 |
What They've Thought
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
What They Thought April 3, 2005 R.A.
Hawkins Click here for columnist bios |
||||||||||
R.A.
Hawkins If one views the conclusions drawn by the brilliant thinkers of the left-wing media regarding the last election and the Schiavo case, it is easy to see why Hillary is posturing the way she is for the next election. I read one article where the New York Times was loudly trumpeting her move to the center because of her stance pushing condoms for kids to cut down on abortions. She was also talking about morality. Say what!? You can’t talk about making condoms more available when they already are available. You will find them for free in most State Health Departments in brown paper bags—given out for free with no questions asked. The point here is that even free and anonymous condom distribution obviously isn’t a solution because it isn’t working yet. Maybe it wouldn’t be a bad idea to bring back real morality again. I guess she is trying to become a big tent liberal. She was smart enough to not be against the Iraq war. She only gave lip service to some vague difference in regards to what she would have done. She’s kind of like Li’l Abner’s Shmoo, or at least trying to look like one, so she is pleasing to all. What Hillary is trying to do is appear to be more centered. She has made a move to the center so she’s okay now? I still remember a quote I read from her within the last six months or so that was right out of the communist manifesto. (Yes, it’s the title of a book so it should be capitalized. I refuse.) What she said was a watered down version of, “From each according to his ability to each according to his need.” So her move towards the center is kind of like Stalin vocalizing regrets over killing all of the clergy, and that he might be willing to allow one church to operate in Russia as long as he didn’t know about it. I did notice that Hillary didn’t say much about the Schiavo case other than that we should let the courts handle it. One or two of the abnormal lefties uttered the phrase "constitutional crisis." But I suspect that was because they wanted to see how it sounded coming out of their mouths when one of their Holy Presidents wasn’t being impeached for obstruction of justice and perjury. That was the last time we heard that from them, in case you don’t remember that. That may well be why Hillary didn’t dare to utter that. She is still hoping everyone will forget all of that. This was one time she would have been wise to speak up. Many on the left thought the Terri Schiavo case was a religious issue. That is what much of the media was saying. Because the media saw placard carrying people talking about the sanctity of life, which is very important, the media foolishly labeled it a religious zealot issue. They were wrong and Hillary could actually have gained some political traction in this instance. We’ve all been treated to many lectures on how Hillary is so politically savvy and here she was playing Harpo Marx for this one. Maybe if she had read something other than the parrot cage liner, The New York Times, she might have understood the real nature of this case. Here are a few facts that the media didn’t tell her. I got these from listening to the Schindler lawyer after the final try in court. Fifty-three weeks after Terri’s collapse, which was so suspicious that the paramedics called the police in to investigate, she was given a bone scan by the rehab center. (I’m not talking a rehab center like Ted Kennedy might think of, though. That may have added to the left-wing confusion on the issue.) The reason they gave her a bone scan was that she was always saying “no” and “stop” when they were giving her the needed physical therapy. The bone scans revealed cracked ribs, a broken femur, broken vertebrae and numerous other injuries. But the important thing here is that she kept saying what? "No" and "stop." Nobody even knew about these bone scans until the 2002 case. It also came out that her neck was extremely rigid and the doctor said the only other time he had seen that was in an attempted strangulation. She was communicating, and then after a certain person took care of her she wasn’t. Interesting. There were numerous people that came out in the 1997 and the 2002 court cases that said she was able to communicate. Since Michael Schiavo has said she is to be cremated, there will be a state appointed board certified pathologist doing an autopsy on her. As time goes by, the facts will leak out and there will be many books written. The Hillary Clinton political savvy was not present and she missed a great opportunity to stand up for women’s rights. She missed it because she was listening to the Gray Lady. That is the reality of her political savvy. This may be her “Swift Boat Vets” —not that there aren’t a lot of others to come. R.A. Hawkins Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||||||
How do you start
an article on the subject that is so surreal that it has to be unbelievable?
Government-sanctioned murder of an innocent woman has just completed
its course. What are we going to do? Tyranny by our judicial system
has just executed what I never thought could happen in the United States
of America. A woman—who was brain-damaged, not dying—was
murdered. It’s true our country has completed its journey into
the “Orwellian” state. There was nothing dignified in the murder of an innocent woman. There should be dignity in our passing. Terri Schiavo wasn’t allowed that dignity. She wasn’t even allowed last communion, nor the comforting hands of a mother’s love to caress her cold, limp hand as she passed from this injustice into the arms of the Creator. Terri has been murdered, and others like her are now in grave danger. It's past time to move the masses to change what has become anarchist judiciary terrorism. The age of the “Black Robes” needs to be reigned in, and our system must demand the balance of government to come back and regain itself to the status of what our founding fathers set forth under the United States Constitution. We must put a stop to the castrating of our American Eagle and the abuse of our freedoms that we say we all hold so dear. What are we, the people going to do about this now? |
||||||||||
A longtime reader emailed me after last week’s article to ask why I wrote about steroids instead of Terri Schiavo. The honest answer is, because I didn’t feel like writing about Terri Schiavo. That’s right. It’s that easy. I didn’t feel like writing about her. In fact, I still don’t. The only reason I’m writing this is to tell you I don’t feel like writing it. I can’t look at Terri Schiavo for more than thirty seconds without hearing my mom saying, “Jonathan, don’t stare,” in the back of my mind. Everything about this story freaks me out. There’s no other way I can say it. The footage freaks me out. The debate freaks me out. Even the fact that I’m freaked out freaks me out. I’m not used to this. I don’t freak out very often. That’s why I’ve kept quiet until now. The way I see it, there are two schools of thought here. There are people who think Terri Schiavo should live and people who think she should die. Now, ordinarily, I’d choose life over death by default. If someone held a gun to Ryan Seacrest’s head, for instance, I would vote not to kill him—even though I could easily imagine living without him. After all, he’s a young, relatively healthy person. Killing him would be inhumane. But Terri Schiavo is different. She’s bedridden and brain-dead. And some people say the only humane thing to do is to simply let her pass on. That said, I spent the entire weekend trying to write this column. What you’re looking at right now is Take 29. I kept starting over. And as we speak, I still have no clue where I stand. On the one hand, how can you call Michael Schiavo’s decision to remove Terri’s feeding tube “murder”? I understand she was surviving just fine when the tube was still connected. But that’s all she was doing, though. Surviving. It seems selfish to hook her up to a machine in the faint hope that she’ll return to form. The law—and the Bible, for those biblically inclined—puts Michael Schiavo in the unenviable position of determining Terri’s fate here. This guy has endured fifteen years of endless headaches and lawsuits. That’s love. True, he moved on and started another family. But he also turned down a million-dollar offer to walk away and wash his hands of this. It’s hard to imagine him doing that unless he truly believes this is what Terri would have wanted. On the other hand, is this what she wanted? Michael Schiavo says yes; Terri’s parents say no. I’m not questioning her husband’s motives, but I understand why her parents are. After all, his decision to remove her feeding tube is based on something she supposedly told him over a decade ago. No one will ever be able to prove it. To be honest, that makes me a little uncomfortable. Over a decade ago, I swore I’d wear Skidz forever. Things change. And it would be one thing if you held me to that promise. But to starve me for it? I don’t know. That seems a bit mean—especially when you could just as easily walk away and leave me with people who want to give me food. So like I said, I’m not sure where I stand on this issue. If I sided with Michael Schiavo, I would have to side with others who’ve sided with him. I don’t want to do that. Those folks seem to be rooting for Terri’s death just to prove a point. But if I sided with Terri’s parents, I’d be looking to rob Michael Schiavo of his duties as Terri’s husband. That’s an anti-family position. The “sanctity of marriage” is a bond between husband and wife—not husband, wife, and in-laws. We should respect that. And we should respect the decision he’s made on her behalf. Then again, if a life is at stake… Whatever. I’m done trying to pick a side here. I’ve been avoiding a Terri Schiavo column since the first time I heard about her. Now you know why: Both sides are wrong. People want to make this out to be a huge political crisis. I would tend to agree with President Bush when he says we should “err on the side of life." But the same conservatives who would err on the side of life for Terri Schiavo would also err on the side of collateral damage and capital punishment. And liberals, for their part, would sooner give the benefit of the doubt to suspected murderers and terrorists than unborn babies and women in persistent vegetative states. You want a political crisis? There it is. Personally, I’d rather err on the side of not erring and simply not kill people at all. But if Americans want to kill people—fine. Let’s kill people. But for God’s sake, at least be consistent. Enough with the drama. You’re freaking me out. Jonathan David Morris Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||||||
Those closest to me know of my eclectic religious upbringing. As a child I sometimes attended a Protestant Church and made it to Sunday school enough to know that it was expected I attend every week, not twice a year. I didn't understand the importance of attending Passover dinner at my Orthodox Jewish grandparents' house during my formative years. In my defense, I wasn't being raised as a member of any religious community. Like the "facts of life," you could say I learned the "facts of religion" from my peers. Catholic friends informed me that without Baptism I would not gain entrance to Heaven. Jewish friends told me that I wasn't really Jewish because I never attended Temple or religious school. It was more than obvious I wasn't being raised as a Jew. I never even heard of Rosh Hashanah or Yom Kippur. No wonder that maintaining faith in one particular idea of a deity has proven difficult to sustain; I was always unsure if I should believe in Christ the Savior or acknowledge Jesus as a misunderstood apostle. I have studied religion and I took Hebrew as an adult, but never had any real epiphanies about my allegiance. Yet as crazy as my religious upbringing was, I find comfort in the idea that there is a God and that there are lots of people who embrace religious morality; valuing life and respecting humanity. With age comes wisdom, and I've come to realize that our country is filled with people of good hearts, indicative that goodness prevails even though the preoccupation of mainstream news with the bad in this world would have us believe otherwise. It was with great consternation that I read The Federalist Patriot 05-13 account of Darrell Scott's congressional testimony regarding the death of his daughter Rachel at Columbine. His estimation is that Columbine should be seen as a spiritual event which teaches us that when we don't acknowledge the spirit in our lives, we create a void and allow evil to fill it. By not allowing Judeo Christian influence in our public institutions, it opens them up to hatred and violence. This particular edition of the Federalist Digest provides plenty of examples of misguided public policy to underscore his point. Not only did the Judiciary refuse to take another look at preserving Terri Schiavo's life, they wouldn't reconsider minors having abortions without parental consent, and they threw out"a death sentence for a man convicted of raping and murdering a cocktail waitress" because the jury used a Bible in its deliberation. As the author of the Federalist so eloquently put it, while Terri Schiavo was allowed to die by starvation in which her mouth, nose, and skin dried out; stomach convulsed; and organs shut down; PETA demanded jail time and community service from a farmer whose neglect, due to alcoholism, allowed 11 of his cows to die of dehydration. At the time of this writing, Pope John Paul II is sustained by a feeding tube because in a speech to doctors and ethicists, he declared his "living will" in which he concluded that a feeding tube for the comatose or vegetative state was a moral obligation for Roman Catholics. "The intrinsic value and the personal dignity of every human being do not change no matter what the concrete situation of his life," the Pope said. To deny such care would be "euthanasia by omission." Moral Relativism, which allows people to rationalize the morally acceptable instead of having to strictly adhere to a moral code based on the intrinsic value and the personal dignity of every human being explains why we can prosecute a man for killing his cows but not take action against an estranged husband for killing his wife. I fear that this bias against Judeo Christian morality on which our founders created the rule of law, might be the beginning of a Holocaust against those of faith; America's Kristalnacht. Nancy Salvato Web Site Contact Back to Top |
||||||||||
The average investor finally, has gotten the wake up call that they have been ignoring. It required a dramatic drop after weeks of steady decline. Some analysts call it a free fall, while the more astute view it as the ultimate insider opportunity. Yes, serious money can be made from the relics of the duped. If your timing is correct, shorting the index is pure joy. Ever hear of a zero sum gain? Well, welcome to the realm of financial misery for the many and glee for the few. While Jesse Livermore was the most famous short seller, he died broke and at his own hands. How many of the believers in the American dream will befall the same fate? Mutual funds, the 401 K and IRA's are a way of life for most investors. They bought into the rising market theory and plunged in with both feet. Now the reality of the corporate mirage, sinks into their consciousness, just as their last quarterly report tanks. What most fail to grasp is that those phantom gains were always funny money, that only existed in the expectations of the apparition. When a stock price far outpaces it's true value, not everyone can sell at its peak. There would never be enough new buyers, to take them out at the apex. The short seller knows this fact very well. Their technique is to sell the rebound dream, while they drive the prices even lower. The financial community has never been a level playing field, nor should sensible people ever expect it to become one. Manipulation is the art of the conductors in this orchestra - chanting the requiem for fiscal suicide for the uninformed. When a trade closes as the price drops for a stock, it means that there is a gain for the buyer who sold short. This occurs because there is a settlement or reconciliation at the end of the day. But what happens when the owners of the stock refuse to panic and maintain their position? The carnage should stop, right? But what we have is a system that gives great latitude to the fund manager to make the portfolio look good for the next report. A task that only the rare fund can accomplish since they are invested in the ownership of a wide range of securities, as the prices for most indexes continue to fall. When nervous investors run for the door and demand redemption, the fund manager is forced to sell from his holdings which continues the downward momentum. The short seller smiles all the way to the bank . . . He loves the frenzy and often feeds the scare. Have you ever wondered why so many savvy traders love crashing markets? The pigeons are easy pickings. But when a company goes bankrupt, it's stock value evaporates because no new buyers are available at any price. At that point and only under this circumstance, is wealth truly destroyed. Under normal conditions, it is a game of musical chairs, scored by Mozart and played by your local high school band. Liquidation is the real danger of a deflating economy. Bankruptcy is the danger we all should rightly fear. While the scheme can still be held together, the financial markets reward handsomely, the practitioner of the 'Rothschild Piller' strategy. "one cause of his [Nathan's] success was the secrecy with which he shrouded, and the tortuous policy with which he misled those who watched him the keenest." This lesson from history needs to be understood today, if the American public wants to retain some marginal vestige of independent control over their own financial destiny. During the uncertainty about the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo, the London Stock Exchange became the focal point of a colossal transfer of wealth. Because of the fear that Napoleon won the battle, the selling turned into a panic as people rushed to unload their 'worthless' consuls or paper money for gold and silver in the hope of retaining at least part of their wealth. Consuls continued their nose-dive towards oblivion. After several hours of feverish trading the consul lay in ruins. It was selling for about five cents on the dollar. At that point on the cue from their director - Nathan, dozens of Rothschild agents made their way to the order desks around the Exchange and bought every consul in sight for just a 'song'! Can history be repeating itself once again? Well, any astute market student would conclude that we have just gone through our own version of TULIPOMANIA. No doubt that historic price earning ratios has been out of sync for well over a decade. A significant downturn has long been overdue. All that talk about a new paradyne for a different economy seems to have fallen flat. Just look at the failure of the AOL - Time Warner model. But there are many serious and somber enterprises that still remain and will continue to function, as long as the domestic economy requires their products and services. The actual functional disconnect that drags down the economy is caused by the international trade deficits. The short seller knows this all too well. They will talk up the need to have Free Trade while they launch their assault on domestic companies. Might there be a little of Rothschild blood flowing in their veins? Well, we will see if the recent wake up call, can be converted into a musical ballad, or will the public continue to hear with a tin ear? No decent person would take enjoyment in the dramatic eradication in value of their neighbor's portfolio. But when was acting morally and proper a trait of Wall Street colluders? Hedging may be too late for most, but panic may well have you working for Nathan's. Maybe you won’t need to be serving up hot dogs, but will you be employed by an inheritor of that other Nathan? Jesse Livermore viewed the markets as sport. Accumulators of short positions see investors as marks. And the typical share holder is befuddled by their sinking investment statement. Maybe now you can begin to understand who is building all those multimillion dollar estates!
|
||||||||||
©2004-2005 by their respective authors. Reprinted by permission. |
||||||||||
|
news | constitution | bill of rights | our view | your view | their view awards to win | awards we've won | resources | goodie shoppe our mission | about us | contact us | privacy policy | site map | home This page last updated on Friday, April 8, 2005 2:45 PM Optimized for Microsoft Internet Explorer |
||||||||||
|
site content ©2002-2005 site design by |
||||||||||
