Colorado Councilman Faces Recall

Councilman David Habecker of Estes Park CO is in a bit of trouble. He has refused to stand and recite the Pledge of allegiance at the beginning of the Council Sessions. He believes the words “under God” violate the separation of Church and State. The first sentence of The First Amendment, which I copied from my handy pocket copy of the Constitution, reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

First of all, God is not a religion. God is the omnipotent entity that many religions view as their spiritual Father. There are many religions that do not worship God. Secondly, the councilman is not a member of Congress, he is not making law when reciting the pledge, and he is not establishing a religion.

I find it difficult to believe that so many politicians, and members of the general public for that matter, can not see this issue and realize that no one’s rights are being violated. If this guy stated he did not believe in God or that his religion did not worship a God the it would be different. The fact that he is misinterpreting the Constitution is an entirely different issue.

I admire one thing about him. He has taken a stand and stated that if the voters want to recall him then let them do so. I admire people who will stand up for what they believe, even if they are wrong. Read the story HERE:

Chevy Chase is an Idiot

I wrote in an earlier post that Eminem and Cher were idiots. Add Chevy Chase to that list. Mr. Chase was at a function and decided the people in attendance needed to know his political views. He is a Hollywood elitist, we already know his views. Anyway, he called George Bush a dumb F*** and said that he (Mr. Chase) was no F***ing clown. I have seen some of his movies and I would have to disagree. Mr. Chase is a clown. Perhaps he just has brain damage from all those years snorting cocaine on the set of SNL. Maybe he hit his head one too many times performing one of his slapstick falls. In any case, Chase is an idiot. The reports are that the liberals in attendance were even embarrassed by the remarks.

Add Chase to the list of has been actors who believe they know what goes on in the real world..

I Get Called Out Again

After my last post, a person known as Antithesis_98 wrote me a comment challenging my assertions about John Edwards. These are his comments:

John Edwards as the cause of increased costs is a real turn off to your sensible readers; and me, heh.

You use his name in a fit of grandstanding then say you have no problem with penalizing negligent practitioners.
The inference thus lumps Edwards with the frivolous lawsuits you despise.

Your next post should state the frivolous lawsuit of which he is a party, or you should apologies for the inference.


First, let’s get a few things out in the open. Antithesis is from the United Kingdom. I do not need to explain my positions to those who are from other places and therefore probably have little knowledge of the facts but, in the interest of educating this person, I will do just that. BTW, I have nothing against the UK. I have some very good friends who live in New Castle. Secondly, I did not say Edwards was the sole reason for the problems in health care. Trial lawyers in general are in part responsible for the mess. Now for the last part about backing my claims. Strap on your seatbelt mate, it is going to get a bit bumpy my little wanker friend.

John Edwards made his fortune suing over things that are not medically sound. He played on the emotions of juries and got them to award huge settlements for things that have no basis in science. At Find Law you will see an interesting biography of John Edwards. He had a 25 million dollar suit because a girl was severely injured by a pool drain. I am sure this was terrible. Why did the parents have the girl in the pool while they were draining it? Also, the claim was that the drain lacked a warning because there had been trouble before. Would a warning on the drain made a difference? Who can see the warning at the bottom of the pool? You will also find four cases where a newborn suffered Cerebral Palsey supposedly from a myriad of reasons ranging frm delay in performing a C-section to not using pitocin to induce labor. I want to make this clear, there is no evidence that complications during birth cause cerebral palsey. This is pseudoscience. It is smoke and mirrors. John Edwards took his snake oil show out and snookered (thought the Brit might enjoy that term) them in to believing there is a correlation. Third world countries have many more difficulties during birth yet the rate of cerebral palsey is no higher. The number of cases in babies born naturally and those born via C-section is nearly the same. Don’t take my word for it. Read all about cerebal palsey from THE ALFRED I. DUPONT INSTITUTE

There are no specific events that, if they occur during pregnancy, delivery, or infancy, will always occurring at birth or right after birth). This is apparently why the incidence of CP in undeveloped and poverty stricken areas of the world, where infant mortality is very high, is the same as in northern Europe, where infant mortality is the lowest. It also explains why modern obstetrical care, including monitoring and a high rate of Cesarian section, has lowered infant mortality rates but not the incidence of cerebral palsy.


Now read that carefully. John Edwards played on people’s emotions and made them believe that which is contradicted by science. The folks here should know a bit more about CP than Edwards. There you have it Antithesis_98, the frivolous lawsuits to which he was a party.

But wait, there’s more. There was a suit against a trucking company by the estate of man killed by a company driver, arguing that the company acted recklessly in paying drivers by the mile, thereby encouraging unsafe conduct. There is no mention of whether the driver actually was unsafe. Only that the company practice lead to unsafe conduct. Perhaps the other driver was at fault.
Here is another: Doctor’s delay and failure to properly treat 45-year-old’s severely lacerated foot ultimately required amputation of foot three years later. I have seen many lacerations and there have been delays in treatment. Sometimes there are sicker people. Why did it take three years for this problem to manifest? Was the patient a diabetic? Did he have other disease processes that caused peripheral vascular disease? These last items can certainly be debated and maybe they were legitimate. The CP cases were definitely not legitimate and border on fraud.

As I stated in the last post, I have no problem with law suits against doctors who are truly negligent. This does not contradict my position that frivolous lawsuits are commonplace and drive up the costs of health care. I know that my post here will not change anyone’s mind if they are believers in Edwards. I did , however, back up my claims as requested by my tosser reader in the UK.

Antithesis_98, I believe that it is I who is owed the apology. I of course do not blame you for being confused. You folks in the UK have a real tough time with the law over there. Keep reading and I will get you straight.

Sometimes it is a Matter of Priorities

I have been reading posts at other sites that are, shall we say, opposed to President Bush. Actually, most of them hate him. I have been having this running battle with Adam at Lost Adam. He wrote some things and in one of my last posts I responded to the unfounded and illogical statements he made. He responded in kind. The problem is he failed to reference what I wrote so if you read just his post it makes it look like he is addressing things I did not say. It also allows one to be misled. Be that as it may I have to respond to some things he wrote. I will put the quotes in so I do not mislead you.

Again, I know where the government money comes from. I think the government should take away from us, and we should be willing to give up that amount, so that it can go to the poor and the homeless, so that it can go to those with no medical care or life insurance. I can’t stomach the idea that we are in some great nation when we have so many homeless people dying every day on the streets, or when we have so many people (including myself) without proper medical care. It’s just gross and when the Republicans talk about this subject they treat it as if liberals just want the government to support us so we don’t have to work for our living. No, we want the government to support those who need help.

I do not understand this idea that the government should take away from us and that we should be willing to give. I pay my taxes like most Americans but I do feel that as a taxpayer I have a right to know how the money is being spent. We have social programs and they are corrupt. There are people who live off the government and have no incentive to go out and earn a living. The busiest times at liquor stores is the day welfare checks are delivered. The government should better control how our money is used. There is no accountability and therein lies the problem.

The idea that we have all these homeless people dying on the streets makes it sound like they are dropping like flies. I will admit there are homeless people in the streets. Most of them are there of their own free will. Many have mental health issues but since the liberals made it a crime to put them in institutions then they are allowed out on the streets. I feel badly for them but all the money in the world will not help them if they spend it on drugs or booze and refuse to live indoors. More people are killed by gun violence. I don’t want to hear the crap about gun control either. There are 20,000 gun laws on the books. The reason gun crimes occur is that criminals do not obey the law. Now people like Adam will tell you that only the militia is allowed to have guns. Those doing the killing are part of the militia of this country as defined in Title 10 United States Code. Banning all guns will not stop crime. Cocaine is illegal except for its use in medicine. People buy it and use it everyday. Why? Because they are criminals.

Adam says he does not have adequate insurance. I can understand this. In my career I have met many people who are underinsured. They say that they can not afford additional insurance (if any at all). Yet, many of these folks are driving new model cars that cost a fortune each month. I have taken care of people who come to the ER for their blood pressure medicine because it is too expensive at $90 per month. These same people smoke 3 packs of cigarettes a day. I have seen people who come to the ER for a minor problem because they did not want to wait for an appointment. Then they do not pay the bill because it is too high or their insurance will not cover a non-emergent visit. If you have a nice entertainment system, a computer with all the bells and whistles and a fancy car then you decided that health insurance was not as important to you as those other things. Of course, one can join the military, they get health insurance as a job benefit. We have John Edwards suing the hell out of doctors for pseudoscience. He makes terrific claims based on unproven science and gets juries to award huge amounts of money. These costs need to be made up somewhere. If you own a plumbing company and the supplier raises the cost of copper tubing you pass that cost on to the consumer. Doctors are no different. Now don’t get me wrong, if they are negligent they need to pay for it. But most of these are frivolous and are designed to make trial lawyers rich.

I don’t want the government to support those who do not work. I want the government to help them get a job and earn a living. You get more of what you subsidize. If you pay people not to work, more of them will not work.

I feel badly for people who live paycheck to paycheck or are unemployed. I think before the government is fast and free with the money it extorts from me there should be some accountability. As for other things, they are not a guarantee. People have to work for them and make sacrifices. As hard as that is to do in this instant gratification society, I think it will build strong character.

What is it About New York’s Police Leaders?

When the President announced that he selected Bernard Kerik, a former New York Police commissioner, to head the Department of Homeland Security I was skeptical. I live in the state of Maryland and Baltimore City has recruited former New York Police leaders to be the commissioner of the Baltimore City Police Department. One of them moved on to become superintendent of the State Police (thus requiring a new commissioner who was recruited from New York).

The first guy was Edward Norris. He came down here and took over the Baltimore Police Department. Problem is, there was a slush fund for the commissioner that Norris dipped in to in order to entertain some lady friends that were not his wife. He spent money on sexy gifts for them, trysts with them, you know, all the things one would expect a police officer not to do. After Norris accepted the job as superintendent the investigation brought all this to light. Norris had to resign the position and ended up getting convicted and going to jail for six months. He got as much time as Martha Stewart and he was supposed to uphold the law.

The next guy they bring in from New York is Kevin Clark. It appears as if he was not particularly well liked by the rank and file. They were a little upset that outsiders kept getting selected over qualified officers from the department. Anyway, one night some time ago, the police get called to Clark’s house for an alleged domestic dispute involving him and his girlfriend. The police reviewed this and the Mayor decided to have another jurisdiction conduct an investigation. The findings were sealed and all they would say was that there was no wrong doing. If you or I did that a judge would have to make that decision but if you are a cop then you don’t really have to follow the law or go by the same rules as the rest of society. As it turns out, the report was released and it was pretty long. I don’t really know what it said but there seemed to be a lot of contradictions, at least according to the news. Not all that unexpected when you consider how the police look out for each other. Turns out, Clark had some problems with domestic issues in New York. All the attention to this was finally too much for the boy mayor of Baltimore and he released Clark. Now Clark is suing the City for around $60 million. He believes he was wrongfully dismissed.

When Kerik was selected I though Oh no, not another New York Cop. I am sure there are many fine police officers there and across the country. The problem is the police have to uphold the law all the time. If they don’t the people lose confidence in the department. Think about this, if some twit Sheriff’s Deputy made a bunch of bogus stops (claims you are weaving even if you are not) so he can check more people for drinking and driving to beef up his arrest numbers then pretty soon he and his department lose credibility. Is it any wonder that people riot when they believe the police have done wrong? No, the people have lost confidence in the police and their ability to execute their duties without passion or prejudice. As I said, I was worried about Kerik but figured they must have checked him out pretty good. Now it appears he might have had an affair with a subordinate, employed an illegal immigrant, and not paid taxes on the immigrant’s salary (or paid insufficient taxes).

I am dismayed about the whole thing. Someone over at B4B stated that he had hoped there would be more discussion but was happy with the selection. Well, now we see that more discussion was needed. It is unfortunate but at least the guy had the sense to bow out before the confirmation hearing. Then it would have been more than ugly.

Advice to Bush administration: Stay away from career police officers, especially ones from New York. Try looking at some recently retired military officers. They might be your best bet.