Thursday, December 30, 2004

Curiouser and Curiouser...


The election results for the governor's race in th State of Washington are scheduled to be certified by the Secretary of State in Olympia today. After nearly two months of counting and recounting the Repubican candidate's victory, the Democrats conveniently scrounged the
votes that count to give Gregoire a razor thin edge. The edge came - thanks in no small part to the State's Supreme Court - by the selective counting of newly 'discovered' ballots from the Democrat's stronghold of King County... only (a blue splotch on a red state). Suddenly time is of the essence for the certification of victory. Again, how convenient. With uncertainty abounding, Rossi has appropriately petitioned his oppenent for a run-off. Afterall, it worked in Ukraine to resolve the scandal; albeit Rossi hasn't been poisoned... yet. But, with the perception of victory in hand moments away fom the prize, it is extremely unlikely that Washington Democrats will suddenly discover integrity. And it is doubtful that the Red counties (3/4 of the state) will march on Seattle, like their insane counterparts. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is indeed reporting this morning that a request for revote has been rejected,

County election officials across the state have turned down the Republican Party's request to reconsider rejected votes for gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi, who is now faced with contesting the entire election or conceding.

State Democratic Party Chairman Paul Berendt called the county auditors' uniform refusal a clear sign that the never-ending governor's election has finally run its course.

"Chris Gregoire will be the next governor of Washington state," Berendt said. "Canvassing boards have spoken, and they have clearly stated this election is done."

Berendt went on to boldly proclaim,
"Republicans and Democrats across the state have worked together to have an accurate hand count. Rossi just didn't like the results. His last shot at overturning the election faded today, when Democratic and Republican auditors turned him down."
So that's it. It was close...

Or is it? is reporting that the State GOP has filed a public records request demanding a list of voters in Washington state's most populous county.
Chris Vance, state Republican party chairman, said officials will decide whether to challenge the recount results after studying the voter rolls from King County, a Democratic stronghold that includes Seattle.

"We're mostly posing questions," he said. "King County is where we saw the votes changing. King County is the one county that was allowed to take ballots that were declared dead in November and bring them back to life in December."

In light of the tight margins on this election where each count has yielded a different number, with two varying results resting on a margin of 1/1000th of a percent, a closer inspection would seem in order. Over at PullOnSupermansCape, Emcee has run some interesting mathematical analyses of the recount results.

Perhaps it is no coincidence that the Washington state lottery site has 'Election Results' listed at the top center of its site. The odds of winning the Lotto game in Washington (picking 6 of 49 numbers) are 13,983,816 to 1 (you get two chances per one dollar ticket).

What King County and the Democratic party would like us to believe is that Christine Gregoire is the recipient of good fortune that is 20% more improbable than a Lotto win. That one county produced two sets of recount data, reported that data after all the other counties had reported, and just randomly found enough 'votes' to overturn an election.

Cynics might offer that people actually do win the Lottery. They might suggest that this is just the way things happened, that simply because it is this way - it just happened. Against all odds, it just happened. They forget that when the Lottery is won it is the result of millions and millions of chances taken by millions of people so that the odds are matched by the number of sets of numbers selected.

The only certain way to win the Lotto is to buy 6,991,908 tickets and pick all 13,983,816 sets of numbers. The only certain way to overturn the Washington gubernatorial election through recounts was to do so with explicit human intervention.

As Emcee concludes, the Democrats are not concerned with the notable improbability of their charade, they "are willing to play the odds that no one will pursue and gather the evidence that will expose their actions." In the past they have been correct. The Mainstream Partisan Media is clearly willing to provide them with cover. The Komo Story offers this mention...
The latest tally included 732 disputed ballots from King County, which the state Supreme Court last week ruled could be counted despite objections from Republicans. The ballots had been mistakenly thrown out because of problems scanning signatures into a computer.

... and yet they, the Times and Post-Intelligencer fall far short of endorsing a public disclosure of the 732 questionable ballots in King County, nor do they bother to link this image of one of those ballots in question. Over at SoundPolitics, they note the 'fascinating irregularities' in the King County voter database:

* More than 500 people registered at the King County Administration Building, and several more registered at City Halls around King County. Although this provision was created for homeless people, some of these voters have also been found in the property tax rolls as homeowners. Others provide mailing addresses in other states and countries.

* Several deceased people have been found in the voter rolls. At least one of them passed away as long ago as 1998.

* Thousands of obvious data errors have been noticed: voters who are recorded as having registered in 1904; 258 who are recorded as having voted in future elections;2,500 who are recorded as genderless.

* Voters who are registered and have voted using aliases that don't appear to be legal name changes.

* Hundreds of people are registered at non-residential addresses: private mailbox services, storage rental facilities, office buildings.

* Hundreds more are registered giving their permanent residence at temporary shelters for the homeless, released convicts, mentally ill, runaway teenagers.

* Many, many people are registered multiple times.

* In additon to all of the above I learned by speaking with state and county elections officials that there are essentially no procedures being used to verify whether a person who registers to vote is actually eligible to vote.

* And then there are the numerous e-mails I receive from readers who tell me that they receive absentee ballots that should never have been sent, such as for long-deceased former residents, and duplicate ballots for wives under both the maiden and married names.

Take a look at Jim Miller's theory of Distributive Voter Fraud as it applies to King County. I suspect it is a tactic that is systematically applied in similar Blue counties throughtout the United States to one degree or another, including Multnomah County in Oregon.

Out of failure comes opportunity (HT. Dueler). The blatant pilfering of the governor's election in Washington provides a invitation for a deeper inspection of the Left's fraud machine. Many voters there across the spectrum demand to know just how far down does this rabbit (or
Morlock) hole go? One wishes that MSM journalists in Washington and the nation were even a fraction as curious as Alice.

Hornet's Nest...

Mr. Atos

Ad Council, in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Transportation/National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Is in the middle of an ongoing campaign geared toward booster seat education. Their argument is that a staggering 80-90% of all children in the U.S. who should be restrained in a booster seat are not. Children who have outgrown their child safety seat, but who still under 4'9", are safer sitting in a booster seat, rather than immediately transitioning to an adult seat belt. That issue aside (for the moment), their most recent radio add, at least to this parent, is one of the most offensive adds I have yet heard emerge from the Ad Council, who seem to be increasingly abandoning persuasive decorum for outright and odious condescension.

Listen to the add titled,
Hornet's Nest, where a mother gleefully forces her terrified child into a swarm of hornets and see if you agree that it is... extreme at best.

Then let the Ad Council know what you think of their adolescent contempt of your sensibilities.

And while you're at it, you might suggest to the USDT/NHTSA that this approach is beneath your expectations of representation.

Wednesday, December 29, 2004


I have a Master's degree in Architecture, and Architecture is my chosen profession (note: I do not mention this to demostrate what my educational credentials ARE, but more importantly what they ARE NOT). Most architects can't even spell correctly, let alone write well. While I was at school, however, I took it upon myself to become a journalist. Not because I studied the subject, but because I had something to say and thought I was pretty good at saying it. I started writing in the Arts section for the university newspaper in my senior year.

It wasn't that hard, really. The biggest hurdle was communicating esoteric ideas in a way that the average Liberal Arts major could understand. Granted, it wasn't the highly-charged newsroom of the New York Times (yikes!) or the Daily Planet, but there were deadlines and subject matter and finding the best way to say something. From that experience, I have to believe that being a full-time journalist doesn't take that much brainpower.

I had friends who were Communications majors, planning on becoming journalists after graduating. I met most of them in classes like Public Speaking. I met a lot of the guys on the basketball team in those classes, too. Strike two for brainpower in journalism.

It seems to me that there must be a segment in the journalism/communications curriculum about impartiality, which I will subclassify under Journalistic Ethics. Perhaps they don't teach that anymore. Well, maybe they DO teach it, but differently than they did before the 1960's. The '60's combined the genesis of institutional distrust by an entire generation with the biggest institution, the U.S. government, engaging in military action of questionable virtue, strategy and tactics. The generation that grew up hating, and that spent their adulthood simultaneously bloating and dismantling the credibility of, that biggest institution has become what they most hate: a gigantic corrupt institution - Mainstream Commercial News Media.

In their quest to change the world, younger journalists pushed aside the generation of REPORTERS OF FACT in favor of the generation of TRUTHTELLERS. Problem is, there are as many different definitions of Truth as there are people in the world. Storytelling and Opinion have replaced Conciseness and Fact.

From my experiences as a writer, I know how difficult it is to choose words in such a way that they will be unbiased. Journalists don't have to simply be factual anymore. They have to tell a good story in order to sell newspapers and TV advertising time. As a result, factual accuracy lessens in importance while emotional impact receives the greatest focus. Combine that with the aforementioned idea of Fact Reporter to Truthteller, and you get a corrosive concoction that is sure to erode the foundations of Democracy.

It also seems to me that we have, as a society, arrived at the point where we recognize that all of our communications are biased by a person's viewpoint of Truth. Bloggers and non-leftist journalists certainly aren't afraid of admitting that they have a point of view. Leftist MSM journalists, however, think that they are carrying on the noble tradition of reporting facts, when in fact (no pun intended) they are telling stories through the filters of their own viewpoints.

To those who are studying journalism, and the current journalists, wherever you may be, I implore you: REDISCOVER THE SCIENCE OF REPORTING FACTS, not just the art of verbal communication. Choose your words carefully. Reserve your opinions for the Opinion page. We bloggers know what we're doing. At the end of the cultural Unraveling, we're destroying your Great Institution. We're excercising our Freedom of Speech. The difference, though, is that we know the difference between Truth and Fact.

Streaming to the Pickets...

Mr. Atos

The skirmishes have begun. One can hear the volleys exchange, see the smoke in the distance, and the wounded already litter their poorly chosen battlefields. Volunteers stream to the action like men assembling before the gates of Mordor for a challenge they are prepared to make... against a foe ill-equipped from ages of inbred intellectual putrefaction. One fortress is in shambles, the bastions breached and its phalanx all but abandoned but for the
rancid frothing of the mortally vanquished scattered on unworthy ground. The other estate is now under siege. And it is clear that the defenders sceptors of poison are shy of sting and offer little protection from the binary ballistas that pound the walls of their ivory towers. It has begun.

Let's Roll!

The latest skirmish involves a columnist for the Minnesota Star Tribune,
Nick Coleman, and the familiar fellows at Powerline. Jim Geraghty has a good summary of that action today over at KerrySpot that is a must read. See Brain Terminal for Evan Maloney's volley.

Another blow is landed by
The Hammer against Los Angeles Times columnist Tim Rutten. Hugh takes note of this slip in Mr. Rutten's otherwise innocuous column regarding the passing of Susan Sontag:

" To the generations of Martin Edens to come, to all those Americans who believe that you can be born in Bakersfield or Boise and still aspire to live fully the life of the mind, Susan Sontag left an example -- and this advice:

'Be serious, be passionate, wake up!' "

Bakersfield and Boise must be like Giddings (Texas), from which the hopelessly ignorant await being plucked and powdered, donned with wig and mole, to join the entourage of the enlightened urban aristrocracy with their prestige of progressive wit and a moratorium on brains. Check out Hugh's latest Weekly Standard column on media elitism and "how it killed big media's credibility with a majority of Americans." It is Hewitt's latest cannon blast to accompany his new battering ram. Tim Rutten never saw it coming. And that is, afterall, part of the problem.

The shelling continues from frigates like
Belmont Club and Little Green Footballs. They have been pounding the Associated Press and other rogue journalists who have abandoned humanity and the requisites of civilization for the chimera of their self-defined virtue. Also here, here, and Glenn Reynolds.

Rather was but the first rusting knight to be cut from his lame steed, and left to whimper in shameful oblivion on the banks of his Styx... as bankrupt of legacy as he is coin for ferry. Others are falling in quick succession, while some like Coleman are charging headlong into Rather's Little valley at a bull with Big Horns.


UPDATE: 12.29.04:23:41

The battle is joined by Captain's Quarters, Shot In The Dark, Betsy's Page, The Volokh Conspiracy, PrestoPundit, Pejmanesque, and our own Dueler to name a few. See Evangelical Outpost for an extended list of volunteer pickets swarming to assure Coleman's last stand. Stones Cry Out is picking targets of opportunity.

Tuesday, December 28, 2004

The Fist of Nature...


Forty Thousand and counting. Dead... men, women, and children whose lives were ended with one instantaneous heave of the Earth's crust thrusting a radial fist of death at hyper-velocity in all directions at once. I've been following this event since it first appeared among the chatter over the Christmas weekend. 1,000 believed dead in the first few hours. The season of life was being puncuated by a reminder of just how precious that one gift is. We sung silent hymns by candlelight to remember. Later we prayed for those lost. The numbers had grown. 6000... 12000... 18000...

And the pictures rolled in. The vultures had arrived nearly as fast the wave. One might wonder had some taken haitus from
staging murders with associated butchers to photograph nature’s statement? Applying that journalists’ ethic here, would they have raised an alarm had they known what was coming?... being that they are no more than objective purveyors of the fancies of fates. Perhaps their wires around the Indian Rim were kept as secret as those in Fallujah and Haifa.

A new week began with a new and unimaginable number, 23,000. Wretchard recorded his gripping insight over at
Belmont Club regarding the nature and perspective of disaster. My mind pondered memories and experience for bearing - Flash floods in Central Texas, tornadoes, hurricanes in the Gulf, Mt. St. Helens. Nothing in my memory came close. History however is replete with cataclysm.

Thera exploded (ca.1628/7 B.C.E.) Western civilization itself was momentarily silenced in and around the Mediterranean Rim. When the shock had subsided, Euripides wrote:

"There came a sound, as if from within the Earth... Zeus' hollow thunder boomed, awful to hear... The horses lifted heads towards the sky... And pricked their ears; while strange fear fell on us,... Whence came the voice. To the sea-beaten shore... We looked, and saw a monstrous wave that soared... Into the sky, so lofty that my eyes... Were robbed of seeing the Scironian cliffs... It hid the isthmus and Asclepius' rock... Then seething up and bubbling all about... With foaming flood and breath from the deep sea,... Shoreward it came to where the chariot stood." - Euripides, The Hippolytus

Pompeii and Herculaneum are two urban graveyard inexorably linked to nature's fury. Krakatoa is another. The City of St. Pierre on Martinique died in an instant in 1902 when Mt. Pelee erupted. Of its population of 28,000, only 2 survived.

And yet, volcanoes are but one hand of nature. San Fransisco perished when the Earth heaved beneath her in 1906. But, many places have felt that particular hand throughout history an the victims have been far too plenty, from a
Wonder of the Ancient World, to the children of Bam.

Even as I write, the death toll along the Indian Rim rises to 44,000 (

Storms can be equally as deadly. And every year, it seems, there are accounts of 6-figure death tolls resulting from monsoon flooding in India and Asia. Typhoons lurk annually among the shores of the Pacific, while Cyclones hunt the South Seas, and Hurricanes prowl the Atlantic, Carribean, and the Gulf of Mexico. In 1900, a
monster snuck upon the great coastal city of Galveston Texas. At that time, she rivaled New York among the greatest metropolitan jewels of American Urbanity. The predator's fist slammed into her with little warning as one of the greatest hurricanes ever recorded obliterated the island city and inland towns with sheering winds and a wall of water that submerged their very existence. It is a legend known to every native child of Texas and one remebered every time the black clouds swirl in strangely from the south. Erik Larson assembled a superb recount of the 1900 storm in his book, Isaac's Storm. Of all the stories of my recollection, this is the one that provides the most vivid insight into the nature of disaster from which I can draw perspective for the devastation in the East.

Last summer, I sat with my family at an outdoor restaurant in Cannon Beach, Oregon enjoying a fine summer morning on the coast of the Pacific Northwest. The morning silence was suddenly exploded by the eruption of a warning klaxon that startled my wife and I, and frightened our 2 year old son to tears. It was the periodic test of the town's coastal warning system. When the disruption subsided, I asked a local seated nearby, "when was the last tsunami?"

The young man replied, "I dunno!"

Nevertheless, we all took notice of where we were, and how to get out if the 'fist' approached. One wonders if the victims in Thailand and Sri Lanka had any similar periodic reminders. And if so, would it have been enough to reduce the great number of those lost. One commentator described the wave of death to have travelled at the speed of a jet-liner. The horrific irony is that Americans remember how shockingly fast and destructive that is.


The death toll continues to rise. As with the Galveston disaster, we may never know how much was lost. Attention must swing from the dead to the living. Many agencies are now assembling aid for the survivors, the injured and homeless. WorldVision has organized a relief effort for the region. The site is a little overwhlemed to be certain, but do stick with it. Let us be the rainbow over subsiding waters.


Cheese and Crackers links to amatuers' tsunami videos. Far from being the fodder for casualty vampires, I believe they give everyone a more profound perspective of what has happened in the East and how a disaster of such immense magnitude can strike with deceptively gentle killing precision. But Dueler asks a great question: "At what point do you put down the camera... and help?!" Jordan follows up that post with a timely look at the relief efforts and aid that is being assembled for deployment in the Indian Rim.

UPDATE: 12.28.04:20:56

Check out these sites as well: Wizbang, Powerline, Captain's Quarters, Brain Shavings, and The South-East Asia Earthquake and Tsunami.

Monday, December 27, 2004

Beware Of The Blog...


I'm listening to '
The Hammer' flog his new book, "Blog." And despite this year of exams, I may just have to break my moratorium on reading (reading anything that is not NCARB related) and read Hugh Hewitt's latest book. Far from being the peak or even the twilight of blogging, this era of pajama journalism realized the end of its beginning with resolution of November's Presidential Election. The Dueler and I made our transition from ICQ debates, intranet skirmishes, and Free Republic pontifications, to the world of the blog during the waining days of the beginning. I'm looking forward to continuing our own journey along with others out there in this expanding universe of real-time enlightenment - an open-source forum for the consideration of reality in the medium of what now has truly become the 'information' superhighway... bypassing the old pitted turnpike of agenda journalism. Who knows where this phenomenon will go. As I wrote Hugh last week, regarding the "Bigs" attempting to take over the Blogs...

Think Homebrew. Recall that the microbrew craze of the early nineties grew out of a homebrew trend by which people were trying to create a product that was not in the market. Laws were changed and these small brewers (the best of the regional homebrew competitions) were hired to be microbrewers. My college friend, Kim was the youngest female brewmaster in the country brewing for the first Belgian Brewery to fill the void (Celis in Austin). She cleaned the clocks of the ‘Bigs’ taking medal after medal at the Great American Beer Festival. The trend continued for a few more years until the ‘Bigs’ began to buy up the micro’s. The products changed and the variety diminished for those that were assimilated. Miller bought Celis, and simplified the recipe. Ultimately they closed the brewery altogether and the label was gone. Today, only a fraction of the independent microbreweries remain. Even the brewpubs have been institutionalized. There is still variety on the shelves, so the overall effect of microbrews remained. But, the novelty wore away with the loss of specialization.

Last I heard, Kim worked in marketing for a biotech corporation; her talent removed from the field. New talent has emerged, however, and the general palette has been transformed forever.

It may be that the ‘Bigs’ will attempt the same move with the blogs… watering down and eliminating the competition and otherwise trivializing the movement. But, then opinions abound and the future is uncertain. At present, I participate as the zeal for understanding inspires a need for thoughtful introspection and the world that I see evokes open reaction for the consideration of anyone who might be interested. Sometimes that is no one. And at a time, I might touch thousands. For predictions and analysis of the phenomenon itself, I will rely on the opinions of my mentors (Glenn Reynolds), and the consideration of one who has heretofor displayed a keen and unique prescience for the significance of a movement that begins to build a crushing degree of momentum.

Go get
the book! Get a few and pass them out to friends and family and anyone who thinks "a Blog" is a giant, red, amorphous, mass, that grows as it devours hapless victims. Then again, perhaps they are right. But, they should come to know the truth about the thing that has already devoured Mainstream journalistic malfeasance and offers a new medium for truth.

Meantime, Hugh or Duane (over at RadioBlogger) might want to sift the archives for some theme music for Hewitt's new book. Might I suggest this original Theme Song from "The Blob" (1958). It is somehow appropriate... in so many ways.

Thursday, December 23, 2004

The Doernbecher Principle...


Shortly after our first son was born, our attention shifted with friend's, to the arrival of their new baby boy. The day brought both joy and tragedy. Their son was alive, but had been born with a severe birth defect that threatened both his immediate survival and hope for a normal life beyond. I cannot imagine the strength that it took for them to endure the first few seconds of birth, through the perserverence of the weeks, months, and even years of care, pain and surgery. An easier decision might have been made elsewhere in the world for them, despite the strength of their character that would always fight fiercly for their children. For these parents, and Oregon Doctors there was only one decision. Right after birth, their son was transferred to Oregon Health Science Institute to the
Doernbecher Children's Hospital for the care that would save his life, and restore everyone's hope. Cooper is alive and well today, facing promising prospects for a healthy life in which he might never have to realize the struggle he faced in those first 10 months.

Not long ago, this blogger joined others in
focusing attention on a Hospital in the Netherlands, where compassion had taken a perverse twist. Cooper's story and the recent birth of our second son weighed heavy in my mind while considering the depths of European depravity. In October of this year, it was revealed that the Groningen Academic Hospital had been extending Holland's policy of adult Euthanasia to infants born with life-threatening conditions and defects. The Groningen Protocol establishes a professional committee of medical staff with complete authority over decisions regarding life (and death) and the critical care needed to sustain it. As I pointed out then (The Groningen Corollary) that the Dutch protocol - as morally depraved as it is - has an even more insidious corollary. When those charged with the responsibility for the maintenance of life, become the 'arbiters' of death, a moral contradiction is introduced within the relationship that undermines human respect. Existence is no longer a fundamental individual condition, but is reduced to a valuation of choices in social context. When a government sanctions the action, that contradiction is manifested in law. The notion of justice abandons inalienable precepts in favor of preferential necessity.

Oregon is the only State where doctor-assisted suicide is practiced legally. Given the nature of this State's progressive sensibilities and its neo-European fetish, there is an ever-present danger that American ethics could deteriorate here toward more consensual preferences yielded by a dominant state of moral relativism, where cultural imperatives have been abandoned to popular convenience. So I was heartened to read
this article, by Patrick O'Neil in this week's Portland Oregonian. The article begins with a perspective far removed from that of the Dutch.

The outlook for the tiny patient appeared hopeless. Born with spina bifida, a birth defect that affects the covering of the spinal column, the newborn also seemed to have a malformed brain.

The question facing Dr. Mark Merkens was whether to perform a lifesaving -- but possibly futile -- operation or to let the baby die.

Merkens, director of the spina bifida program at Doernbecher Children's Hospital, recalled that the infant's brain looked so deformed that "it was possible the child would not experience interaction with human beings or anything going on in the environment."

"I discussed the case with an experienced colleague," he said, "and he made a minor point about the anatomy of the brain and the accuracy of our projection. We provided the lifesaving surgery."

Today that newborn is a young teenager who attends public school and has normal mental abilities.

Merkens thinks the case illustrates the hazards involved in a proposal by a hospital in the Netherlands to euthanize terminally ill newborns. The Groningen Academic Hospital, which made the proposal last week, revealed it has euthanized several children.

The article goes on to highlight the Principles of Doernbecher as personified by Dr. Merkens, who serves as a clinical ethics consultant at Oregon Health & Science University.

Ethicists such as Merkens say a distinct but often misunderstood difference exists between actively ending a life and removing medical intervention, letting nature take its course.

In the United States, it is permissible to give dying patients enough painkilling medication to make them comfortable, even though a side-effect might be to shorten the patient's life. That so-called "double effect" of painkillers is a "seemingly small point,"

Merkens said. But from an ethical point of view, it is huge. "We do not provide euthanasia," he said.

"We do not hasten death. We provide comfort care, which would allow the natural course of an illness which ends in death."

There seems to be a profound distinction between the ethics guiding American medicine from that of itsr European counterpart. Doctor's like Merkens, recognize that their's is not the role of God, to bestow or retract life as they see fit. And that is a strong principle on which to found a legitimate medical ethos. Life has priority. It is a concept that is hardly isolated to Doernbecher, however, as the story further notes:

Dr. Joel Frader, a bioethics professor at the Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, said he has a great concern about euthanasia.

"The big worry I have is that lives are being ended because of judgments about the moral worth of the individual, as opposed to the experience of the individual," he said. "If what's happening in the Netherlands indicates an intolerance of difference and disability, I think we have a serious moral problem."

Another critical point is made here,

Arthur Caplan, chairman of the department of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania, says hazards abound in infant euthanasia. Like Merkens, Caplan worries about the possibility of unexpected recovery.

"Kids fool you," he said. Sometimes infants have a poorly understood condition called "failure to thrive," which can end in death.

"It's a common policy in neonatal intensive care units," Caplan said, "that you pull the technology off a child and,if the child hangs in there, you put it back."

Sometimes with treatment, the child will survive. But if euthanasia were available, the child might not get a second chance.

"You'd have a death," Caplan said. "There's no room for error in euthanasia. But babies prove you wrong more often than any other patient."

"Kids fool you!" It is a incisive way to say that no man posesses the omniscience to ascertain an outcome. And no committee consensus has the authority to circumvent fate. The true fools are those that pretend otherwise. While the victims pay the ultimate price with there blood which can never be washed clean from the hands of the culture that surrenders its souls to existential expediency.

For now, American medicine seems to be insulated from the malevolence that continues to pervade modern European culture, and seeping into its most critical institutions.
Hippocrates recognized the danger inherent when one's most precious possession is offered to the care of another. There must first be the presumption that both share the same value of existence before an appreciation of worth can be mutually understood. As with any institution, its legacy is established by its practices... not simply its promises. Clearly Groningen and Doernbecher are world's apart, as are the cultures of the old and the new world. One is obsessed with death, while the other still celebrates the primacy life.

Wednesday, December 22, 2004

Horton Finds, Who?...


Gregoire's the Winner! In Washington, the Democrats have declared their candidate 'the winner' in the 2004 Governor's race. After two previous unsatisfactory election results, showing Republican Candidate, Dino Rossi, first winning by 261 votes and again by 42 votes, a third review seems to have yielded the votes that count. Out of 2.9 million votes cast, the close results should demonstrate that every individual voice does have profound significance in that less than a tenth of a percent can decide an election. In short, every vote cast in a legitimate manner does indeed count... or does it?

Komo news reports:

OLYMPIA - The head of the state Democratic Party said late Tuesday that recount results from King County give Democrat Christine Gregoire an eight-vote victory in the closest governor's race in state history.

"We're confident Christine Gregoire has been elected the governor of the state of Washington," Democratic Chairman Paul Berendt said. "I believe Dino Rossi should concede."

As Democrats have adapted their sensibilities to adopt a more chaotic view of free elections, a new mantra has arisen from the Left urging that 'every vote count.' Considering the fact that Democrats only investigate elections on this basis when the results - close as they may be - are not favorable to their preferences, which votes do they mean? Dispensing with the rhetorical absurdities, we can see the truth of their dogma exorcised in public in the State of Washington where an election result, counted and recounted in a manner that has yielded Democrat victory there for decades, is suddenly unsatisfactory to the losing party. In a desperate attempt to cheat reality, they measure the fractal edge of the preferential wrinkle with an ever larger hand lens until the results conform to their perceptions. The moment it does... victory! That is the wrinkle that counts!

Four years after the fiasco of Florida, the truth is all too clear. The only vote that counts as far as Democrats are concerned, is the one that puts them over the top. Dare we brandish them again, with the moniker of hypocrit? Like a tree falling in the forest, if they don't care does it matter? Ethics and integrity be damned to a party obsessed with power... and horrified by the loss of it. Truer scoundrels have scant been observed in any era of American politics; and there have been both pitiful and plenty. In another perverse twist of semantics (from the experts in epistemoligical burlesque), somehow now 8 blue votes 'count' more than 261 previous red votes. And with that favorable pass, Democrats claim decisive victory. Like Horton picking clover to find the tiny voices left lonely and unrecognized on a speck of dust in the prairie of ballots, Washington Democrats spent the last month on their knees culling the fields of King County squeals for the one 'Yop' that will be heard by a kangaroo press...

... thus certifying their official 'Who!'

UPDATE: 12.22.04:14:01
AP is reporting:

OLYMPIA, Wash. - Washington state's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that hundreds of belatedly discovered ballots from Seattle's King County should be counted in the extraordinarily close governor's race — potentially enough to tip the balance in favor of Democrat Christine Gregoire.
And the Roo in their pouch said, "Me too!" And they boiled the rest of Whoville's voters, and the Elephant in Beezlenut oil afterall.

Tuesday, December 14, 2004

Merit Badge of Tolerance...


The Constitution of The United States - Amendment 1:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

In Portland,the Boy Scouts have been targeted for termination. Due to legal threats from the ACLU on behalf of the parents of athiest and homosexual students, the Portland School Board plans to ban all activities involving The Boy Scouts of America from its property and jurisdiction. For an organization that thrives by nature of its affiliation with school-age children, marginalization to the private realm assures their deterioration to insignificance in this community. The Boy Scouts will join a growing list of ideas, groups, and institutions deemed 'unnacceptable' among the annointed enlightened bureaucratic aristocracy of public education, and thereby subject to expulsion.

AP reports:

Under pressure from gay and atheist parents, Portland school officials are considering a policy that would ban the Boy Scouts of America from recruiting students during school hours.

Under the proposal, non-school groups would be allowed to send literature home with children, but the flier or pamphlet would need to be accompanied with a disclaimer, warning parents that the groups' values may be offensive.

"From time to time, you may receive materials from a group that holds values that may offend some of our families," the draft disclaimer says.

At a public hearing Wednesday, gay and atheist parents called the policy a step in the right direction but said that it falls short of protecting their children from discrimination.

Discrimination... notable use of that word, is it not? Among it, tolerance, diversity, open-mindedness have become the catch phrases of a generation... that has obviously forgotten (or maybe has never known) what they mean. Today the very people who petition the loudest for thoughtful consideration are quickest to deny it to others. Denial becomes venom if others follow a traditional avenue of value-based judgments in their lives. The Boy Scouts happen to be the latest target du jour of Portland's brand of 'progressive tolerance'.

Attacks on the BSA are hardly new. For years, the ACLU and certain
predictable communities have been hacking away at the group's resources (by litigation), their reputation (by inference) , their participation (by legal exclusion), and ultimately their patronage (by marginalization). The group is fighting a near hopeless battle now for survival in an era where its principals, albeit noble, are of as much value as the fundamentals of liberty that have been perverted to redefine the nature of virtue in America.

Hans Zeiger at WorldNetDaily notes that Portland Schools are relenting after spending the last seven years defending inclusion. After judgments in similar cases and bowing to increased pressure,
The Portland School Board in Oregon has announced a proposed policy that discriminates against the Boy Scouts by banning the character development organization from recruiting students in Portland schools. The proposed policy would prohibit non-profit organizations like the Scouts, Little League, and the local parks and recreation department from distributing literature or recruiting during school hours. It is the latest blow against the embattled Boy Scouts.

But, one must ask if the change in policy is as much a surrender of principle as it is a relenting to a dominant progressive sensibility (a shift of consensual opinion) in a city with a giant bare 'holiday' tree standing amidst a sterilized season of meaningless celebration, where the fear of an angel, a star, or an unwanted infant might cause a collective conniption fit from the worshippers of secular ignorance. The desire to reject meaning (and consequence) has become fanatic among the worshippers of progressive sensibility. Clearly there is an ongoing effort by the 'progressive' Left to expunge any and all sources of judgment from their midst. The BSA is an American Institution that promotes goodness through moral principle. Note that there is no challenge of the organization regarding its actions or its mission. It is being attacked singularly on the basis of its values and their basis.

Let's look at what is the The Boy Scouts of America. By its own definition:

The Boy Scouts of America is the nation's foremost youth program of character development and values-based leadership training.

In the future Scouting will continue to offer young people responsible fun and adventure; instill in young people lifetime values and develop in them ethical character as expressed in the Scout Oath and Law; train young people in citizenship, service, and leadership; serve America's communities and families with its quality, values-based program.

Scout Oath
On my honor I will do my bestTo do my duty to God and my countryand to obey the Scout Law;To help other people at all times;To keep myself physically strong,mentally awake, and morally straight.
Scout Law
A Scout is: Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean, Reverent

Of all those things, the inclusion of one word - establishing the basis of their moral principle -is the cause for profound offense as noted by the AP report:

The Boy Scout oath requires members to "affirm a duty to God" and calls for scouts to keep themselves "morally straight" -- values which gay parents and atheists say are inherently discriminatory.

Boy Scout officials said that all children and parents are welcome to participate in their organization, so long as they do not advertise or proclaim their sexual orientation or differing religious views.

If the so-called 'Separation of Church and State' is the proclaimed concern of some parents in their ongoing crusade to exorcise all facets of judeo-christian philosophy from the civic realm, then it is important to reflect on the meaning and purpose of the Establishment Clause instituted by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The website, Exploring Constitutional Conflicts has a good analysis of the issue :

At an absolute minimum, the Establishment Clause was intended to prohibit the federal government from declaring and financially supporting a national religion, such as existed in many other countries at the time of the nation's founding. It is far less clear whether the Establishment Clause was also intended to prevent the federal government from supporting Christianity in general. Proponents of a narrow interpretation of the clause point out that the same First Congress that proposed the Bill of Rights also opened its legislative day with prayer and voted to apportion federal dollars to establish Christian missions in the Indian lands. On the other hand, persons seeing a far broader meaning in the clause point to writings by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison suggesting the need to establish "a wall of separation" between church and state.
The question of religion itself was outlined by Judge Adams of the Third Circuit. He applied these three criteria before answering the question in the affirmative:

1. A religion deals with issues of ultimate concern; with what makes life worth living; with basic attitudes toward fundamental problems of human existence.

2. A religion presents a comprehensive set of ideas--usually as "truth," not just theory.

3. A religion generally has surface signs (such as clergy, observed holidays, and ritual) that can be analogized to well-recognized religions

The Establishment Clause is understood to prevent Civic institutions from being controlled by aspects of faith as embraced by the Church or any other conceptual establishment. It likewise protects private groups and individuals from being compelled by the force of government to adopt a specfic set of beliefs. Religion being a comprehensive set of ideas concerned with fundamental issues of human existence, one might argue that the BSA is actually the subject of discrimination. The BSA is being unfairly targeted for its beliefs and denied fair consideration with regard to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution at the hands of a religion of fanatic humanists embracing secular pragmatism using the power of the Judiciary to manifest its will.

Do these self-annointed 'progressives' really fear discrimination from groups like the BSA? Or are they so baracaded by their own philosophic contradictions that any manifestation of values threatens to render the horrible conviction of judgment on their existence? Prejudice being an irrational hatred of that which is feared, then clearly the subject of prejudice (hatred and intolerance) is the BSA, while objects of intolerance are those groups who would have them aborted from their realm of perception. This begs additional inquiry: Do those organizations that fear and hate the BSA, really have a problem with the value-based organization? Or is it the fear and hatred of actual values that makes them simply despise the reality of the BSA's existence? Do they in fact fear reality?

A world of co-existing contradictions is a delusion. But, remove the acknowledgment of an unwanted contradiction, and existence can be maintain. The delusion, however still exists... as does the status of the deluded. A tree that falls in the forest does so whether or not anyone is around to acknowledge it. And the ideas embraced by the BSA will likewise remain regardless of their presence among the students in Portland public schools even as the Boy Scouts - with Christmas, the Commandments, and the Salvation Army - are burned like books on a proverbial pyre fueled by the victims of liberal tolerance.

Exploring Constitutional Conflicts
Establishment Clause
Boy Scouts in danger in Portland!
School officials consider ban on Boy Scout recruiting
5. Free Republic: Here, Here

Wednesday, December 08, 2004

The War We Have...


"You go to war with the Army you have," not the one you might want, was the retort of Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld as reported by CNN to questioning by troops after a morning conference at Camp Buehring, Kuwait . This particular inquiry (as reported by the AP), presented by Thomas Wilson of the 278th Regimental Combat Team concerned the logistics of combat:

"Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to uparmor our vehicles?" Wilson asked. "We do not have proper armored vehicles to carry with us north," Wilson went on.
CNN further reports that: 'A big cheer arose from the approximately 2,300 soldiers in the cavernous hangar who assembled to see and hear the secretary of defense.'

Rumsfeld replied that, "You go to war with the Army you have..."

The original AP story includes more of the Secretary's response,

Rumsfeld replied that troops should make the best of the conditions they face and said the Army was pushing manufacturers of vehicle armor to produce it as fast as humanly possible...

...the defense chief added, armor is not always a savior in the kind of combat U.S. troops face in Iraq, where the insurgents' weapon of choice is the roadside bomb, or improvised explosive device that has killed and maimed hundreds, if not thousands, of American troops since the summer of 2003.

"You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up," Rumsfeld said.

The wisdom of the Secretary captured in this one notable response, underscores our great fortune to have men of substance, candor, and character in the Pentagon and the White House at a time when the nation is in dire need of great Men and Women, not infants and adolescents pandering to consensual emotions and soundbites.

The war we have, is one christened with the murder of some 3000 civilians. The war we have, was pre-staged by decades of diplomatic incompetence, and international malfeasance (see Wrethcard's post) . The war we have, is one being fought with a defense budget that is a fraction of the federal education budget, despite a Constitution that expressly outlines the duty of the federal government to, "provide for the common defense," first, and "promote the general welfare," next.

I sincerely respect the concerns of troops in the field that know first-hand the hardships and challenges of the combat environment. I further applaud their ability to improvise and overcome adversity, as they have done in all wars. In the Spanish American War, more troops died of food poisoning than from being shot (
reference). As many recalled yesterday, the most armored ogres of war, were shattered like butterfly wings by the bombs and torpedoes of a surprise assault at Pearl Harbor. Those that survived, dug out of and through the wreckage and overcame assured defeat to prevail.

That being said, I would gladly give those men and women on the frontier anything I could muster to get them more of the items that will both protect them and improve their capability; even as the county in which I live extracts duplicating
income taxes to ostensibly amend the exhorbitant amounts wasted on a failing education system. Note that Oregon Congressmen are not pleading for budget shifts to their National Guard contingent to pay for armor. At the same time, do let's remember that this IS a new kind of War, begun with an attack on the homeland, by terrorists and their State sponsors that recognize no difference between an armored soldier and naked civilians. One they shoot. The other they behead. And they would just as soon bomb a Humvee with an IED as they would set off a backpack loaded with C4, shrapnel, and rat poison in my Metro bus which is also not armored. Likewise, they might simply infect a few of their loyal sappers with Small Pox and send them into my midst. I have no armor from that. Or they may just set off a cannister of ricin or sarin in the museum I visit with my family. God only hopes we can reach the gasmasks we purchased off Ebay (and carry for that one possible and horrific contigency) in time to improve our personal protection from attack. We are all fighting this war you see. And we are all improvising and overcoming the horrors that we did not invite upon ourselves, but nevertheless have to deal with on a daily basis.

The war we want, is not a jigged video game where we have an unlimited
Halo of power, armor, and weapons. The war We want, is no war at all.

If only the enemies of Man, shared that desire... or the champions of stupidity understood the stakes.

UPDATE: 12.08.04:19:51
A cursory review of my blogroll yields scant discussion of this topic. There is an ongoing thread at Free Republic with some decent feedback. Kevin C. at Sgt Stryker has a slightly different take on this issue from my own. And while I don't disagree with his initial point, I would challenge the argument that we are conducting this war "on the cheap." The budgetary implications of 8 years of Clinton, and another 4 years of moral conflict and virtually parallyzing political division have manifested domestic challenges nearly as formidable as the physical resistance of an elusive enemy. And yet we have prevailed astoundingly in three years of war with fewer casualties than that of the first 3 hours of World War II, and nearly half that of the first 90 minutes of World War IV. Victor Davis Hanson's latest arcticle at NRO puts this all in very clear perspective. A new mandate was established on November 2nd that changes the equation. Fallujah was the first step since. January's elections will be another. Nevertheless, Iraq is but one battle in a long conflict. Hanson sums it up best,

There may well be even more terrible things to come in Iraq than what we have seen already, but there will also be far better things than were there before. And there will come a time, when all those who slandered the efforts — the Germans, the French, the American radical Left, the vicious Michael "Minutemen" Moore, the pampered and coddled Hollywood elite, the Arab League, and the U.N. will assume that Iraq is a "good thing" like Afghanistan, and that democracy there really was preferable — after they had so bravely weighed in with their requisite "ifs" and "buts" — to the mass murders of Saddam Hussein. Yes, they will say all this, but it will be for the rest of us to remember how it all came about and what those forgotten soldiers and people of Iraq went through to get it — lest we forget, lest we forget...

The War we have been delivered will be resolved in the manner we see fit, and as we choose. It is ours to lose.

UPDATE: 12.09.04:06:15
Matthew H. weighs in with good insight at Froggy Ruminations. Likewise, I would not begin to question the Sgt.'s criticism. But, the War we have is being engaged at many levels. While being overly concerned about arming his rear, this Guardsman's criticisms amplified through a hostile media, may encourage a dozen new insurgents to put his face in the sights of their weapons... and a few more IED's along the road to victory.

Also, Check out 2Slick's Forum for an extensive first-hand discussion of this issue. Good Stuff.

UPDATE: 12.09.04:09:38
Drudge is reporting, RUMSFELD SET UP; REPORTER PLANTED QUESTIONS WITH SOLDIER. Embedded reporter, Edward Lee Pitts of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, manipulated the questions and the questioning ensuring that HIS question would be asked via Guardsman Wilson. Are we surprised?

UPDATE: 12.09.04:21:39
Closing my final thoughts on this subject as I walked the blacksheepdog, it occurred to me tonight that the MSM never questioned the armaments of Marine equipment after the ambush in Somalia - the infamous Black Hawk Down incident. Few questions were levelled by reporters at the Clinton Administration for denying troops armored support during that deployment. Democrats in Congress did not demand the resignation nor even accountability of Clinton's SECDEF. When did Les Aspin or William Cohen ever face the troops for candid inquisition? In the years after, how many stories were written by Mr. Pitts or his colleagues demanding logistical upgrades for the U.S. Military or increases in defense spending? Only when it came to the protection of his own arse, and the furthering of his particular agendas, did Mr. Pitts feign any solidarity with his benefactors, even as he manipulated their real concerns. Do let's see now, if the journalists will defend increases in the Defense budget and tolerate the necessary wartime deficits needed to fight an extended war for our very survival. Or is this another fickle finger flipped at the defenders of freedom for engaging in the unnecessary agression of what the Left believes to be Bush's War for oil. For additonal insight, check out the perspective of one who actually attended yesterday's session with Rumsfeld over at Missick (Hat Tip Blackfive).

To all those good Men and Women standing tonight on the frontiers of chaos on my behalf, I say... Thank you. If I have it and you need it, its yours.

Saturday, December 04, 2004

The Groningen Corollary...


Pastor Niemoeller was a victim of the Nazis. His famous quote reads as follows:

First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me - and their was no one left to speak for me.

After a brief respite from external reality attending to personal matters, nothing jolts one back to blogosphere like the knowledge that Western Civilization is crumbling around us. Some physical traits are genetically recessive. So to, it seems that both stupidity and insanity are recessive among generations of humanity. Little more than 70 years ago, one of the most progressive nations on the planet pursued a ‘just’ system of genetic filtration in league with an alliance for world domination. What evolved was the greatest nightmare the world has yet known, as millions of men, woman, and children were terminated in line with a protocol of enlightened hubris.

As with any inverted philosophy ( conceptualizations of existence that begin with ‘I think’ before ‘I am’), Nazism sought to focus on manifesting a reality to fit its perception, even if that meant irradicating all ‘inconsistent’ perceptions. The primacy of life being the most fundamental precept, it was naturally the first to go by way of incremental devaluation. Ultimately there was a rationalization that... its not alive if we don’t think its alive. That concept lends itself quite easily to a judgment of... its not alive if we don’t want it to be alive. Sound familiar? It should. The American Left has been paving a similar road with regard to human conception and moral relativism. But, it is their mentors in progressive Europe that have taken the logical and subsequent step in line with those beliefs, adopting a new name for an old atrocity…
The Groningen Protocol.

"Death by Committee" (as Hugh Hewitt notes) has become the practice of at least one hospital in the Netherlands. Selective euthenasia is being administered to "very sad cases" meant to aleviate " the small number of infants born with such severe disabilities that doctors can see they have extreme pain and no hope for life." And while "the protocol is likely to be used primarily for newborns, ... it covers any child up to age 12." These are the reported words of a Groningen Hospital spokesman who went on to note that, the "parent's role is limited under the protocol. While experts and critics familiar with the policy said a parent's wishes to let a child live or die naturally most likely would be considered, they note that the decision must be professional, so rests with doctors."

With the parent's role limited and the individual's choice forfeit, the Committee has thereby assumed complete authority over those subject to its jurisdiction. Given the choice of care, avoidance of the Groningen Academic Hospital would clearly be warranted. And yet the government's legalization of adult euthanasia and refusal to prosecute ongoing infant 'terminations' has institutionalized the practice of managed murder. Other hospitals have followed suit, ensuring eventual consensus. In a State with socialized healthcare, the choice to avoid exposure to the protocol under such conditions would seem remote. Agape Press reports that Dutch residents have begun wearing bracelets informing doctors of their request not to be euthanized in the event of a serious injury, for whatever influence that will have with the 'Protocol Committees.' It is clear that people in Holland, therefore, exist by the leave of their government, in league with its compassion tempered by convenience... at the mercy of elites and bureaucrats and conditional imperatives. Other nations are sure to follow.

Bill R. has a comprehensive discussion of this issue at the Fourth Rail that is a must read. The Dutch protocol - as morally depraved as it is - has an even more insidious corollary. When those charged with the responsibility for the maintenance of life, become the 'arbiters' of death, a moral contradiction is introduced within the relationship that undermines human respect. Existence is no longer a fundamental individual condition, but is reduced to a valuation of choices in social context. When a government sanctions the action, that contradiction is manifested in law. The notion of justice abandons inalienable precepts in favor of preferential necessity.

Matthew H. at Froggy Ruminations notes the dangers inherent with the prospects of increasing nationalization of healthcare systems as it relates to managed euthenasia. While compassionate intentions may seem a noble origin for progressive solutions, bureacratization begets corruption. And the suspension of ethical constraints is an invitation for accelerated degeneration. This fact can be witnessed in every type of bureacratic system; from legislating, to education, judicial activism, and even the United Nations. In the beginning, managed euthenasia may be guided by commisserate intent to relieve the suffering. Later, children may be culled by progressive environmental policy and racial parity. One community might be deemed to have too many caucasian children for the desired demographic, while another may have exceeded it's population quota as established by amendments to the Environmental Protection Act.

"I'm sorry Mr. and Mrs. Jones, but your baby girl was terminated after birth because infant 100 was born seven minutes before her. It is the law. The decision was out of my hands." ...What if?

To date, the ostensible ramifications of modern Socialism and its collective co-dependence have been limited to dimishing quality and monetary sacrifice. Ayn Rand once argued that there was no difference between a man's money and his life; the ownership of the product of one's mind and its efforts being a fundamental imperative of freedom. Her prescience is being demonstrated now with profound ratification. The thugs of Europe have abandoned the robber's request of "your money or your life" for a despotic declaration of "your money and your life." Moral principle was the first casualty when secular humanism replaced ethics. Man himself is its final sacrifice.

One might think that none would be more vigilant against brutality than the Dutch. Afterall, it was the written log of a young, frightened, yet hopeful girl, hiding with her family for years in an Amsterdam attic that has come to immortalize the extreme consequences of moral contradiction.
Anne Frank did not survive that previous protocol. Let’s hope that it won’t take the posthumous record of frightened families hiding their children in attics and giving birth in sewers to finally put to rest the notion that life and freedom is bestowed by the consent of men.

Perspective: From the perspective of one who just welcomed a new son into the world, the idea that some other entity might take command of that sitution is both horrifying and infuriating, Even with medical science as it stands, there are no assurances during a delivery. Any of a number of factors can command the situaion toward a tragic solution. The greater fear by far (next to the ultimate loss) is extreme birth defect. No one can be certain of their reaction in that situation. But it is both one's right and responsibility to attend those decisions and acccept their consequences. No committee has the moral authoriy to bestow life or rights nor should they be relinquished the decisions that humans must make in their pursuit of sentience and wisdom. In the confusion and misery of a moment, humanity can be lost... and three lives destroyed. If existence by committee is to be the legacy of Mankind, then the silence of our lambs today may yield the soylents of necessity tomorrow.

UPDATE: 12.11.04:07:21

The blogosphere will continue to stir the issue surrounding the Groningen Protocol and its moral implications: Professor Bainbridge, Got Design, E-Nough, Hugh Hewitt, OKIE on the Lam-in LA, Evangelical Outpost, Brain Shavings (has a great index for links on this story), Pseudo-Polymath, ProLifeBlogs, The Write Wing Conspiracy

And media links: CNN:Dutch ponder 'mercy killing' rules, WS:Now They Want to Euthanize Children...