Get d'Clu

Get a clue & wake up! The best way to lead a nation astray of its values is to keep it ignorant of its history.

Usurpation of Parental Rights, Again

The Obama administration is allowing the courts to attack homeschooling families, as reported in today’s Washington Times (hat tip James Koerner).  Apparently the dispute came to light because the couple is divorced, and the Father is disgruntled enough with the Mother to hurt the daughter’s education.  Thankfully, Mom turned to the ADL for help and they will turn it around.

Home-schooler ordered to attend public school
Mom’s religious views ripped by court
By Julia Duin

A New Hampshire court ordered a home-schooled Christian girl to attend a public school this week after a judge criticized the “rigidity” of her mother’s religious views and said the 10-year-old needed to consider other worldviews as she matures.

Ever since the judge’s ruling came out in July, the case has aroused the interest of home-schooling groups nationwide, who  have asked why a court has the power to decide whether someone’s religious views are too extreme (emphasis mine & throughout).

The girl’s mother, Brenda Voydatch, has engaged the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal group based in Scottsdale, Ariz., to contest the ruling, in which the judge granted a request by the girl’s father, Martin Kurowski, that the girl go to a public school.

On Tuesday, the girl, Amanda Kurowski, started fifth grade at an elementary school in Meredith, N.H., under court order. Amanda’s “vigorous defense of her religious beliefs … suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view,” District Court Judge Lucinda V. Sadler said.

And why exactly does the court feel the need to regulate the “opportunity to see other points of view”???  Are they now the purveyors of right-thought and the holders of the moral code by which we judge all political correctness?  God help us all.  This might be an excellent time to donate to the ADL.

Other ADL suits of interest:

  International Law in American CourtsThere is cause for serious concern about the future of America’s national sovereignty and our religious liberty. – 7k – 7/14/2009


  ADF seeks to challenge order requiring FDA to disregard parental rightsAlliance Defense Fund attorneys together with attorney Charles Holster of Mineola have filed a motion to intervene to challenge a federal court order that requires the Food and Drug Administration to allow the Plan B drug, which many doctors believe can cause an abortion, to be sold over the counter to minors. The motion was filed on behalf of Concerned Women for America, the Christian Medical and Dental Association, and Christian Pharmacists Fellowship International, who contend that the order disregards parental rights and the safety of minors. – 3k – 6/29/2009

What’s Left of the Constitution?

“What’s Left of the Constitution?” is a periodic news digest featuring Alliance Defense Fund legal analysis of proposals, policies, and trends advanced by the federal government.  On a regular basis, this digest specifically highlights policies and actions that move America away from the principles of the U.S. Constitution and closer to the demands of the political Left, especially ones that threaten religious liberty, the sanctity of life, and marriage and the family. – 9k – 3/13/2009



September 4, 2009 Posted by | 1st Amendment, Agenda of the Left, Christian, Culture, Family, Govt Oppression, Leftists Criticize Conservatives, Political Correctness, Politics, Wake Up, WordPress Political Blogs | , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sept. 8 Is National Skip School for Freedom Day

At issue was an announcement that Obama plans to deliver a message directly to students via the Internet into public school classrooms across the nation on Sept. 8.

According to announcement posted on, Obama will address students “about the importance of persisting and succeeding in school” at 1 p.m. Eastern at the website.

‘President doesn’t get to speak to my children unchallenged’

“Now the former community organizer and current president of the United States is making an unprecedented speech to the school children of our nation. I’d like to believe his motives were pure and politics didn’t play into this. But viewing this administration’s track record doesn’t afford such benefit of the doubt.

“When the president browbeats property owners who want to protect their legal rights… when the president admits he doesn’t know the facts but impugns the integrity of a police force… when the president calls me a liar for reporting what is actually in the health care bills and encourages my neighbors to report me to some enemies list… when the president apologizes to nations around the world and bows to a Saudi king… he loses the benefit of the doubt,” the blogger wrote.

“Without benefit of the doubt, the president doesn’t get to speak to my children unchallenged,” the writer said.

“My kids will be forced to listen to the views of a president that is perhaps the most anti-American in history, not to mention one who believes we need a ‘civilian national security force just as strong, powerful and well-funded as our military.'”

WND has reported on Obama’s civilian force plans several times, including when he signed into law the “Give Act,” H.R. 1388, which massively expanded the National Service Corporation and allocated to it billions of dollars.

Obama had told a campaign stop in Colorado Springs last year he wants a “Civilian National Security Force” as big and as well-funded as the U.S. military.

Robert Stacy McCain writes today in the AmSpecBlog that the kiddos can have their day off school with good reason!  

Michelle Malkin issues a hallway pass so your kid can cut class during the Obama Mass Indoctrination on Tuesday.

hallpass from Obama speech

Rather than merely skipping just that one period, however, Steve “VodkaPundit” Green advocates ditching the whole day — an idea endorsed by a new ad hoc organization, Hoodlums for Homeschooling. Somehow, I suspect even Ferris Bueller’s teacher might approve of this plan. 

Laughs aside, I don’t care that the Prez is giving a service speech to the children.  What I care about is that

  1. I don’t know the content ahead of time,
  2. Most parents won’t be able to be in the classroom at the time of the ‘showing,’
  3. I don’t want any leader telling my child to stay in school like he’s his Father, because he’s not.  Neither is he the ruler of all that is just and fair…….

But do we really need to add to the already inflated sense of the president of the United States as our national daddy?  The man’s in charge of one branch of the federal government; he’s not king (emphasis mine)…

MichaelW thinks the whole thing is “creepy” and says it’s different than what Republican presidents have done.  For example, Bush 41 was telling kids to stay off drugs.  He sees a more nefarious agenda from Obama:

President Obama has already shown that he’s not above using children to advance his political agenda, so it’s not surprising that those opposed to his aims would be a bit skeptical of his speech. Adding to the wariness is the fact that he only seems to make these speeches when he needs help with bolstering his political capital (e.g. the “race speech” after Jeremiah Wright blew up in his face). After the battering his health care insurance reform plans took in August, it almost seems too convenient that he would suddenly want to address all the school kids in the nation, right about when he’s planning to try and save the one program he truly wants to enact.


September 3, 2009 Posted by | Agenda of the Left, Culture, Family, Life with Big Brother, Wake Up, WordPress Political Blogs | , , , | Leave a comment

What Obama Said to SEIU

Finally, the entire video and the whole quote in context.  Check out Philip Klein’s post from American Spectator.  This shows the President’s and the Democrats’ desire to change the structure of the system.  Bankrupt capitalism, increase unemployment to double digits, increase worry about health care coverage — what a lead-in to total control of people’s personal lives.

Drudge has been pumping up a video purporting to show Obama in March 2007 telling the SEIU that his health care plan would eliminate private health coverage. I haven’t blogged about it at this point because the video only excerpted a short clip, and I didn’t want to pass judgment until I heard the full context of his quote. I was able to track down the full video of his question and answer session, and wanted to set the record straight about what Obama did and didn’t say. Let me start by quoting Obama’s fuller statement (bold refers to section in the Drudge-linked video):

“As I indicated before, I think we’re going to have to have some system where people can buy into a larger pool. Right now their pool is typically their employer, but there are other ways of doing it. I would hope that we could set up a system that allows those who can’t go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort. But I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There’s going to be potentially some transition process. I can envision a decade out, or 15 years out, or 20 years out, where we’ve got a much more portable system, employers still have the option of providing coverage, but many people may find that they get better coverage or at least coverage that gives them more for the health care dollars that they spend outside of their employer, and I think we’ve got to facilitate that and let individuals make that choice to transition out of employer coverage. I do believe that employers are going to have to pay or play. I think that employers either have to provide health care coverage for their employees, or they’ve got to make a decision that they’re going to help pay for those who don’t have coverage outside the employer system, so I think that’s one important principle.”

(Video below, relevant section begins around the 1:25 minute mark.)

Some background. There are health care policy experts on both the left and right who agree that the employer-based insurance system is problematic because people can’t take their health insurance from job to job and losing a job can often mean losing one’s health coverage. But these experts offer drastically different remedies. Advocates of a free market system argue for changing the tax code that currently discriminates against those purchasing insurance on their own to the advantage of those purchasing insurance through their employers. Such a change would not only address the portability issue, but also give people an incentive to search for better deals, since they’d be paying rather than their employers. But liberals argue, fundamentally, that there can’t be a functional market for individual insurance because in order to get a good deal on insurance a person needs to be part of a larger pool, typically either an employer or the government. And this is the point Obama is trying to make. 

In the video, when Obama talks about creating a different sort of pool, he’s referring to what is now being described as a government insurance exchange, along the lines of what they have in Massachusetts. What he’s saying is that he wants to give people the option of either getting insurance through their employers, or through the government exchange.  Over time, he says, he can see that leading to a system in which most (if not all) people buy their health insurance at a government store instead of through their employers. Would this be the same as eliminating private insurance? Not technically, since private insurers could do business through the exchange. But at the same time, all of the private insurers would be subject to much more government control, and if Obama gets his way, they’d have to go up against a new government-run plan that would also be offered on the exchange.

It’s important to note that these comments were made just two months after Obama announced he was going to run for president, and before he even had a formal plan. Now we have actual bills to look at and thus can see how they stack up against what he talked about in the March 2007 remarks.

On one hand, the House Democrats’ bill, once implemented, would not allow individuals to purchase insurance outside of a government store. (More detail here). On the other hand, much to the chagrin of liberals, the Democratic bills also restrict the ability of an individual already covered by his or her employer to opt out of that plan and purchase health insurance through the government exchange. In other words, one provision would accelerate the number of people who buy their insurance through government, while the other would place limitations on it.

The Drudge-linked video also includes the 2003 clip of Obama arguing that he favors a single-payer health care system to the AFL-CIO, as well as clips of Democratic Reps. Barney Frank and Jan Schakowsky arguing that offering a government-run plan (or “public option”) will lead to single-payer over time. Taken together, I think this highlights Democratic double-talk on health care. When speaking to liberal audiences who want a single-payer system, Democrats will argue to them that offering a government-run plan within a government-run exchange is the politically pragmatic way of getting to a single-payer system over time. But when addressing the general public, they talk about the government plan merely as something that will provide people with “choice” and foster “competition.” They don’t get to have it both ways.

Reprinted from

August 4, 2009 Posted by | (Definitely Not) Free Markets, (Un)Limited Government, Agenda of the Left, Fiscal (Ir)Responsibility, Politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

One Reason is enough to reject Obamacare

A friend had emailed this list to me yesterday, but it was garbled and the formatting was messed up somehow.  Then I found Steve’s site and he had it at the bottom of his page.  Giving him full credit, a two links and a ping, I hope he’ll allow the reprint.  If this isn’t a Huxley flashback, I surely don’t know what is!  (Bold emphasis mine throughout.)

52 Reasons to Reject Obamacare: 

Steve Hilton @ 7:34 PM
You are encouraged to look into these matters for yourself. This is far too important to wait for the agents of “spin” to “explain” the matter.

1.    Page 22 of the Healthcare Bill MANDATES the Government will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!

2.    Page 30 Sec 123 of Healthcare bill – THERE WILL BE A GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments and benefits you get.

3.    Page 29 lines 4-16 in the Healthcare bill – YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!!

4.    Page 42 of Healthcare Bill – The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your Healthcare Benefits for you. You will have no choice!

5.    Page 50 Section 152 in Healthcare bill – Healthcare will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.

6.    Page 58 Healthcare Bill – Government will have real-time access to an individual’s finances and a National ID Healthcare Card will be issued!

7.    Page 59 Healthcare Bill lines 21-24 Government will have direct access to your bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.

8.    Page 65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions and “community organizations” such as ACORN.

9.    Page 72 Lines 8-14 Government is creating another “agency”, the Healthcare Exchange to bring private heathcare plans under government control.

10.    Page 84 Sec 203 Healthcare bill – Government mandates ALL benefit packages for private healthcare plans in the Exchange.

11.    Page 85 Line 7 Healthcare Bill – There will be specs regarding benefit levels for Plans: another way in which the Government will ration your healthcare.

12.    Page  91 Lines 4-7 Healthcare Bill – Government mandates “linguistic appropriate services”. Translation – Spanish or other languages for illegals.

13.    Page 95 Healthcare Bill Lines 8-18 The Government will use groups such as ACORN and Amiericorps to sign up individuals for the government healthcare plan.

14.    Page 85 Line 7 Healthcare Bill – A reiteration of the specs regarding benefit levels for Plans which means, AARP members, your health care WILL be rationed no matter what you are being told now.

14.    Page 102 Lines 12-18 Healthcare Bill – Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicare; you will have no choice regarding that enrollment.

16.    Page 124 lines 24-25 Healthcare No company can sue the government on a charge of price fixing. No “judicial review” will be permitted against a government monopoly.

17.    Page 127 Lines 1-16 Healthcare Bill – Doctors:  The Government will tell YOU what you can make.

18.    Page 145 Line 15-17 An Employer must automatically enroll employees into the public option plan; there is NO CHOICE. However, this plan is so convoluted that obviously there must be someway this can be avoided (see #s 20 and 21: the mandated payroll taxes for employers who do NOT off the public option); this is an apparent contradiction, but this is what the bill says.

19.    Page 126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for healthcare for part time employees AND their families.

20.    Page 149 Lines 16-24 ANY employer with a payroll of 400k and above who does not provide the public option must pay an 8% payroll tax (see # 18 above).

21.    Page 150 Lines 9-13 Businesses with a payroll between 251k & 400k who don’t provide the public option will pay 2-6% tax on all payrolls (see #18 above).

22.    Page 167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesn’t have acceptable healthcare according to the government will be taxed 2.5% of his income.

23.    Page 170 Lines 1-3 Healthcare Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes but Americans will pay.

24.    Page 195 Healthcare Bill – officers & employees of Healthcare Administration (Government) will have access to the financial records of ALL Americans.

25.    PAGE 203 Line 14-15 Healthcare – “The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax” Yes, it says that!

26.    Page 239 Line 14-24 Healthcare Bill Government will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income and poor affected.

27.    Page 241 Line 6-8 Healthcare Bill – Doctors, it doesn’t matter what your specialty is, you will all be paid the same.

28.    Page 253 Line 10-18 Government sets value of doctor’s time, professional judgment, experience etc. Literally, the government will be setting the value on human life.

29.    Page 265 Sec 1131Government mandates & controls productivity for private healthcare industries.

30.    Page 268 Sec 1141 Fed Government regulates rental & purchase of power drive wheelchairs, scooters etc.

31.    Page 272 Sec. 1145. Treatment at certain cancer hospitals – Cancer patients, welcome to rationing!

32.    Page 280 Sec 1151 The Government will penalize hospitals for what GOVERNMENT deems preventable re-admissions.

33.    Page 298 Lines 9-11 Doctors treating a patient during an initial admission which later results in a re-admission will be penalized by the government.

34.    Page 317 L 13-20 PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. The government will tell doctors what and how much they can own.

35.    Page 317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion. Government is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.

36.    Page 321 2-13 Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for an exception BUT “community input” is required. This opens the way to an incredible amount of extortion by “community groups” who might demand a quid pro quo from any hospital wishing to expand.

37.    Page335 L 16-25 Page 336-339 – Government mandates the establishment of outcome based measures; that means, healthcare as they want it, a/k/a rationing.

38.    Page 341 Lines 3-9 Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv. Plans, HMOs etc. thus forcing people into the government plan.

39.    Page 354 Sec 1177 – Government will RESTRICT enrollment of “special needs people” a/k/a the handicapped!! Eugenics and euthanasia become a part of medical treatment.

40.    Page 379 Sec 1191 Government creates more bureaucracy, that is the “Telehealth Advisory Committee (can you say “healthcare” by phone?).

41.    Page 425 Lines 4-12 Government mandates Advance Care Planning Consultations for Senior Citizens which in effect lets seniors know that it’s time for them to die and get out of the way.

42.    Page 425 Lines 17-19 Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney etc. This will be MANDATORY! (So much for individual liberty and privacy!)

43.    Page  425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Government provides approved list of “end of life resources” to help guide you into death. I’m sure that “Dr.” Kevorkian will have a job with this group.

44.    Page  427 Lines 15-24 Government mandates program for orders at the end of life; the government has a say in HOW and WHEN your life will end. This is called euthanasia.

45.    Page  429 Lines 1-9 An “advanced care planning consultation will be used frequently as a patient’s health deteriorates. Again, much American health care involves people with chronic conditions but who can still have many years of productive life WITH PROPER MEDICAL CARE. If you are deemed to be unworthy of such care by virtue of criteria such as your race, gender, socio-economic condition etc., the chances are good that you will be DENIED that care and you life will end far sooner than would otherwise be the case under today’s healthcare system.

46.    Page  429 Lines 10-12 the “advanced care consultation” may include an ORDER for end of life plans – an ORDER from the GOVERNMENT. Again, we will have government ordained euthanasia – which is nothing less than legalized murder.

47.    Page  429 Lines 13-25 – The Government will specify which Doctors can write an “end of life” order. This means that the physician(s) who cared for you may not even be consulted and you will be condemned to death by some uncaring bureaucrat in Washington who knows nothing about you and your situation.

48.    Page  430 Lines 11-15 The Government will decide what level of treatment you will have at the end of your life.

49.    Page  469 – Community Based Home Medical Services regards services provided by non profit organizations like ACORN.

50.    Page 472 Lines 14-17 Dictates payment to a community based organization like ACORN for such treatment. Both the treatment and the organization are determined by the government.

51.    Page  489 Sec 1308 The Government will cover Marriage & Family therapy which means they will insert themselves into your marriage. If you are a Christian, it is possible that the government may be able to intrude into decisions made by your family as a result of your religion.

52.    Page 494-498 Government will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, and rationing those services. Again, you could be adjudged “mentally ill” if you disagree with the prevailing agenda such as homosexual rights, abortion etc.

August 1, 2009 Posted by | (Definitely Not) Free Markets, (Un)Limited Government, 1st Amendment, Agenda of the Left, Christian, Constituional Issues, Culture, Family, Fiscal (Ir)Responsibility, Politics, Wake Up | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Uh-oh Moment” on Health Care for All

It’s Not An Option

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, July 15, 2009 4:20 PM PTtoon071309 - healthcare tk a number

Congress: It didn’t take long to run into an “uh-oh” moment when reading the House’s “health care for all Americans” bill. Right there on Page 16 is a provision making individual private medical insurance illegal.

When we first saw the paragraph Tuesday, just after the 1,018-page document was released, we thought we surely must be misreading it. So we sought help from the House Ways and Means Committee.

It turns out we were right: The provision would indeed outlaw individual private coverage (emph. mine). Under the Orwellian header of “Protecting The Choice To Keep Current Coverage,” the “Limitation On New Enrollment” section of the bill clearly states:

“Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day” of the year the legislation becomes law.

So we can all keep our coverage, just as promised — with, of course, exceptions: Those who currently have private individual coverage won’t be able to change it. Nor will those who leave a company to work for themselves be free to buy individual plans from private carriers.

Washington does not have the constitutional or moral authority to outlaw private markets in which parties voluntarily participate. It shouldn’t be killing business opportunities, or limiting choices, or legislating major changes in Americans’ lives.

Read More

July 18, 2009 Posted by | (Definitely Not) Free Markets, (Un)Limited Government, Agenda of the Left, Fiscal (Ir)Responsibility, Politics, Wake Up | , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments