Daily Archives: May 2, 2009

Pro-lifers arrested for peacefully demonstrating at Notre Dame

Obama has the lowest approval rating in 40 years after 100 days

H/T to Jeremiah Films:

The Washington Times (of course; the Times is one of the things I miss about Northern Virginia) reports that, despite his support in the media, Barack Obama has the second worst approval rating in Gallup’s April survey since it started in 1969.

The only new president less popular was Bill Clinton, who got off to a notoriously bad start after trying to force homosexuals on the military and a federal raid in Waco, Texas, that killed 86. Mr. Obama’s current approval rating of 56 percent is only one tick higher than the 55-percent approval Mr. Clinton had during those crises.

As the attached chart shows, five presidents rated higher than Mr. Obama after 100 days in office. Ronald Reagan topped the charts in April 1981 with 67 percent approval. Following the Gipper, in order of popularity, were: Jimmy Carter with 63 percent in 1977; George W. Bush with 62 percent in 2001; Richard Nixon with 61 percent in 1969; and George H.W. Bush with 58 percent in 1989.

. . . Mr. Obama’s popularity after 100 days is the second-lowest for a simple reason: He is more partisan and divisive than his predecessors – including Richard Nixon.

What will happen when Doctors don’t have conscience rights

A great blog piece, by one “Suzy B”, about the lack of support special needs families get in an era when we can use genetic testing to “prevent” “defective” children by IVF and abortion contains the following bit:

Newsweek spoke to the mother of a Down Syndrome child who said that there was a strong pressure among doctors, telling her to have an abortion. One pediatrician was so bold as to say, “You should consider putting him up for adoption. You’re going to end up divorced. Don’t even bother having any other children. Didn’t you have the option to terminate?”

This disgusting sentiment is exactly what Sen. Edward Kennedy and Sen. Sam Brownback hope to change with their recently passed bill that requires doctors to tell expecting parents about medical care, services, and support available for Down Syndrome children and their families.

I keep saying it: doctors’ conscience rights are *your* conscience rights. Two years ago, when we moved to Columbia, I called around to find a pediatrician who wouldn’t force us to use tainted vaccines. Most of them said they wouldn’t allow patients to conscientiously object, even for religious reasons, because the doctors were against it.

If a patient wants to conscientiously object to some practice, then the patient needs a doctor who will permit it. If the government won’t allow doctors to make conscience decisions, doctors will force such patients to use procedures we conscientiously object to.

Also, of course, we wont’ be able to make our conscience decision of not wanting to engage in remote material cooperation by funding OB/Gyns who provide abortions.

Jon Stewart favors Nuclear War

Apparently, the other night on his show, Jon Stewart, in the heat of a debate on torture, suggested (rightly) that Harry Truman was a war criminal for his use of the atomic bomb (which annihilated the oldest Catholic community in Japan).

Reminds me of high school . . . .

When I successfully applied to college in 11th grade, my school didn’t know what to do with me. The top students in the senior class, who were my friends, were already in a heated competition for class rank . They admitted I was the smartest kid in the school and had the best scores. The school board and the senior class both voted on the subject and said I could graduate as “#1 of a class of 1”, rather than graduating with the seniors . I’ve always said “I dropped out of high school and went to college,” because that’s basically what I did. Whether they graduated me or not, I was going.

Well, it turns out that some of the Democrats, for similar reasons aren’t too happy about Arlen Specter’s party switch. He has such seniority in the Senate that he will potentially knock several committee positoins around. Meanwhile, Jill Stanek suggests that Specter may also throw off a potential Supreme Court Nominee. Her argument: Specter is currently ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, and the ranking minority party member has a certain “veto power.” So if the Republicans replace Specter with a more pro-life member on the Judiciary Committee, then that person could have power to stop any Obama nominee.

I would also hope that Specter the “moderate” would at least favor Republican values in some way (e.g., he said in Bush’s nomination battles that he wanted justices who were constitutional originalists, regardless of an agenda on abortion).