered,” said Katie McCormick Lelyveld, a spokeswoman for Mrs. Obama. “In the end, the Obamas selected the school that was the best fit for what their daughters need right now.”

Note the word “selected,” as in made a choice. The Obamas are fortunate to have the means to send their daughters to private school, and no one begrudges them that choice given that Washington’s public schools are among the worst in America.

Most D.C. parents would also love to be able to choose a better school for their child, but they lack the financial means to do so. The Washington Opportunity Scholarship Program each year offers up to $7,500 to some 1,900 kids to attend private schools, but Democrats in Congress want to kill it. Average family income for kids in the voucher program is about $22,000.

Mr. Obama says he opposes such vouchers, because “although it might benefit some kids at the top, what you’re going to do is leave a lot of kids at the bottom.” The example of his own children refutes that: The current system offers plenty of choice to kids “at the top” while abandoning those at the bottom.

A week ago, Rep. Lew Evangelidis (R-Holden) declared his candidacy for the position of Minority Leader on Beacon Hill. Breaking news on that front today. Contrary to back door rumors, the race is still on to shake up Beacon Hill and challenge the Democrats every time they turn around!

From Rep. Lew Evangelidis:

I am disappointed by the statement of Representative Jay Barrows to the press today.

The Republican caucus won’t choose the next minority leader until January 7th. Since my announcement that I am seeking the position of minority leader I have been overwhelmed by the support I have been receiving across the state.

Everywhere Republicans are unhappy with the status quo and looking for a new message and new messengers. Regrettably, some of our members on Beacon Hill who are closest to the situation are the last ones to recognize the desperate need for change that I hear everywhere outside of the building. There are many in our caucus who are fully committed to pursuing the changes that are essential for us to reenergize our party and help bring two-party government back to Massachusetts. We nee d leadership that will confront the Democrats and their one party rule on Beacon Hill.

We have watched our caucus drop to a historic low of 16, including the loss of all three of the seats vacated by Republicans this year. In the last six years alone we have seen our numbers drop from 24 to 16.

Without new leadership I don’t believe we can effectively move our caucus, or the party as a whole, in a new direction. Many of us simply cannot endorse the status quo. I will continue to meet with members of our caucus and State Committee members to craft the best plan for us to move forward in the coming term. I look forward to our vote for minority leader on January 7th.

And this post from Monday, November 17,2008:

This is an exciting development and something that is needed. Hot off the press from the Beacon Hill office of Rep. Lew Evangelidis (R-Holden):

Today I am announcing my candidacy for House of Representatives minority leader. There is nothing more important in our state today than to revive our two party system in Massachusetts. The Republican House Caucus is now at a historic low. During my six years in the legislature our party has lost a third of its seats, dwindling from 24 members to 16. Everywhere I go Republican leaders and state committee members are pleading for a change in direction and new leadership for our Republican Party.

All across the country, Republicans are regrouping to chart a new course. Massachusetts must do the same.

We need to energize our party and elect more Republicans to the House of Representatives. We must be vocal watchdogs for good government on behalf of the citizens of Massachusetts. The Republican caucus must be a leader when it comes to ethical reform at the State House. We need leadership that is willing to challenge the Democrats inside the building and be much more visible outside the building. We need a stronger, better message that resonates with Massachusetts residents.

I hate to see our local Reps not working together on this issue. It’s unusual for our crew. But we definitely need the Minority Leader to be a lot more vocal about the Democrats shenanigans on Beacon Hill. The Republican caucus will elect a new Minority Leader on January 7, 2009.

The Massachusetts Republican Party announced today that it has engaged Daniel B. Winslow of the international law firm of Duane Morris LLP to head the upcoming effort to redistrict the state’s legislative and congressional districts. 

The purpose of the redistricting, which is based on the federal census, is to create districts providing equal voting rights.  The Republican Party is committed to protecting the rights and representation of all voters, including political and racial minorities.   

Dan Winslow said, “The right to vote is the most fundamental right of a free society. Without fair elections, the power of the people in Massachusetts to fight for reform will continue to elude our grasp.  We know that striving for fair elections and civil rights of voters will not be the easy thing to do, but it’s the right thing to do and I am honored to play a part in this effort. We will work to ensure fair legislative and congressional districts, where votes are equally valued and candidates can compete without the burdens of prejudice or backroom politics.”

MassGOP Chairman Peter Torkildsen said,  “I know firsthand the value of fair and competitive congressional districts, where voters can decide based on the issues rather than merely the power of incumbency.” 

Torkildsen was elected to Congress following the last GOP redistricting lawsuit filed by Winslow.

In the future the Massachusetts Republican Party will propose maps of new legislative and congressional districts and be prepared to file civil rights lawsuits to enforce the constitutional requirements of fair redistricting. 

Winslow, is a veteran of similar efforts in the past that resulted in the election of the state’s first Latino state representative as well as two Republican members of Congress.  He served as a state District Court Judge and as Chief Legal Counsel to Governor Mitt Romney before joining the trial practice group at Duane Morris. 

Winslow was asked to lead the GOP redistricting project by unanimous vote of the Party’s Executive Committee.  The Executive Committee resolution noted that “fair and impartial drawing of district lines that protect the civil rights of minorities and all voters” is the goal of the Republican Party in Massachusetts.  Legislative and congressional redistricting will occur in 2011 based on the 2010 federal census data for each precinct.  In past federal lawsuits, the Republicans have successfully allied with groups such as the Black Political Task Force and the Latino Political Action Committee. 

If you’ve never met Boston’s Cardinal Sean O’Malley, you should. He is an amazing man. Devoted, intellectual, driven by his faith in God and the Lord Jesus Christ, and his love for his congregants.

So when Planned Parenthood decides to strike out at our Cardinal, it’s because his point has hit home, uncomfortably so for PP. This from Catholic Culture:

The Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts has unleashed a broadside of criticism against Boston’s Cardinal Sean O’Malley, in response to the cardinal’s charge that Planned Parenthood has its historic roots as “a very racist organization to eliminate the blacks.” Sidestepping questions about their organization’s ties to racist ideology and eugenicism, the Planned Parenthood statement complained that Cardinal O’Malley and other American prelates “are eager to jump into politics.” Claiming that most Catholics ignore Church teachings on birth control and legal access to abortion, Planned Parenthood said that the bishops “have a lot of work to d in order to reconnect with their members.” The group said: “Perhaps Cardinal O’Malley should spend less time sharing political opinions and more time listening to the reality of life for his own constituency.”

The stinging public statement indicates that Planned Parenthood feels confident enough to make a direct personal attack on the leader of Boston’s Catholic community. The group is obviously less comfortable defending its own history and its plans to promote contraception and abortion especially among members of racial minority groups.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was widely known to be anti-black and anti-poor. Here’s a sad summary from La Shawn Barber on Townhall.com:

The Planned Parenthood Federation of America makes a futile effort to deny that its founder Margaret Sanger was a eugenicist. Eugenics is a pseudo-science that claims some races are genetically superior and more fit to survive than others. As a eugenicist, Sanger’s goals were to discourage the “unfit” and “inferior” from reproducing. In her 1922 book Pivot of Civilization, she called for segregation of “morons, misfits, and the maladjusted” and sterilization of “genetically inferior races.”

Can you guess which race in particular she considered genetically inferior?

Sanger even suggested that the federal government pay “obviously unfit parents” not to have children and advocated limiting and discouraging “overfertility of the mentally and physically defective.”

In 1916, Sanger founded the Birth Control League, the forerunner of Planned Parenthood. She appointed a man named Lothrop Stoddard, a Nazi sympathizer, fellow eugenicist and author of The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy to the Board of Directors. At some point, after Adolph Hitler’s atrocities against the Jews became known, Sanger changed the league’s name to Planned Parenthood, because “birth control” was too closely associated with eugenics.

More controversial is Sanger’s “Negro Project,” devised in 1939. The eugenicist set out to implicate black ministers and doctors in her efforts to spread her message of contraception, sterilization, and abortion in the black community. “The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We do not want the word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it occurs to any of their more rebellious members,” she wrote.

Sanger’s work has done serious damage. In the latest abortion surveillance report from the CDC that tracks racial demographics:

The abortion ratio for black women (491 per 1,000 live births) was 3.0 times the ratio for white women (165 per 1,000), and the ratio for women of the nonhomogeneous “other” race category (347 per 1,000) was 2.1 times the ratio for white women. The abortion rate for black women (29 per 1,000 women) was 2.9 times the rate for white women (10 per 1,000), and the abortion rate for women of other races (19 per 1,000 women) was 2.0 times the rate for white women.

Great column by State Committeewoman Linda Rapoza from Fall River:

Everyone has an opinion about “what happened” to the Republican brand. What’s happened has been developing for some time, and it’s quite simple.

The party that once stood for small government, low taxes and individual responsibility abandoned those principles in order to attract moderates and Democrats. We became a party of mutants with no coherent message and no unifying purpose. While Democrats’ desire for FDR “New Dealism” was never abandoned, cocktail-sipping “Rockefeller Republican” snobs elbowed their way into leadership positions, remade Reagan-style conservatism into middle-of-the-roadism, and then proudly proclaimed “Reaganism” dead. Since they’re so busy distancing themselves from the religious rabble, how would they know?

“The Speech” (as it came to be known) by Reagan in 1964 was on the cutting edge of the coming debate between liberals who wanted a centralized government involved in the personal lives of Americans, and conservatives who wanted the government to spend less and leave them alone.
After a disastrous Carter presidency, Ronald Reagan helped people believe in themselves again, so it was no surprise when he won a second term in the White House by the largest electoral landslide in U.S history. He carried 49 states, receiving 525 electoral votes. He won 59 percent of the popular vote, including majorities in every age group and every occupational category. He won 61 percent of Independents, 25 percent of Democrats and 44 percent of Hispanics. Even with Geraldine Ferraro on the Mondale ticket, Reagan won 54 percent of women.

Reagan saw big government as the adversary of freedom-loving Americans, and said in April of 1986, “I have always stated that the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this Earth is a government program.”

He believed government by nature was inefficient, that it stifled individual initiative and therefore individual freedom, and he was right. Government cannot create anything for anybody without first taking something away from somebody else.

Congress’s sweeping Republican victory in 1994 was based on Ronald Reagan’s 1985 State of the Union speech. The basic Republican principles of “citizen legislature,” less government intervention and individual freedom have always been more aligned with the tenets of the American Dream and the traditional Main Street values of family, neighborhood, thrift and charity. Today’s self-anointed leaders of the Republican Party have decided to let Democrats define who we are.

If liberal ideologues weren’t so afraid of another Reagan Revolution, they wouldn’t be desperately trying to convince us that Reaganism is dead. Elitists in the leadership of the Republican Party ran it into the ditch. It’s up to us now to take the party back to the roots of its success.

I don’t understand. There are dozens or more dating service web sites that cater to the GBLT community. How is it that the government can force eHarmony to change it’s core business because a gay person wants eHarmony rather than Match.com? What’s next? A gay person will want to buy a Toyota Corolla from General Motors, so the government will step in and force General Motors to change it’s business and start producing Corolla’s? Or my business will have to discontinue it’s focus on the tech community and start to work with retailers if a gay person objects to our business model?

This from Fox News:

Online dating service eHarmony has agreed to create a new Web site — “Compatible Partners” — for gay and lesbian users, the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General announced.

Created as part of a settlement with Eric McKinley, a gay man from New Jersey, the Web site will provide services for users seeking same-sex partners by March 31, New Jersey Division on Civil Rights Director J. Frank Vespa-Papaleo said.

eHarmony, which was founded by Dr. Neil Clark Warren in 2000, said the settlement was triggered by a Law Against Discrimination complaint filed by McKinley against the online service on March 14, 2005. As part of the agreement, eHarmony will pay McKinley $5,000 and will provide him a one-year complimentary membership.

eHarmony — which was not found in violation of the law — also agreed to ensure that same-sex users will be matched using the same or equivalent technology used for its heterosexual clients. It will also post photographs of same-sex couples in its “Diversity” section of its Web site and in advertising materials.

Registration on the “Compatible Partners” site will be free to the first 10,000 users. The site and eHarmony will maintain individual matching pools and registration information. As a result, users of the “Compatible Partners” site and eHarmony.com cannot be paired together, the company announced.

“With the launch of the Compatible Partners site, our policy is to welcome all single individuals who are genuinely seeking long-term relationships,” eHarmony Vice President of Legal Affairs Antone Johnson said in a statement.

Legislative approval is down across the board, locally, state-wide, and nationally. Which is why I was blown away when I saw this updated list of approvals from the Mass High Tech Council. Technology has been the lifeblood of Massachusetts for a very long time. We need to continue to encourage the tech sector to innovate and grow and employ. And our small delegation of Republicans is leading the way.

The Massachusetts High Technology Council today released its biennial MassTrack legislative scorecard, which showed legislator average scores drop from 75 percent in 2006 to 42 percent for the 2007-2008 session. The MassTrack scorecard uses votes from the 2007-2008 legislative session to assess legislative support of the technology agenda on issues of taxes, health care, education and economic development.

“The legislative scorecard is designed to create a better understanding of the technology sector’s priorities on Beacon Hill and to consistently remind legislators that their votes have an impact long after they have been cast,” said Council President Christopher R. Anderson. “While there were some positive developments in this legislative session, the MassTrack rankings show some severe backtracking on key areas of economic competitiveness.”

Legislative passage of a nearly $500 million tax hike and an increased healthcare assessment were two issues that hurt the rankings of legislators who supported those measures, according to MassTrack. Anderson noted some positives from the session, including the passage of the $1 billion Life Sciences investment package and the Green Communities Act.

Overall, 6 representatives received perfect 100 percent scores and 5 senators scored a highest in house score of 87. The lowest score in the Legislature was 21 percent, a score shared by 2 senators and 1 representative. The average score for the Senate was 42.2, with House coming in slightly lower at 41.59. Those legislators who achieved a perfect score were:

Rep. Lewis Evangelidis – 100 (R-Holden)
Rep. Paul Frost – 100 (R-Auburn)
Rep. George Peterson – 100 (R-Grafton)
Rep. Karyn Polito – 100 (R-Shrewsbury)
Rep. Richard Ross – 100 (R-Medfield)
Rep. Todd Smola – 100 (R-Palmer)

We have 351 towns and cities in Massachusetts. So there’s lots of room to be at the bottom of various lists. But a big hats off to our local communities who scored big on the latest Mass High Tech Council list of tech-friendly communities.

Central Massachusetts communities took eight of the top ten spots in the Massachusetts High Technology Council’s annual ranking of tech-friendly communities.

The “Mass Track” rankings measure variables including tax policy, workforce strength and openness to new growth.

Shrewsbury placed second on the list, followed by Groton in third, Grafton fourth, Medway fifth, Douglass sixth, Boylston seventh, Leominster eighth and Uxbridge 10th. The other communities to make the list were North Reading, in first place, and Gill, in ninth.

Two area towns also made the “rapid risers’” list. Boylston was at the top of that list, going from 234th place to 7th. Fitchburg rose from 239th to 130th

Now here’s an interesting fact. See anything interesting in the following chart, which outlines the legislative approval for these towns?

2008 Rank Community State Representative/MassTrack Score

1 North Reading
Rep. Jones – 87 (Republican)
Sen. Tarr – 87 (Republican)

2 Shrewsbury
Rep. Polito – 100 (Republican)
Sen. Augustus – 34

3 Groton
Rep. Hargraves – 87 (Republican)
Sen. Pangiotakos – 34

4 Grafton
Rep. Peterson – 100 (Republican)
Sen. Augustus – 34

5 Medway
Rep. Loscocco – 87 (Republican)
Rep. Vallee – 34
Sen. Spilka – 34

I see a lot of Massachusetts Republicans doing the right things to support the technology sector, an important employer across the state. So why don’t we have more R’s in office?

How sad for us that someone who showed such blatant disrespect for the military during his run for president in 2004 has been appointed by President Elect Obama as the incoming Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

More than three decades after he first appeared before the panel as a 27-year-old Vietnam veteran-turned-antiwar protester, Senator John F. Kerry will be named chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, giving him enormous influence over President-elect Barack Obama’s foreign policy, according to congressional officials.

Kerry, who was elected to a fifth term from Massachusetts earlier this month, will be handed the gavel when the new Congress convenes in January, replacing Vice President-elect Joe Biden, the officials said.

Aides to Kerry said he is already laying out a broad agenda for the committee, beginning with new legislation to strengthen the United States’ hand against terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan; provide oversight of efforts to end the war in Iraq; and seize what he sees as a new opportunity to curtail the spread of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.

I hope Kerry follows through, otherwise we’re in for a long, painful four years. For those of you who may have forgotten, here’s one of his worst gaffes, from the Darwin Awards:

Under pressure from many Democrats, John Kerry apologised on Wednesday, two days after appearing to tell college students that if they did not get an education, “you get stuck in Iraq”.

In a written statement, Senator Kerry said his words had been “misinterpreted to wrongly imply anything negative about those in uniform, and I personally apologise to any service member, family member, or American who was offended”.

The botched joke not only sapped momentum from his party in the final week of campaigning for the midterm congressional elections, it also dealt a blow to his 2008 White House aspirations.

Senator Kerry cancelled campaign appearances in three states, saying he did not want to be a “distraction”.