Wednesday, June 30, 2010
J-D loves those summer time peaches!
By KIM PIERCE / Special to the Dallas Morning News reports, Last year, we were crying in our bellinis over the near-total loss of the Hill Country peach crop and damage to orchards around the state.
This year, extension agents and growers predict a record harvest. "This could be the best we've had since 1982," declares Darren Rozell, who grows East Texas peaches with J.T. Lemley (better known for his tomatoes). "It's about time."
What a difference a year makes.
"We've got the makings of a tremendous crop," says Hill Country peach grower Jamey Vogel, owner of Vogel Orchard near Stonewall and vice president of the Hill Country Fruit Council. "People are just itchin' for peaches."
"This will be an awesome year," enthuses Galen Logan, Camp County Texas AgriLife Extension Service agent in East Texas. "For the first time in several years, we've got a beautiful crop." Ditto the famous peach-growing area around Weatherford to the west, says Parker County extension agent Jon Green.
Chalk it up to the vagaries of weather, which ruined last year's crop. In 2009, a late-spring freeze plus hailstorms doomed the peaches. This year, an unusually cold winter provided the perfect setup for a bumper crop. "Peach trees require so many 'chill hours,' " says Rozell, when the temperature must be below 45 F. "We made it this year."
With the freeze threat past and hail less of a problem this year, farmers are rejoicing, and peach lovers should be, too.
A lot of peach fans hold out for their favorite varieties, such as freestones that include Loring, Bounty, Harvester, Dixieland, Red Globe, Redskin, Ouachita Gold and Gala, to name a few. But there are many newer, improved varieties that taste just as sweet, says Rozell, whose orchards are in New Harmony, northwest of Tyler. "Harvester has a little tartness," he adds. "A lot of people who are putting up jams or making cobblers prefer it."
"The peaches do get sweeter, the hotter it gets," says Lafreita Hutton, whose family owns Hutton Farms in Weatherford. Even then, it takes the right combination of sun and showers for peak flavor, she says.
"The best peaches come off between June 15 and July 25," says Rozell. "If you want some high-quality peaches to put up, that's the time to buy them."
Kim Pierce is a Dallas freelance writer.
Get some yummy recipes HERE
I didn't know Old Glory had a make-over
J-D said, "How about this....If you make money selling America's most revered symbols, Old Glory, make sure it has 13 stripes AND 50 stars....Jeeze!
Casey Norton on wfaa.com reports, when you see the red, white and blue proudly displayed for Independence Day, take a closer look.
President Eisenhower set the standard for all American flags 51 years ago. The order requires 13 stripes and 50 stars on a field of blue.
Tim Childress had to double-check when he unfurled Old Glory — he got more than he wanted.
Large or small, the American Flag is supposed to be flown with pride, a symbol of our nation.
The seven red stripes represent hardiness and valor; six white stripes stand for for purity and innocence. There's a blue field for perseverance and justice. And, of course, 50 stars for each of the 50 states.
That makes Tim Childress' flag something other than American.
"You can kind of see the stars are all crooked, and if you count them, there's actually 61 stars," he said.
Childress counted several times. He multiplied rows and columns. He counted them one-by-one.
Every time, it added up to 61.
So he went back to the Dollar Tree store where he bought the plastic flag and sent an e-mail message to the Virginia marketing company.
"I kind of let them know there are 50 states in the United States, and they need to correct this — or at least get the Chinese supplier to correct this," Childress said.
Yes, it's a plastic flag, and it only cost a dollar, but Childress argues this is not just another decoration at a discount store.
"They can do that to Santa Claus; do what they want, change his face. But this is the flag, and it needs to stay that way," Childress maintains.
The Dollar Tree assistant store manager wouldn't comment on camera, but said the flag is sold as a "patriotic banner" — not as an American flag.
See the story HERE
Casey Norton on wfaa.com reports, when you see the red, white and blue proudly displayed for Independence Day, take a closer look.
President Eisenhower set the standard for all American flags 51 years ago. The order requires 13 stripes and 50 stars on a field of blue.
Tim Childress had to double-check when he unfurled Old Glory — he got more than he wanted.
Large or small, the American Flag is supposed to be flown with pride, a symbol of our nation.
The seven red stripes represent hardiness and valor; six white stripes stand for for purity and innocence. There's a blue field for perseverance and justice. And, of course, 50 stars for each of the 50 states.
That makes Tim Childress' flag something other than American.
"You can kind of see the stars are all crooked, and if you count them, there's actually 61 stars," he said.
Childress counted several times. He multiplied rows and columns. He counted them one-by-one.
Every time, it added up to 61.
So he went back to the Dollar Tree store where he bought the plastic flag and sent an e-mail message to the Virginia marketing company.
"I kind of let them know there are 50 states in the United States, and they need to correct this — or at least get the Chinese supplier to correct this," Childress said.
Yes, it's a plastic flag, and it only cost a dollar, but Childress argues this is not just another decoration at a discount store.
"They can do that to Santa Claus; do what they want, change his face. But this is the flag, and it needs to stay that way," Childress maintains.
The Dollar Tree assistant store manager wouldn't comment on camera, but said the flag is sold as a "patriotic banner" — not as an American flag.
See the story HERE
Dallas Police Chief David Brown's son high on PCP
Rebecca Lopez on wfaa.com reports, An autopsy report shows that David Brown Jr., the son of the Dallas police chief, was high on drugs when bullets started flying at a Lancaster apartment complex on Father's Day.
Brown, 27, is blamed for the shooting deaths of Lancaster police Officer Craig Shaw and another man before Brown was killed by police.
The autopsy report was finished rather quickly. Normally these types of reports take months, but the Dallas County Medical Examiner's office released it on Wednesday, 11 days after the crime.
The report says David Brown Jr. had marijuana and PCP in his system when he died.
The autopsy found Brown had 0.12 milligrams of PCP in his system and also a small amount of marijuana. Experts tell News 8 that even a slight amount of PCP can have psychotic effects.
Parkland Memorial Hospital toxicologists told News 8 the levels in Brown's system were high, and are consistent with other cases they have seen where people have gone crazy and done violent things.
They said PCP can cause bizarre behavior and intense hallucinations.
On June 20, the day Brown gunned down an officer and an innocent man, witnesses said he had been acting erratically. He got into a fight with his girlfriend, Misti Conaway, and had been shouting and yelling at people at his apartment complex before he began shooting.
The autopsy results also show Brown was shot nine times by Lancaster police, who opened fire on him after he shot and killed Officer Shaw.
News 8 has also learned that back in 2004, Rowlett police arrested Brown. He was booked as a mental health patient and was ordered into a psychological assessment program.
It is not clear whether Brown completed that program, or why police and health care workers felt he suffered from mental health problems.
Watch Rebecca Lopez's coverage HERE
Brown, 27, is blamed for the shooting deaths of Lancaster police Officer Craig Shaw and another man before Brown was killed by police.
The autopsy report was finished rather quickly. Normally these types of reports take months, but the Dallas County Medical Examiner's office released it on Wednesday, 11 days after the crime.
The report says David Brown Jr. had marijuana and PCP in his system when he died.
The autopsy found Brown had 0.12 milligrams of PCP in his system and also a small amount of marijuana. Experts tell News 8 that even a slight amount of PCP can have psychotic effects.
Parkland Memorial Hospital toxicologists told News 8 the levels in Brown's system were high, and are consistent with other cases they have seen where people have gone crazy and done violent things.
They said PCP can cause bizarre behavior and intense hallucinations.
On June 20, the day Brown gunned down an officer and an innocent man, witnesses said he had been acting erratically. He got into a fight with his girlfriend, Misti Conaway, and had been shouting and yelling at people at his apartment complex before he began shooting.
The autopsy results also show Brown was shot nine times by Lancaster police, who opened fire on him after he shot and killed Officer Shaw.
News 8 has also learned that back in 2004, Rowlett police arrested Brown. He was booked as a mental health patient and was ordered into a psychological assessment program.
It is not clear whether Brown completed that program, or why police and health care workers felt he suffered from mental health problems.
Watch Rebecca Lopez's coverage HERE
Stark Arrogance
Rep. Stark Mocks the Minute Men by asking them, "Who are you going to kill today?"
Foxnews.com reports, A California congressman known for edgy sarcasm mocked an opponent of illegal immigration during a town hall meeting last week, asking, "Who are you going to kill today?" before the constituent, a self-identified Minuteman, posed his question.
Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., no stranger to controversy, mocked the idea that the borders are not secure when asked about the federal government's lack of activity on border security.
"We can't get enough Minutemen armed. We'd like to get all the Minutemen armed so they can stop shooting people here," Stark said.
Eventually, members of the audience urged Stark to offer a serious answer.
"If you knew anything about our borders, you would know that's not the case. Our borders are quite secure, thank you," Stark said, drawing jeers.
Stark resumed his hostile act, asking the Minuteman what he would do to secure the border.
"I would send about about 25,000 troops for one thing and build a wall down so vehicles could not pass," the Minuteman said.
"How high and long would it be?" Stark asked.
"As high and as long as it takes," the Minuteman said, elicting cheers.
Stark said he would start a ladder company with the Minuteman if he designed the wall and doesn't shoot the people coming over.
"But I've got to know how high the wall is and I'll sell a whole lot of ladders for people who want to come," Stark said.
"This is a very serious matter and you're sitting there making fun of it," the Minuteman responded.
"I don't have to make fun of you sir, you do a fine job all by yourself," Stark said.
Stark made the comments last week at a town hall audience that included Steve Kemp, a member of the Golden Gate Minutemen, a group that opposes illegal immigrants. Kemp recorded the confrontation.
A spokesman for Stark did not return voicemail messages left at his office or on his cell phone. He also didn't respond to an e-mail seeking comment.
The clash came as the national spotlight focuses on Arizona's tough new law cracking down on illegal immigrants and the protests it is drawing across the country, including a legal challenge from the federal government.
Immigration is shaping up to be among the critical election-year issues as Republicans try to regain control of both chambers in Congress riding a wave of anti-Washington sentiment.
Stark, a liberal Democrat, is expected to easily win re-election against a lightly regarded opponent, political newcomer Justin Jelincic, who describes himself as a conservative Democrat.
Stark earned his primary challenge after he slammed a constituent who voiced his opposition to Obama's health care plan last summer at a town hall meeting.
"Mr. Congressman, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining," the constituent told Stark, referring to what he called the smoke and mirrors of the president's plan.
"I wouldn't dignify you be peeing on your leg," Stark fired back. "It wouldn't be worth wasting the urine."
In March, Stark seized control of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee for one day after Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., stepped aside due to an ethics probe. But Stark was quickly pushed aside in favor of Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., after many Democrats privately complained that Stark was too volatile to lead such an important committee.
Stark is known for making inflammatory comments.
In 2007, Stark accused President Bush of sending troops to Iraq "to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."
He also once called former Colorado Republican Rep. Scott McInnis a "fruitcake."
See the video HERE
Foxnews.com reports, A California congressman known for edgy sarcasm mocked an opponent of illegal immigration during a town hall meeting last week, asking, "Who are you going to kill today?" before the constituent, a self-identified Minuteman, posed his question.
Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., no stranger to controversy, mocked the idea that the borders are not secure when asked about the federal government's lack of activity on border security.
"We can't get enough Minutemen armed. We'd like to get all the Minutemen armed so they can stop shooting people here," Stark said.
Eventually, members of the audience urged Stark to offer a serious answer.
"If you knew anything about our borders, you would know that's not the case. Our borders are quite secure, thank you," Stark said, drawing jeers.
Stark resumed his hostile act, asking the Minuteman what he would do to secure the border.
"I would send about about 25,000 troops for one thing and build a wall down so vehicles could not pass," the Minuteman said.
"How high and long would it be?" Stark asked.
"As high and as long as it takes," the Minuteman said, elicting cheers.
Stark said he would start a ladder company with the Minuteman if he designed the wall and doesn't shoot the people coming over.
"But I've got to know how high the wall is and I'll sell a whole lot of ladders for people who want to come," Stark said.
"This is a very serious matter and you're sitting there making fun of it," the Minuteman responded.
"I don't have to make fun of you sir, you do a fine job all by yourself," Stark said.
Stark made the comments last week at a town hall audience that included Steve Kemp, a member of the Golden Gate Minutemen, a group that opposes illegal immigrants. Kemp recorded the confrontation.
A spokesman for Stark did not return voicemail messages left at his office or on his cell phone. He also didn't respond to an e-mail seeking comment.
The clash came as the national spotlight focuses on Arizona's tough new law cracking down on illegal immigrants and the protests it is drawing across the country, including a legal challenge from the federal government.
Immigration is shaping up to be among the critical election-year issues as Republicans try to regain control of both chambers in Congress riding a wave of anti-Washington sentiment.
Stark, a liberal Democrat, is expected to easily win re-election against a lightly regarded opponent, political newcomer Justin Jelincic, who describes himself as a conservative Democrat.
Stark earned his primary challenge after he slammed a constituent who voiced his opposition to Obama's health care plan last summer at a town hall meeting.
"Mr. Congressman, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining," the constituent told Stark, referring to what he called the smoke and mirrors of the president's plan.
"I wouldn't dignify you be peeing on your leg," Stark fired back. "It wouldn't be worth wasting the urine."
In March, Stark seized control of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee for one day after Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., stepped aside due to an ethics probe. But Stark was quickly pushed aside in favor of Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., after many Democrats privately complained that Stark was too volatile to lead such an important committee.
Stark is known for making inflammatory comments.
In 2007, Stark accused President Bush of sending troops to Iraq "to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."
He also once called former Colorado Republican Rep. Scott McInnis a "fruitcake."
See the video HERE
Massafoolishnessetts! Say What?
The story hit the nation on June 25th. A Cape Cod Town elementary school at the center of a controversial policy on sex education. The policy involves handing out condoms to elementary school age kids! That's right, you read that correctly. Pick yourself up off the floor and keep reading.
According to ABC News, The superintendent of a Massachusetts school district is apologizing to parents for what she calls a misunderstanding over a sex education policy that as written, would have applied to both high school students and first-graders.
Provincetown Superintendent Beth Singer said in the letter e-mailed Tuesday that the district would clarify that elementary school-age students couldn't get condoms if they requested them from the school nurse.
Singer said it became necessary to revise the policy's wording after it was "so badly understood and misrepresented by the media," according to the Cape Cod Times.
"It is especially troublesome to me and to our school community that this is likely to have been your introduction to the policy," Singer wrote in the e-mail, as reported in the Cape Cod Times.
In 1991, the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education passed its first policy on condom availability as part its previous policy on AIDS/HIV prevention education.
It recommended that "every school committee, in consultation with superintendents, administrators, faculty, parents and students consider making condoms available in their secondary schools."
Provinceton -- the smallest district in the state -- was at the center of a firestorm after its school board voted unanimously on June 8 to give condoms to students even without their parents' consent. But because of an outcry from Gov. Deval Patrick and others the district said would consider excluding students in grades one through four.
You can see the full ABC story and their video coverage HERE
*************************************************************
Also, a Massachusetts high school has decided to allow the Pledge of Allegiance in school, but not in class. Are you kidding me? Arlington High School Principal Charles Skidmore has "graciously" offered to allow students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance before school begins, but not in the classrooms.
Todd Starnes on foxnews.com reports, Student Sean Harrington appears to have won his fight to bring the Pledge of Allegiance back into his Massachusetts high school -- except the Principal's proposed solution leaves the daily honor to the nation's flag literally hanging in the hall.
Charles Skidmore, principal of Arlington High School in Arlington, Mass., has offered to allow students to recite the pledge before school begins -- but in the school's foyer and not in the classrooms, as 17-year-old Harrington had hoped.
Kathleen Bodie, Arlington superintendent of schools, told Fox News Radio that “The principal wanted to be very respectful about the pledge and be sensitive to the Supreme Court ruling that students are not forced to say the pledge. He wanted to be sensitive to the diverse group of students we have.”
Bodie said there has been reluctance to put the district's teachers in a position of reciting the pledge, and she acknowledged that some have raised concerns about its inclusion of the words “under God".
“I don’t know if it’s all about ‘under God,’ but that is certainly an aspect of it,” she said.
She said the pledge is voluntarily recited in the district's elementary and middle schools, but it hasn't been recited at the high school in decades.
It is unclear whether Harrington, who led the fight to bring the pledge back to the school, will be satisfied with the compromise of having it recited in the foyer, and not in class. When he was a freshman, he noticed that there were no American flags in the classrooms, and he enlisted the aid of his fellow students to get them installed. He also began his fight to have students voluntarily recite the pledge.
Harrington recently presented school officials with a petition signed by 700 people, along with letters of support from lawmakers including Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. But the request to have the pledge recited failed when the committee's vote ended in a 3-3 tie.
"I was really heartbroken," Harrington told Fox News Radio. "It's hard to think that something so traditional in American society was turned down."
His fight has received quite a bit of support from the community. "When I was going to school, it was an honor and a privilege to pledge allegiance to the flag," Francis De Guglielmo, 55, told the Arlington Patch. He called the ban an "absolute travesty" and a "disgrace."
Harrington, who will be a senior in the fall, told Fox News Radio: "I'm not a person who quits and I don't back down. It's a very righteous cause and needs to be followed through until the end."
Some committee members voiced concerns about forcing people to do something that might violate their beliefs – including religious beliefs. Among the no-votes was committee member Leba Heigham.
"Patriotism is a very personal thing for all of us, but I do not think it is in the school committee's best interest to mandate that any of our employees recite the pledge," she told the Patch.
But Harrington stressed that he was seeking a voluntary recitation.
"If we can't find one teacher who is willing to say the pledge, then the system we have is cracked," he told FOX News Radio, noting that a number of teachers signed his petition.
He said the school's ban on the pledge sent the wrong message. "It tells me that we've basically cast aside what our country is founded on," he said. "It's saying that we don't really care, and it's sad."
Get more about this story from Fox News HERE
Kudos to Sean Harrington for standing up for what he believes in!
According to ABC News, The superintendent of a Massachusetts school district is apologizing to parents for what she calls a misunderstanding over a sex education policy that as written, would have applied to both high school students and first-graders.
Provincetown Superintendent Beth Singer said in the letter e-mailed Tuesday that the district would clarify that elementary school-age students couldn't get condoms if they requested them from the school nurse.
Singer said it became necessary to revise the policy's wording after it was "so badly understood and misrepresented by the media," according to the Cape Cod Times.
"It is especially troublesome to me and to our school community that this is likely to have been your introduction to the policy," Singer wrote in the e-mail, as reported in the Cape Cod Times.
In 1991, the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education passed its first policy on condom availability as part its previous policy on AIDS/HIV prevention education.
It recommended that "every school committee, in consultation with superintendents, administrators, faculty, parents and students consider making condoms available in their secondary schools."
Provinceton -- the smallest district in the state -- was at the center of a firestorm after its school board voted unanimously on June 8 to give condoms to students even without their parents' consent. But because of an outcry from Gov. Deval Patrick and others the district said would consider excluding students in grades one through four.
You can see the full ABC story and their video coverage HERE
*************************************************************
Also, a Massachusetts high school has decided to allow the Pledge of Allegiance in school, but not in class. Are you kidding me? Arlington High School Principal Charles Skidmore has "graciously" offered to allow students to recite the Pledge of Allegiance before school begins, but not in the classrooms.
Todd Starnes on foxnews.com reports, Student Sean Harrington appears to have won his fight to bring the Pledge of Allegiance back into his Massachusetts high school -- except the Principal's proposed solution leaves the daily honor to the nation's flag literally hanging in the hall.
Charles Skidmore, principal of Arlington High School in Arlington, Mass., has offered to allow students to recite the pledge before school begins -- but in the school's foyer and not in the classrooms, as 17-year-old Harrington had hoped.
Kathleen Bodie, Arlington superintendent of schools, told Fox News Radio that “The principal wanted to be very respectful about the pledge and be sensitive to the Supreme Court ruling that students are not forced to say the pledge. He wanted to be sensitive to the diverse group of students we have.”
Bodie said there has been reluctance to put the district's teachers in a position of reciting the pledge, and she acknowledged that some have raised concerns about its inclusion of the words “under God".
“I don’t know if it’s all about ‘under God,’ but that is certainly an aspect of it,” she said.
She said the pledge is voluntarily recited in the district's elementary and middle schools, but it hasn't been recited at the high school in decades.
It is unclear whether Harrington, who led the fight to bring the pledge back to the school, will be satisfied with the compromise of having it recited in the foyer, and not in class. When he was a freshman, he noticed that there were no American flags in the classrooms, and he enlisted the aid of his fellow students to get them installed. He also began his fight to have students voluntarily recite the pledge.
Harrington recently presented school officials with a petition signed by 700 people, along with letters of support from lawmakers including Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. But the request to have the pledge recited failed when the committee's vote ended in a 3-3 tie.
"I was really heartbroken," Harrington told Fox News Radio. "It's hard to think that something so traditional in American society was turned down."
His fight has received quite a bit of support from the community. "When I was going to school, it was an honor and a privilege to pledge allegiance to the flag," Francis De Guglielmo, 55, told the Arlington Patch. He called the ban an "absolute travesty" and a "disgrace."
Harrington, who will be a senior in the fall, told Fox News Radio: "I'm not a person who quits and I don't back down. It's a very righteous cause and needs to be followed through until the end."
Some committee members voiced concerns about forcing people to do something that might violate their beliefs – including religious beliefs. Among the no-votes was committee member Leba Heigham.
"Patriotism is a very personal thing for all of us, but I do not think it is in the school committee's best interest to mandate that any of our employees recite the pledge," she told the Patch.
But Harrington stressed that he was seeking a voluntary recitation.
"If we can't find one teacher who is willing to say the pledge, then the system we have is cracked," he told FOX News Radio, noting that a number of teachers signed his petition.
He said the school's ban on the pledge sent the wrong message. "It tells me that we've basically cast aside what our country is founded on," he said. "It's saying that we don't really care, and it's sad."
Get more about this story from Fox News HERE
Kudos to Sean Harrington for standing up for what he believes in!
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
If You Believe America Has Lousy Health Care, Here's Why
J-D spoke with Dennis Prager about the media's involvement in trying to convince you that traditional health care is bad and Obama Care is good. J-D says absolutely the media is working to convince the public their current health care is bad, but what do you think?
Here's Dennis Prager's article below:
If you believe that Americans have lousy health care, it is probably not because you have experienced inferior heath care. It is probably because you were told America has lousy health care.
Last week, major news media featured these headlines:
Reuters: "U.S. scores dead last again in healthcare study"
Los Angeles Times: "U.S. is No. 1 in a key area of healthcare. Guess which one ..."
NPR: "US Spends The Most On Health Care, Yet Gets Least"
The Week: "US health care system: Worst in the world?"
Now let's delve into this widely reported headline as written by Reuters.
For those readers who rely on a headline to get news -- and we all do that sometimes -- the issue is clear: America is rated as having the worst health care "again."
For those who read the first sentence or two, an even more common practice, the Reuters report begins this way: "Americans spend twice as much as residents of other developed countries on healthcare, but get lower quality, less efficiency and have the least equitable system, according to a report released on Wednesday. The United States ranked last when compared to six other countries -- Britain, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand, the Commonwealth Fund report found."
For those reading further, the claim of the headline and of the first two sentences is reinforced. The third sentence offers commentary on the study by the head of the group that conducted it: "'As an American it just bothers me that with all of our know-how, all of our wealth, that we are not assuring that people who need healthcare can get it,' Commonwealth Fund president Karen Davis told reporters ..."
Only later in the report does the discerning reader have a clue as to how agenda-driven this report and this study are. The otherwise unidentified Karen Davis, president of the never-identified Commonwealth Fund, is quoted as saying how important it was that America pass President Obama's health care bill.
Could it be that Ms. Davis and the Commonwealth are leftwing?
They sure are, though Reuters, which is also on the Left, never lets you know.
Here's how the Commonwealth Fund's 2009 Report from the president begins: "The Commonwealth Fund marshaled its resources this year to produce timely and rigorous work that helped lay the groundwork for the historic Affordable Care Act, signed by President Obama in March 2010."
As for Davis, she served as deputy assistant secretary for health policy in the Department of Health and Human Services in the Jimmy Carter administration all four years of the Carter presidency. And in 1993, in speaking to new members of Congress, she advocated a single-payer approach to health care.
I could not find any mainstream news report about this story that identified the politics of Karen Davis or the Commonwealth Fund. If they had, the headlines would have looked something like this:
"Liberal think tank, headed by single-payer advocate, ObamaCare activist, and former Carter official, says America has worst health care"
Conversely, imagine if a conservative think tank had released a study showing that, in general, Americans had the best health care in the world. Two questions: Would the media have reported it? And if they did, would they have neglected to report that the think tank was conservative? The answer is no to both.
In microcosm, we have here four major developments of the last 50 years:
1. The Left dominates the news media in America; and around the world, leftwing media are almost the only news media.
2. The media report most news in the light of their Leftwing values (whether consciously or not).
3. Most people understandably believe what they read, watch or listen to.
4. This is a major reason most people on the Left are on the Left. They have been given a lifetime of leftist perceptions of the world (especially when one includes higher education) and therefore regard what they believe about the world as reality rather than as a leftwing perception of reality.
The same thing happened on a far larger scale in 2000 when the world press reported that the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) ranked America 37th in health care behind such countries as Morocco, Costa Rica, Colombia and Greece.
This WHO assessment was reported throughout the world and regularly cited by leftwing critics of American health care. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, no one other than a few conservatives noted that Cuba was ranked 39th, essentially tied with the United States.
Which means that the WHO report is essentially a fraud. Who in his right mind thinks Americans and Cubans have equivalent levels of health care? For that matter, how many world leaders travel to Greece or Morocco instead of to the United States for health care?
The answer is that WHO doesn't assess health care quality; it assesses health care equality, exactly the way any organization on the Left assesses it. And since the world's and America's news media are on the Left, they report a Leftist bogus assessment of American health care as true.
Imagine this headline around the world: "World Health Organization declares America and Cuba tied in health care."
Of course, only Leftists would believe that. But since non-Leftists would realize how absurd the claim was, that is not what anyone was told. Instead, the world and American media all announced "America rated 37th in health care by World Health Organization."
These two reports illustrate why so many people in America and around the world think America's health care is inferior and why they support movement toward nationalized health care.
But these two reports are only one example of the larger problem -- the world thinking is morally confused because it is informed by the morally confused. How else explain, for example, why America, the greatest force for good among nations, is hated, while China, never a force for good, isn't?
The answer is, unfortunately, simple: Garbage in, garbage out.
source: http://townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2010/06/29/if_you_believe_america_has_lousy_health_care,_heres_why#
Here's Dennis Prager's article below:
If you believe that Americans have lousy health care, it is probably not because you have experienced inferior heath care. It is probably because you were told America has lousy health care.
Last week, major news media featured these headlines:
Reuters: "U.S. scores dead last again in healthcare study"
Los Angeles Times: "U.S. is No. 1 in a key area of healthcare. Guess which one ..."
NPR: "US Spends The Most On Health Care, Yet Gets Least"
The Week: "US health care system: Worst in the world?"
Now let's delve into this widely reported headline as written by Reuters.
For those readers who rely on a headline to get news -- and we all do that sometimes -- the issue is clear: America is rated as having the worst health care "again."
For those who read the first sentence or two, an even more common practice, the Reuters report begins this way: "Americans spend twice as much as residents of other developed countries on healthcare, but get lower quality, less efficiency and have the least equitable system, according to a report released on Wednesday. The United States ranked last when compared to six other countries -- Britain, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, Australia and New Zealand, the Commonwealth Fund report found."
For those reading further, the claim of the headline and of the first two sentences is reinforced. The third sentence offers commentary on the study by the head of the group that conducted it: "'As an American it just bothers me that with all of our know-how, all of our wealth, that we are not assuring that people who need healthcare can get it,' Commonwealth Fund president Karen Davis told reporters ..."
Only later in the report does the discerning reader have a clue as to how agenda-driven this report and this study are. The otherwise unidentified Karen Davis, president of the never-identified Commonwealth Fund, is quoted as saying how important it was that America pass President Obama's health care bill.
Could it be that Ms. Davis and the Commonwealth are leftwing?
They sure are, though Reuters, which is also on the Left, never lets you know.
Here's how the Commonwealth Fund's 2009 Report from the president begins: "The Commonwealth Fund marshaled its resources this year to produce timely and rigorous work that helped lay the groundwork for the historic Affordable Care Act, signed by President Obama in March 2010."
As for Davis, she served as deputy assistant secretary for health policy in the Department of Health and Human Services in the Jimmy Carter administration all four years of the Carter presidency. And in 1993, in speaking to new members of Congress, she advocated a single-payer approach to health care.
I could not find any mainstream news report about this story that identified the politics of Karen Davis or the Commonwealth Fund. If they had, the headlines would have looked something like this:
"Liberal think tank, headed by single-payer advocate, ObamaCare activist, and former Carter official, says America has worst health care"
Conversely, imagine if a conservative think tank had released a study showing that, in general, Americans had the best health care in the world. Two questions: Would the media have reported it? And if they did, would they have neglected to report that the think tank was conservative? The answer is no to both.
In microcosm, we have here four major developments of the last 50 years:
1. The Left dominates the news media in America; and around the world, leftwing media are almost the only news media.
2. The media report most news in the light of their Leftwing values (whether consciously or not).
3. Most people understandably believe what they read, watch or listen to.
4. This is a major reason most people on the Left are on the Left. They have been given a lifetime of leftist perceptions of the world (especially when one includes higher education) and therefore regard what they believe about the world as reality rather than as a leftwing perception of reality.
The same thing happened on a far larger scale in 2000 when the world press reported that the United Nations World Health Organization (WHO) ranked America 37th in health care behind such countries as Morocco, Costa Rica, Colombia and Greece.
This WHO assessment was reported throughout the world and regularly cited by leftwing critics of American health care. Yet, to the best of my knowledge, no one other than a few conservatives noted that Cuba was ranked 39th, essentially tied with the United States.
Which means that the WHO report is essentially a fraud. Who in his right mind thinks Americans and Cubans have equivalent levels of health care? For that matter, how many world leaders travel to Greece or Morocco instead of to the United States for health care?
The answer is that WHO doesn't assess health care quality; it assesses health care equality, exactly the way any organization on the Left assesses it. And since the world's and America's news media are on the Left, they report a Leftist bogus assessment of American health care as true.
Imagine this headline around the world: "World Health Organization declares America and Cuba tied in health care."
Of course, only Leftists would believe that. But since non-Leftists would realize how absurd the claim was, that is not what anyone was told. Instead, the world and American media all announced "America rated 37th in health care by World Health Organization."
These two reports illustrate why so many people in America and around the world think America's health care is inferior and why they support movement toward nationalized health care.
But these two reports are only one example of the larger problem -- the world thinking is morally confused because it is informed by the morally confused. How else explain, for example, why America, the greatest force for good among nations, is hated, while China, never a force for good, isn't?
The answer is, unfortunately, simple: Garbage in, garbage out.
source: http://townhall.com/columnists/DennisPrager/2010/06/29/if_you_believe_america_has_lousy_health_care,_heres_why#
Friday, June 25, 2010
Parkland Hospital board meeting shifted to closed session
Should Parkland Hospital be allowed to have a board meeting that is closed to the public? J-D says, "No Way!"
SHERRY JACOBSON and MILES MOFFEIT of the Dallas Morning News says, Hundreds of babies delivered prematurely at Parkland Memorial Hospital may be at risk because they are not being kept warm enough immediately after birth, according to a study presented to the hospital's board of managers on Tuesday.
The study included recommendations on how preemies delivered by Caesarean section can be kept warmer in the operating room. But it's unclear what the hospital board decided to do because its members abruptly decided to meet behind closed doors.
Parkland officials defended the decision but gave conflicting reasons why the private discussions were necessary.
Dalton Lott, chairman of the board's quality and risk management committee, said the unannounced executive session included a discussion about personnel. The public agenda listed no such discussion.
Parkland board chairman Dr. Lauren McDonald said the closed session centered on the hospital's care for HIV patients.
"We don't have to be going over our reasons for this," Michael Silhol, Parkland's general counsel, told two Dallas Morning News reporters asked to leave the meeting. "We have the right to do it."
Silhol said that Section 161 of the Texas Health and Safety Code allowed the Parkland board to meet in closed session without advance public notice.
But attorney Joseph Larsen, an expert on the Texas Open Meetings Act who represents The News, said Parkland's move appeared to violate open government requirements. The state Health and Safety Code, Larsen said, permits an exception to the open meetings law only to allow a hospital board to receive information in private. Board members may not otherwise deliberate, he said. Silhol had no further comment.
The Parkland board does not typically hold executive sessions as part of its committee discussions unless scheduled. "The attorney general has specifically disapproved of agendas that are misleading," Larsen said.
McDonald explained that she was concerned about allowing reporters to hear board members' comments. "We had a casual discussion at the last board meeting, and you ran out and published it online," she said. "We want to be careful. We want you guys to get actual information."
According to the board's public agenda, its quality and risk management committee was to review a study showing that 56 percent of premature babies delivered by C-section at Parkland were "too cold."
Parkland met state standards for birth temperatures for premature infants but failed to meet World Health Organization requirements. "Hypothermia at birth is associated with increased risks for sepsis [infection] and death," said a summary of the report, attached to the agenda.
Warmer temperatures increased the success of resuscitating newborns, the report said. It didn't specify how many premature babies were in the study or whether any suffered complications. Parkland handles about 16,000 births annually, only about 5 percent of which are premature.
To improve conditions, more than $8 million in possible upgrades to climate control, new equipment and building renovations were outlined in the report to the board.
The board also received an overview of Parkland's HIV services, indicating that the number of patients was up 2 percent in 2009 to 5,629. Parkland has been reorganizing its approach to treating HIV/AIDS patients.
When questioned later about the decision to close the meeting, Silhol objected to the presence of two News reporters. "Why were you here?" he demanded of one attending for the first time. "You are not normally [here]."
The board spent nearly half of its normally daylong public meeting behind closed doors.
It reviewed lawsuits against the hospital, considered property purchases, approved medical staff appointments and examined internal audits, according to the agenda of its planned executive session.
Dr. Ron Anderson, Parkland's president and CEO, said he was not concerned that an increasing amount of the public hospital's business was being conducted in private. "What they are asking to be in executive session for is within their rights," he said.
Source:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/062310dnmetparkland.1edea61.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
SHERRY JACOBSON and MILES MOFFEIT of the Dallas Morning News says, Hundreds of babies delivered prematurely at Parkland Memorial Hospital may be at risk because they are not being kept warm enough immediately after birth, according to a study presented to the hospital's board of managers on Tuesday.
The study included recommendations on how preemies delivered by Caesarean section can be kept warmer in the operating room. But it's unclear what the hospital board decided to do because its members abruptly decided to meet behind closed doors.
Parkland officials defended the decision but gave conflicting reasons why the private discussions were necessary.
Dalton Lott, chairman of the board's quality and risk management committee, said the unannounced executive session included a discussion about personnel. The public agenda listed no such discussion.
Parkland board chairman Dr. Lauren McDonald said the closed session centered on the hospital's care for HIV patients.
"We don't have to be going over our reasons for this," Michael Silhol, Parkland's general counsel, told two Dallas Morning News reporters asked to leave the meeting. "We have the right to do it."
Silhol said that Section 161 of the Texas Health and Safety Code allowed the Parkland board to meet in closed session without advance public notice.
But attorney Joseph Larsen, an expert on the Texas Open Meetings Act who represents The News, said Parkland's move appeared to violate open government requirements. The state Health and Safety Code, Larsen said, permits an exception to the open meetings law only to allow a hospital board to receive information in private. Board members may not otherwise deliberate, he said. Silhol had no further comment.
The Parkland board does not typically hold executive sessions as part of its committee discussions unless scheduled. "The attorney general has specifically disapproved of agendas that are misleading," Larsen said.
McDonald explained that she was concerned about allowing reporters to hear board members' comments. "We had a casual discussion at the last board meeting, and you ran out and published it online," she said. "We want to be careful. We want you guys to get actual information."
According to the board's public agenda, its quality and risk management committee was to review a study showing that 56 percent of premature babies delivered by C-section at Parkland were "too cold."
Parkland met state standards for birth temperatures for premature infants but failed to meet World Health Organization requirements. "Hypothermia at birth is associated with increased risks for sepsis [infection] and death," said a summary of the report, attached to the agenda.
Warmer temperatures increased the success of resuscitating newborns, the report said. It didn't specify how many premature babies were in the study or whether any suffered complications. Parkland handles about 16,000 births annually, only about 5 percent of which are premature.
To improve conditions, more than $8 million in possible upgrades to climate control, new equipment and building renovations were outlined in the report to the board.
The board also received an overview of Parkland's HIV services, indicating that the number of patients was up 2 percent in 2009 to 5,629. Parkland has been reorganizing its approach to treating HIV/AIDS patients.
When questioned later about the decision to close the meeting, Silhol objected to the presence of two News reporters. "Why were you here?" he demanded of one attending for the first time. "You are not normally [here]."
The board spent nearly half of its normally daylong public meeting behind closed doors.
It reviewed lawsuits against the hospital, considered property purchases, approved medical staff appointments and examined internal audits, according to the agenda of its planned executive session.
Dr. Ron Anderson, Parkland's president and CEO, said he was not concerned that an increasing amount of the public hospital's business was being conducted in private. "What they are asking to be in executive session for is within their rights," he said.
Source:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/062310dnmetparkland.1edea61.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Texas Democrats fight against voter ID's
J-D asks you 2 questions: Do most Democrats hate the United States of America? If so, are they becoming a public nusiance?
Christy Hoppe of the Dallas Morning News reports, AUSTIN – Texas Democrats have staked out political ground that trumpets their beliefs and will ignite supporters at the party's state convention this week – protecting the rights of eligible citizens to vote.
The only problem – especially for a political party that hasn't won a statewide office in 15 years – is that when it comes to whether voters should have to show a photo ID, 70 percent of Texans disagree with the Democrats.
Most Texans believe that if they need one to rent a video or get on a plane, it makes sense that there should be equal safeguards for the ballot.
But many Democrats believe it would mean turning away eligible voters – especially the poor, disabled and elderly who are the least likely to have driver's licenses.
Republicans have made a new law on the issue, usually referred to by the shorthand "voter ID," one of their top priorities. Democrats have vowed to fight, but it poses a political problem.
"It is, in the short-term, a loser issue," said Daron Shaw, a pollster and University of Texas political science professor.
In a poll he conducted last year, voters were told that "such a requirement has a negligible effect on voter fraud but places significant obstacles on elderly, low income, disabled and minority voters."
But an overwhelming majority of Texans still liked the idea of voter ID.
Support exceeded 50 percent among all demographic groups – even among Hispanics and the elderly, who Democrats say they are trying to protect, Shaw said.Democrats are trying to convince a conservative-leaning Texas electorate that they, not the GOP, offer mainstream positions on issues heading into the fall battle for statewide offices and control of the Legislature.
The voter ID stance may send the opposite message.
But Democrats must champion the cause regardless of polls, said Rep. Rafael Anchia of Dallas.
"It's the right position, and that's what matters," said Anchia, who has led Democrats' efforts on the issue in the Legislature.
The polls reflect a false presumption that everyone has a photo ID, he said, arguing that too many people don't and could be harmed by a new law.
"When you start doing research, you realize a lot of people don't have an ID, especially the least among us, and I think it's terribly important to protect their voting rights," Anchia said.
State officials estimate that between 150,000 and 450,000 adult Texans don't have photo IDs.
"If you're going to encumber voting rights then you should have a compelling state issue," Anchia said. "And voter impersonation is rare to nonexistent."
The pledge to fight voter ID is in the Democratic platform and the document lauds Democratic lawmakers who pushed the Republican-dominated Legislature to a stalemate on the issue last year.
Neither side would budge, and as a result, hundreds of bills died in the final days of the session.
The platform committee will address the issue again during the convention Friday and Saturday in Corpus Christi, said state Rep. Garnet Coleman of Houston, the committee chairman.
"There will be a section that says we are against the suppression of voters. The right to vote is fundamental," Coleman said.
He and others said that requiring photo IDs is a solution in search of a problem.
Since 2002, the attorney general has investigated 267 reports of voting irregularity, resulting in 35 prosecutions. Almost all involved absentee balloting abuses, not voter impersonation.
Coleman also said the polls don't matter.
"I'm sure 70 percent of people might have said it was OK in the '50s and '60s to have blacks segregated," he said. "It's just wrong. You can poll on an issue and it doesn't mean everybody understands the ramifications, which could include denying citizens a fundamental right."
Bills drafted by Republicans have provided that voters without photo IDs could produce other documents to prove their identities, such as utility bills or social security cards.
But most Democrats have fought such compromises, saying most voters don't carry those items to the polling place.
Rep. Jim McReynolds, D-Lufkin, hails from a conservative district and knows that most constituents think voter IDs are a good idea. He said that a law can be crafted to provide better ballot security and still ensure that those eligible can vote.
"I'm for voter ID. I just want one where your mama can vote," he said. "Sane heads on both sides of this can prevail, if everyone could get together instead of gouging each other in the eye."
McReynolds said both Republicans and Democrats have dug in and made the issue about scoring partisan points.
Democratic governor candidate Bill White said he opposes requiring that voters have a photo ID but would consider additional ID requirements to "ensure the integrity of the process" if they don't deter voting.
Pollster Shaw said Democrats and Republicans both seem to be trying to alienate voters.
"Both parties are vying to see who can be more stupid," he said.
He cited Arlington Republican Rep. Joe Barton apologizing to BP and Democrats, having pushed through an unpopular health care plan. Now, Shaw said, Texas Democrats are saying: "What's our best issue? One that has 70 percent support on the other side."
And it's particularly difficult for Democrats in this year's climate, the pollster noted.
"You're pushing an unpopular public policy decision in the face of a conservative electorate," he said.
"They're already fired up in light of a lot of other policies that are being adopted."
Source: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/062410dnpolvoterid.215f317.html
Christy Hoppe of the Dallas Morning News reports, AUSTIN – Texas Democrats have staked out political ground that trumpets their beliefs and will ignite supporters at the party's state convention this week – protecting the rights of eligible citizens to vote.
The only problem – especially for a political party that hasn't won a statewide office in 15 years – is that when it comes to whether voters should have to show a photo ID, 70 percent of Texans disagree with the Democrats.
Most Texans believe that if they need one to rent a video or get on a plane, it makes sense that there should be equal safeguards for the ballot.
But many Democrats believe it would mean turning away eligible voters – especially the poor, disabled and elderly who are the least likely to have driver's licenses.
Republicans have made a new law on the issue, usually referred to by the shorthand "voter ID," one of their top priorities. Democrats have vowed to fight, but it poses a political problem.
"It is, in the short-term, a loser issue," said Daron Shaw, a pollster and University of Texas political science professor.
In a poll he conducted last year, voters were told that "such a requirement has a negligible effect on voter fraud but places significant obstacles on elderly, low income, disabled and minority voters."
But an overwhelming majority of Texans still liked the idea of voter ID.
Support exceeded 50 percent among all demographic groups – even among Hispanics and the elderly, who Democrats say they are trying to protect, Shaw said.Democrats are trying to convince a conservative-leaning Texas electorate that they, not the GOP, offer mainstream positions on issues heading into the fall battle for statewide offices and control of the Legislature.
The voter ID stance may send the opposite message.
But Democrats must champion the cause regardless of polls, said Rep. Rafael Anchia of Dallas.
"It's the right position, and that's what matters," said Anchia, who has led Democrats' efforts on the issue in the Legislature.
The polls reflect a false presumption that everyone has a photo ID, he said, arguing that too many people don't and could be harmed by a new law.
"When you start doing research, you realize a lot of people don't have an ID, especially the least among us, and I think it's terribly important to protect their voting rights," Anchia said.
State officials estimate that between 150,000 and 450,000 adult Texans don't have photo IDs.
"If you're going to encumber voting rights then you should have a compelling state issue," Anchia said. "And voter impersonation is rare to nonexistent."
The pledge to fight voter ID is in the Democratic platform and the document lauds Democratic lawmakers who pushed the Republican-dominated Legislature to a stalemate on the issue last year.
Neither side would budge, and as a result, hundreds of bills died in the final days of the session.
The platform committee will address the issue again during the convention Friday and Saturday in Corpus Christi, said state Rep. Garnet Coleman of Houston, the committee chairman.
"There will be a section that says we are against the suppression of voters. The right to vote is fundamental," Coleman said.
He and others said that requiring photo IDs is a solution in search of a problem.
Since 2002, the attorney general has investigated 267 reports of voting irregularity, resulting in 35 prosecutions. Almost all involved absentee balloting abuses, not voter impersonation.
Coleman also said the polls don't matter.
"I'm sure 70 percent of people might have said it was OK in the '50s and '60s to have blacks segregated," he said. "It's just wrong. You can poll on an issue and it doesn't mean everybody understands the ramifications, which could include denying citizens a fundamental right."
Bills drafted by Republicans have provided that voters without photo IDs could produce other documents to prove their identities, such as utility bills or social security cards.
But most Democrats have fought such compromises, saying most voters don't carry those items to the polling place.
Rep. Jim McReynolds, D-Lufkin, hails from a conservative district and knows that most constituents think voter IDs are a good idea. He said that a law can be crafted to provide better ballot security and still ensure that those eligible can vote.
"I'm for voter ID. I just want one where your mama can vote," he said. "Sane heads on both sides of this can prevail, if everyone could get together instead of gouging each other in the eye."
McReynolds said both Republicans and Democrats have dug in and made the issue about scoring partisan points.
Democratic governor candidate Bill White said he opposes requiring that voters have a photo ID but would consider additional ID requirements to "ensure the integrity of the process" if they don't deter voting.
Pollster Shaw said Democrats and Republicans both seem to be trying to alienate voters.
"Both parties are vying to see who can be more stupid," he said.
He cited Arlington Republican Rep. Joe Barton apologizing to BP and Democrats, having pushed through an unpopular health care plan. Now, Shaw said, Texas Democrats are saying: "What's our best issue? One that has 70 percent support on the other side."
And it's particularly difficult for Democrats in this year's climate, the pollster noted.
"You're pushing an unpopular public policy decision in the face of a conservative electorate," he said.
"They're already fired up in light of a lot of other policies that are being adopted."
Source: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/062410dnpolvoterid.215f317.html
Thursday, June 24, 2010
New hit song for Palestinian children
J-D Wells asks this question, "How proud will you be as a parent, when your child gives her life for your politics?"
According to Haaretz.com, An Arabic children's choir has been racking up views all over the world with the new YouTube hit "when we die as martyrs, we will go to heaven.
The song was apparently recorded by the Jordanian-owned production company and television channel "birds of Paradise."
According to The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), one of the world's most comprehensive data centers on radical Islamic terrorist groups, the song is a hit on Arabic and worldwide websites and the children's choir performing it fast is becoming one of the most popular children's groups in the Arab world.
In the video clip, which can be viewed on the popular video sharing site YouTube, a young brown-eyed girl sings in front of what seems to be a group of children in pre-school the lyrics "Without Palestine, what does childhood mean?"
YouTube has already received dozens of spin-offs and remakes of the video, some of which depict Arabic children mimicking the lyrics while others show Jihadists using it as background music.
Journalist Fawzia Nasir al-Naeem wrote in the Saudi Arabian newspaper Al-Jazirah that "[Birds of Paradise] is one of the most widely distributed children's song groups in the Arab world, and it seems to have crossed the ocean to Canada and Britain."
She added that the group represents a new wave in Jihadist youth indoctrination, as it is child-friendly, as opposed to previous Jihadist programs.
Source: http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/new-hit-song-for-palestinian-children-when-we-die-as-martyrs-1.297731
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
