Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Michelle Obama – The Fat and the Furious…

What the First Lady eats or doesn’t eat would normally not be an issue worthy of much attention if not for the fact she has clearly linked her national campaign against obesity with her husband’s freedom-breaking Obamacare initiative that has doctors looking over their shoulders awaiting government approval over what procedures can and cannot be performed on their patients and parents looking over their shoulders wondering what they can and cannot feed their own children.

In recent days, we have learned Michelle Obama has successfully convinced Mars Candy to make smaller candy bars. Prior to this the First Lady has been aggressively working to reform school lunch programs with a veiled threat of loss of federal dollars to school districts who don’t comply with her demands. This environment has led to schools actually spending time monitoring not just student lunches – but lunches brought from home. This has even led to some schools initiating bans on lunches made by good old Mom – no more brown bagging it for school kids in the healthy at all costs age of Michelle Obama. Further influence by the Obama government has been brought down upon the heads of the restaurant industry to make their menu options “healthier”.

But what of Michelle Obama herself? A just released report of yet another recent lavish White House party reveals the First Couple devouring a smorgasbord of high calorie food that is in direct contrast to the First Lady’s public campaign of healthier eating. Such “do as I say not as I do” stories have become increasingly common of late – but here’s another menu list to prove yet again the repeated hypocrisy of the people currently inhabiting the White House:

White wine

Bread and butter

Crab mac and cheese

Ribeye steak 12oz

Creamed spinach

Garden salad

Pear tart with ice cream

Ribeye steak 12oz

Creamed spinach

Garden salad

Pear tart with ice cream

It all sounds quite delicious – though hardly a menu that lends any semblance of credibility to Michelle Obama’s goal of forcing Americans to shape up. Apparently she is pleased enough with her own shape to continue eating away at that steak, butter, and crab mac and cheese – with a bit of ice cream to wash it all down at the end.

It all fits so well with what the Obama administration has been spoon – feeding America from the moment it took office…BULLSH-T.

Source:  The Ulsterman Report

Related: The Obamas… “Let Them Eat Cake” or Is That Drink Tea? – Updated

Vaccination rights attorney Patricia Finn threatened with criminal charges; New York State demands she surrender names of all clients

k2239119[1](NaturalNews) Vaccine rights attorney Patricia Finn is being targeted by the Ninth Judicial District of New York State, which has threatened to strip her of her license to practice law and even file criminal charges against her. Finn is one of several "vaccine rights" attorneys across America who helps parents assert their rights to protect their children from potentially deadly vaccines. She's considered a hero by many, but a villain by the status quo for daring to stand up against the vaccine-pimping medical police state that exists in America today.

I personally interviewed Patricia Finn for InfoWars Nightly News last night (February 27, 2012), and during that interview I saw and read the documents that contain the charges being leveled against her. PrisonPlanet.TV subscribers can watch the video at www.PrisonPlanet.TV

One document described her vaccine rights advocacy as "threatening the public interest," asserting that her helping parents legally and ethically avoid toxic vaccines somehow puts the public at risk. This accusation makes absolutely no logical sense, of course, given that even the vaccine pushers claim their vaccines offer absolute and total immunity against infectious disease. Therefore, how can an unvaccinated child ever threaten the health of a vaccinated child?

New York demands Patricia Finn surrender her list of clients

Perhaps even more alarmingly, a letter outlining the various charges against Patricia Finn included the demand that she immediately surrender her complete list of clients to the judiciary. When I saw this, it immediately set off alarm bells. This is not merely a gross violation of attorney/client privilege; it's also a thinly-veiled attempt for the New York judiciary to terrorize the parents who have sought legal help in opting out of dangerous vaccines.

Furthermore, it could serve as the starting point for New York State to dispatch CPS workers to the homes of all of Finn's clients, where their children might be kidnapped by CPS and sold into sex slavery (this is a common behavior of CPS workers across the country, where low-income children simply "disappear" into the system and suffer ongoing sexual abuse by state workers or even high-paying clients, similar to what happened at Penn State). I don't have the space to go into all the evidence that CPS functions as a child kidnapping and sex slavery ring, but the organization isn't called "Communist Pedophile Services" for no reason.

Patricia Finn told me during the InfoWars Nightly News interview that she would absolutely refuse to turn over the list of her clients, and that the judiciary even asking for such a list was a violation of state law. She said she would rather lose her law license than betray the trust of her clients.

Watch Patti Finn speak at the recent WV rally in this YouTube video:

Follow more updates from Patricia Finn at:

The Wakefield Effect

In an article written by Curt Linderman, Patricia describes the events that led to her being targeted for "legal termination" by New York:

This morning I was served with papers to suspend my license to practice law. The charges are bogus and come on the heels of my address to the Parental Rights Rally in WV. I am also being ordered to disclose the names of people I represent who do not vaccinate… I refuse. I would go to jail first before I give out the names. Please contact all pro vaccine choice organizations and the media… know the truth! I call this harassment the Wakefield Effect! (

The "Wakefield effect," of course, refers to the outrageous and illegal censorship and oppression dished out to anyone who takes a firm stand against the vaccine industry's lies. Merely questioning the mythology of vaccines makes you an instant target for endless ridicule and humiliation followed by a well-planned media smear campaign. Dr. Wakefield, who was viciously slandered by the British Medical Journal, has already filed a lawsuit against the BMJ to clear his name

By the way, the author of that story on InfoWars, Curt Linderman, has just launched a new radio show on NaturalNews Radio entitled "Linderman Unleashed." (

Robert Scott Bell interviewed Patricia Finn on NaturalNews Radio

NaturalNews Radio host Robert Scott Bell also interviewed Patricia Finn yesterday in what turned out to be a stunning audio report. You can download and listen to the entire audio interview at the RSB archives on NaturalNews Radio:

Highly relevant: Vaccines Armed and Dangerous

Robert Scott Bell and Jon Rappoport, by the way, have just published an astonishing audio course that completely dismantles the lies and mythconceptions of the vaccine industry. This audio course, which I have been listening to myself, teaches you a wealth of information you need to know in order to protect yourself from vaccine zealots and zombies who mindlessly try to push toxic chemical injections on you and your children.
Watch the trailer for "Vaccines, Armed and Dangerous" at:

Or just check out the full course at:

Learn more:

Related:  The Popping Vaccine Bubble

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Obama caught on tape arguing against giving medical attention to aborted babies

The IL General Assembly destroys audiotapes of its floor debates after transcripts have been written. That is why there is precious little audio, if any, of Barack Obama as state senator making any speeches.

But a pro-life sleuth has found a short audio clip on the Chicago Tribune website of Obama arguing on the IL Senate floor on April 4, 2002, against Senate Bill B1663, a companion bill to the Born Alive Infants Protection Act that would have required an abortionist to call a second physician to assess a baby aborted alive.

Obama advocating infanticide audio mp3

Obama advocating infanticide audio wav

Here is the Senate transcript to ensure the comment is heard in context….

obama floor speech 2.jpg
Obama opposed SB1663 arguing he had “confidence” that the abortionist – who was invested in attempting to kill the child pre-delivery – would not mind revealing his or her botch by calling a 2nd physician to ensure the child was given proper medical attention and revived if possible.

Obama thought it remarkable to suspect an abortionist of having a subjective medical opinion about his new second patient. It didn’t occur to Obama that the abortionist might also be invested in seeing the baby dead to preclude malpractice lawsuits down the road if the baby were found not to have pre-birth diagnosed defects, an overriding reason for these late-term induced labor abortions.

But Obama’s most telling statement from the clip was to say this bill “is really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.”

In other words, if a baby were to survive his or her abortion, the death plan marked out for this child should be carried out nonetheless.

Guy Benson tracked down the pro-life sleuth, who will be interviewed with me on the Sandy Rios show this afternoon at 3:20p CST.
Michelle Malkin is also covering this story, as is The Weekly Standard blog, and is asking a great poll question, “Did Barack Obama protect infanticide in Illinois?”

Source:  Jill Stanket – h/t to AJ


Women’s health? The only doctors Planned Parenthood hires are abortionists

What is the Real Purpose of Birth Control?  Why Is All of This So Important to Progressives?

War On: Obama and ObamaCare verses Constitutional Patriots and Religious Freedom

Obama administration struggles to contain uproar over birth … – Since this piece was written the AG’s of 12 states have joined the suit being prepared and expected additional states of join the fight.

Birth control is the sacrament of eugenics, which also explains Ultra Left Wing HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ Spin, based on her ideology and history. She was an ardent supporter of murdered partial birth abortionist, Tiller and her extreme record on abortion has sadly been ignored (or hidden) by the media.

America just celebrated 54 million abortions

You may have seen this already because it was uploaded 9.21.11

However, the gist of the video in the beginning is about how young people do not know who Hitler was and it is about not voting for any politician that would support abortion at the end of the video.


Video:  "180" Movie -  Award Winning Documentary

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Popping the Vaccine Bubble

Popping the Vaccine Bubble 

 Source Kindred Community  - h/t to AJ

Read the original article in pdf.

My business involves advising portfolio managers about asset allocation in global financial markets. During my career, I have observed several extreme speculative bubbles, including the Japanese stock market in the late 1980s, the NASDAQ frenzy in 1998–2000 and the U.S. housing bubble from 2006–2008.

These bubbles all ended in tears. I see the same elements now in the pharmaceutical industry’s preoccupation with vaccines. I coined the term “vaccine bubble” (in the book Vaccine Epidemic) to describe the economic and psychological factors that are driving the obsession with and over-investment in vaccines. The psychology of making big profits is causing a lemming-like rush into vaccine research and production. Ultimately, many of these companies and vaccine products will likely turn out to be flash-in-the-pan nobodies and nothings that simply waste investment and get discarded on the ash heap of medical history. In the meantime, families and individuals need to educate themselves and make informed decisions about vaccine acceptance or refusal.

The business model of vaccine manufacturers relies on compulsion—you must take their product, or else.

Investing in Health

Taking pharmaceutical company advice about vaccine safety and efficacy is like trusting a stockbroker or real estate agent to tell you the market is in a bubble. As investors and homeowners have learned the hard way, those with corrupt financial or professional incentives cannot be relied upon to provide trustworthy advice.

From a financial and industry perspective, here is what you need to know. Vaccines are licensed by the FDA and recommended by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Vaccine manufacturers perform (or outsource) their own efficacy and safety studies, so there is plenty of wiggle room for juggling the data. Manufacturers can choose their own placebo to either flatter efficacy or safety. If you think vaccine safety studies use saline solution for a placebo, think again.

The Merck Manual (the pharmaceutical company’s best-selling series of medical textbooks) defines an adverse reaction to a vaccine: “Encephalitis is inflammation of the brain that occurs when a virus directly infects the brain or when a virus or something else triggers inflammation…. Encephalitis can occur in the following ways: A virus directly infects the brain. A virus that caused an infection in the past becomes reactivated and directly damages the brain. A virus or vaccine triggers a reaction that makes the immune system attack brain tissue (an autoimmune reaction).”

Thus, an adverse vaccine reaction that causes brain damage (encephalitis) has the same result as a complication from an infectious disease like measles. In vaccine safety studies, manufacturers can disguise the neurological damage caused by the vaccine they are testing by using another vaccine (or another substance that contains an aluminum adjuvant) known to cause neurological adverse reactions as placebo. The standard language they use is: “Adverse reactions were no different than placebo.” They don’t mention that the placebo causes neurological adverse reactions.

Another trick they use is to compare adverse reactions to a fully vaccinated population that has neurological damage from those vaccines. They claim it is unethical to compare vaccine adverse reactions in their new product being tested to unvaccinated controls, because the unvaccinated would supposedly miss out on all the great benefits of vaccines. This is a cheap statistical trick to camouflage adverse neurological reactions from vaccines.

Products in the Pipeline

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America’s (PhRMA) 2010 Report on Medicines in Development for Infectious Diseases boasts, “Among the medicines now being tested are…145 vaccines to prevent or treat diseases such as staph infections and pneumococcal infections.” The report didn’t include “medicines in development for HIV infection,” and stated, “A 2009 survey by PhRMA found 97 medicines and vaccines are in testing for HIV/AIDS and AIDS-related conditions.”

The current CDC-recommended vaccine schedule contains 70 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18. PhRMA obviously would love to double or triple that vaccine burden by cramming the new vaccines under development into the ACIP-recommended schedule.

A Government-Subsidized, Captive Market

ACIP vaccine recommendations are a godsend to pharmaceutical manufacturers. The simple ACIP recommendation that so many doses of such-and-such vaccine should be given at such-and-such age is transformed into public school attendance mandates by the alchemy of drug industry sales reps, state health officials and gullible state legislatures. The business model of vaccine manufacturers relies on compulsion—you must take their product, or else. Imagine you were in business selling something and you could snap your fingers and compel everyone to be your customer. Normal businesses have to attract customers with an attractive product and compete with other providers of that product. Compulsion is a nice way to capture an involuntary market, isn’t it?

Since most people won’t pay hundreds of dollars out-of-pocket for every vaccine, manufacturers must find someone to foot the bill. They have been very effective in coercing federal and state governments and health insurers into subsidizing their products. One little-noticed feature of the Affordable Care Act (the Obama administration’s healthcare reform program) is that health insurers must provide subsidized vaccines to their customers. Big Pharma’s vaccine business model consists of taking choice away from the individual and getting someone else to foot the bill.

Filling the Profit Void

Pharmaceutical companies are losing patent protection on about $140 billion of blockbuster drugs (such as Lipitor) over the next few years. Their research departments have produced few product replacements with blockbuster potential (sales greater than $1 billion/year). This pending loss of business is causing a wave of layoffs and restructurings within the industry. Also, disastrous drugs like Vioxx have caused between 88,000 and 139,000 heart attacks and about 40,000 deaths, according to FDA estimates cited by epidemiologist David Michaels, current head of OSHA for the Obama Administration, in his excellent book Doubt Is Their Product.

According to Michaels’ book, Merck exploited the FDA drug approval process by gaming the placebo and claiming that the higher rate of heart attacks observed in Vioxx clinical trials was due to the placebo (naproxen) preventing heart attacks. According to Michaels’ book, “Merck chose the interpretation that implausibly credited naproxen over the one that more plausibly indicted its own drug and it embarked on a four-year defense of this almost ridiculous hypothesis.” Incidentally, Merck is a primary manufacturer of U.S. vaccines. Its corporate behavior with Vioxx certainly discredits its ethical credibility with regard to pharmaceutical safety studies.

Pharmaceutical companies now tout vaccines as the Holy Grail that will help replace the lost revenues from expiring patents on blockbuster drugs that will face generic (cheap) competition. But the numbers don’t add up. Vaccines are currently about a $25 billion market. As previously mentioned, patent expirations amount to about $140 billion. Pharmaceutical companies desperately need to grow that $25 billion vaccine market in a hurry. Hence the big push to create, license and mandate new vaccines.


Popping the Vaccine Bubble

Now, if you are in the pharmaceutical industry charity market, you can donate your body to Merck and other vaccine manufacturers by volunteering to be a human pincushion for every vaccine recommended by the ACIP or in development. That is your decision, and I fully support your right to vaccinate yourself into oblivion.

However, if you (like me) do not agree with forced medication using products that may have been approved using safety studies involving bogus placebos, then you probably face persecution by your allopathic doctor, public school or employer (flu vaccines are now mandatory for many healthcare workers). I fully support your right to refuse vaccines. In fact, the position of the American Medical Association (AMA) on informed consent states that with regard to patients, “He or she can make an informed decision to proceed or to refuse a particular course of medical intervention.” Please notice the word refuse. It is our right to refuse “a particular course of medical intervention.” Notice it doesn’t say “except vaccination.” Informed consent is the backbone of medical ethics. You have the right to say no. Doctors who assert that you do not have a choice about vaccines are violating this medical code of ethics.

Contrast that AMA official position on informed consent with the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) position on “terminating” vaccine refusers: “If, after discussion about the importance of vaccination and the risks of not vaccinating, the parent refuses, the pediatrician should document the discussion and have the parent sign a waiver affirming his/her decision not to vaccinate (i.e., AAP Refusal to Vaccinate Form). If the situation becomes such that you are no longer comfortable having the parent/patient in your practice, the AAP manual, Medical Liability for Pediatricians, Chapter 3, offers resources for risk communication and termination of the physician-patient relationship.”

The Basis for My Choice

My daughter Lyla died within hours after receiving her hepatitis B vaccine at the age of five weeks. We subsequently had two more children and I looked closely at the rate of vaccine adverse reactions contained in the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) versus the risk of contracting an infectious disease and the risk of complications from that disease. As a professional statistician who provides econometric forecasts for institutional investors, I am qualified to make decisions based on statistical models. That is what I do, day in and day out. My conclusion? I would have to be a total idiot to vaccinate my children.

Informed consent is the backbone of medical ethics. You have the right to say no.

If mainstream pediatricians are going to “terminate” patients like me (like a pest control company), then perhaps my family is better off not being a captive of such a totalitarian doctor in the first place. For others in favor of vaccine choice, I’ve written an article entitled “How to Terminate a Relationship With an Uncooperative and Combative Pediatrician.” Sadly, most pediatricians wouldn’t know what to do with themselves and their practices if they weren’t vaccine pushers. As mentioned above, they are simply the agents of a medical system that is addicted to a vaccine bubble. Vaccine refusers should find trustworthy medical professionals who support the AMA’s position on informed consent.

Ghosts in the Machine

Bubbles always have corruption hidden under the surface. Look how the mortgage and banking industries are now choking on lawsuits and destroyed reputations. Corruption in the vaccine bubble probably exists in ghostwritten medical journal articles (penned by pharmaceutical companies but supposedly authored by respectable doctors). Ghostwriting has recently become a huge issue in medical research. We have yet to find out which vaccine studies were ghostwritten by industry flunkies.

Another area of corruption is front groups. Front groups using straw-man citizens are a standard PR technique to hype a product. Full Frontal Scrutiny, a joint venture between Consumer Reports WebWatch and the Center for Media and Democracy, describes the technique as such:

“A front group is an example of what is known in the PR trade as the “third party technique.” The idea behind the term is that when one person (the first party) wants to persuade someone else (the second party) to believe or do something that benefits the first party, it helps if the message comes from a seemingly disinterested, independent source. As Daniel Edelman, the founder of Edelman PR Worldwide, has stated, “A third party endorsement can position a new brand so that it’s poised for great success or, conversely, can blunt a serious problem before it gets out of hand and proves disastrous for a particular product or for a company overall.”…

“The best PR ends up looking like news,” bragged one public relations executive. “You never know when a PR agency is being effective; you’ll just find your views slowly shifting.”

When you see supposedly grassroots groups lobbying for vaccine mandates, you may be seeing the invisible hand of just such a PR agency.

A prime example of corruption in the vaccine bubble is Paul Thorsen, a Danish epidemiologist who is under federal indictment for fraud. Thorsen allegedly absconded with millions of dollars of CDC money.

Another prime example of corruption in the vaccine bubble is Paul Thorsen, a Danish epidemiologist who is under federal indictment for fraud. Thorsen allegedly absconded with millions of dollars of CDC money. Thorsen’s Danish data forms the backbone of several

scientific studies the CDC uses to claim that vaccines and thimerosal (a mercury-containing vaccine preservative) do not cause autism.

So far, no one seems to care that a principal author of those studies stands accused of fraud.

One other noteworthy fact with regard to vaccines and autism: In the DTaP package insert, autism and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) are listed as “adverse events reported during post-approval use…. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting.” So much for CDC denials of a vaccine/autism link.

Vaccines are in a bubble. Pharmaceutical companies are working on hundreds of new vaccines that they are drooling to make mandatory to replace their vanishing blockbuster drug patents. If you choose to resist the vaccine bubble, many people (and doctors) will regard you as loony, in the same way people looked down at those who didn’t buy into the NASDAQ bubble in 2000 or the housing bubble in 2007. But look how those people turned out when the bubbles burst—postponed retirements, foreclosures and underwater home equity. Is that what you want?

1) Michaels, David. Doubt Is Their Product, Oxford University Press, USA, 2008.

2) Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, 2010 Report on Medicines in Development for Infectious Diseases,

3) Rampton, Sheldon. “Front Groups: A History,” Full Frontal Scrutiny,

This article first appeared in the winter issue of Pathways to Family Wellness magazine.


National Vaccine Information Center

The Vaccine Ingredients Calculator: Find out what you're putting into your child's body, or your own.

Find Our Your State Laws on Vaccine Exemptions

Our Extensive Selection of BOOKS on Vaccination and Informed Choice

National Resources for Informed Choice

USA State by State Resources for Informed Choice

Medical Journal Says Autism Study 'Fraud' (Jan. 6, 2011)

More Parents Seek Vaccine Exemption (July 6, 2010)

Book Review: The Shot Heard Round the World (March 26, 2011)

Related Posts:

More Doctors Fire Vaccine Refusers 

Alert: Hallmark Now Distributing Vaccine Shot Compliance Cards Targeting Newborns Across America

83 percent of brain injury vaccine compensation payouts were for autism caused by vaccines

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Tells Truth About Government Coverup of Vaccine Dangers

Healthy 7-Year-Old Girl Dies in Her Mother's Arms After Flu Shot

Eugenics in Action: 3-Year Old Denied Kidney Transplant

Anyone Recall Jane Bergermeister and the Letha Vaccinations??? It’s Back!

The Gardasil Timeline – History of Corruption and Negative Reactions

Merck Vaccine Scientist Dr. Maurice Hilleman Admitted Presence of SV40, AIDS and Cancer Viruses in Vaccines

Katie Couric Reports on Serious Vaccine Issues – Finally!!

First Daughters Not Vaccinated Against H1N1

The Drug Story

The Truth About the Rockefeller Drug Empire

Merck’s Profits Exploded as Government-Backed HPV Shot Gardasil Sale Skyrocket

Bill Gates Confirms Population Reduction Through Vaccination on CNN

Bill Gates: Register Every Birth by Cellphone To Ensure Vaccination, Control Population Growth

Hillary Clinton: Population Control Will Now Become the Centerpiece of U.S. Foreign Policy

Texas Governor Orders STD Vaccine for all Girls (By Executive Order)

Vaccination Nanotechnology

Swine Flu - One of the Most Massive Cover-ups in American History - Video

Religious Liberty: Obamacare's First Casualty

Video:  Religious Liberty: Obamacare's First Casualty


War On:  Obama and ObamaCare verses Constitutional Patriots and Religious Freedom

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Eugenics: Effective by Incrementalism

Short excerpt:

In a shocking little booklet (click for PDF) entitled “Ancient Eugenics” written in 1913 by “late scholar” Allen G. Roper, this incrementalism is further elaborated upon. The way to build this future eugenic state, Roper argues, is not by an open decree or oppressive measures. For the trick to work, it must be a thing of the long haul.


Eugenics: Effective by Incrementalism

Jurriaan Maessen  -  -  February 21, 2012  -  h/t to AJ

Every time we read about another technocrat (biocrat may be a more accurate description) stating that the planet should be liberated from “excess humans”, some obscure manuscript in a long-forgotten library rattles with glee. For the eugenic idea does not originate with some sadist in a United Nations office building. It is a practice, rather, that has been tried and tested by many civilizations and tribes in earth’s history- and now perfected at the hands of a biocratic elite hellbent on seizing the human body, constricting the human mind, and by doing so, subdue all of mankind.

The biocratic thought is simply this: in order to achieve total control over the body and the mind, both components must be made dependent on a specific cure for a specific ill. A feigned ill is usually preferred, as it can be made to go this or that way just as they see fit. By presenting themselves as well-doers, the biocrats raise the perfect guise behind which they can exercise eugenic power in full impunity. They regard their work as a great work, a sacred exercise. Like the human offerings of old, this too is performed as a sacrifice to be laid at the feet of some dark deity.

True culture-changes, the biocrats know, are not spontaneous- nor are they the children of sudden revolutionary acts. It is by the hand of gradual variations, the tiniest adjustments, that humanity is led towards the biocratic society.

In a shocking little booklet (click for PDF) entitled “Ancient Eugenics” written in 1913 by “late scholar” Allen G. Roper, this incrementalism is further elaborated upon. The way to build this future eugenic state, Roper argues, is not by an open decree or oppressive measures. For the trick to work, it must be a thing of the long haul.

“(…) compulsion”, writes Roper, “or guidance, however veiled, is foredoomed to failure in the case of an institution which can only rest on inclination or an innate sense of duty. Moreover, “custom is lord of all,” and custom can only be modified gradually and in the course of centuries”

“Modern Eugenists”, the author goes on to say, “have recognized that, if there is to be Eugenics by Act of Parliament, the Eugenic ideal must first be absorbed into the conscience of the nation.”

The author, a fierce proponent of eugenics himself, also shows us a glimpse into the mind of the biocratic utopians: those who believe themselves to be equal to God and therefore permit themselves the leisure of deciding who lives and who dies.

The author traces the idea of exterminating the weak in favor of the strong’s survival back to the ancients. Roper does not, as you would expect, limit his search to the ancient Greeks. He descents even further into the past until he reaches the very beginnings of man.

“The preface to a history of Eugenics may be compiled from barbarism, for the first Eugenist was not the Spartan legislator, but the primitive savage who killed his sickly child.”

“While they (the “savages”, as Roper tends to describe early man) lived their short lives, the weakly, the deformed, and the superfluous were a burden to the tribe. Human law, superseding natural law, strove to eliminate them at birth. This was the atavistic basis on which subsequent Eugenics was built.”

Infanticide, therefore, as a means to preserve the tribe. Roper states outright that eugenics flows from the killing of baby’s. Any lapse in this human endeavor will be compensated by nature, Roper says:

“Nature, forging additional weapons, hastens the elimination of the unfit by disease.”

But the author makes clear that:

“Modern Eugenics is based on Evolution not a passive form, but one that concedes some latitude to the guiding action of the human will.”

“While infanticide is everywhere disappearing”, Roper writes, “there remain still the principles simultaneously developed. Three centuries ago Eugenics was the Utopian dream of an imprisoned monk. A century later Steele, more in jest than in earnest, suggested that one might wear any passion out of a family by culture, as skilful gardeners blot a colour out of a tulip that hurts its beauty. But neither science nor public opinion was ready to respond. It was not till late in the nineteenth century that the crude human breeding of the Spartans, in altered form and in new conditions, became the scientific stirpiculture of Galton.”

There it is. Eugenics existed for countless millenniums. Now, in the last fifty years or so, the mainstream media will make you believe eugenics does not exist. It’s a conspiracy theory, they claim. To understand where the eugenics movement of the early 20st century- and by extension the Rockefeller-funded environmental movement of today, draw their inspiration from, the following quote must be read in its entirety:

“The Ancients attempted to combat the wasteful processes of Nature by eliminating the non-viable at birth; our efforts, on the contrary, have been directed to the prolongation of their lives. Instead of sacrificing the unfit in the interests of the fit, we have employed every resource of modern science “to keep alight the feeble flame of life in the baseborn child of a degenerate parent.”” (…) “There is the female infanticide of China and the Isles of the Southern Pacific, the male infanticide of the Abipones of Paraguay, and the indiscriminate massacre of the Gagas, who, killing every child alike, steal from a neighbouring tribe. There are the Indians who offer up children to Moloch or drown them in the Ganges; the Carthaginians sacrifice them to Kronos, the Mexicans to the rain god. There is the murder of twins and albinos in Arebo, and the cannibalism of the Aborigines. In Mingrelia, ” when they have not the wherewithal to maintain them, they hold it a piece of charity to murder infants new born.” There are the Biluchi, who kill all their natural children, and there is the modern factor of shame. Co-existing with all these various practices there is the definitely Eugenic motive. Among the Aborigines, all deformed children are killed as soon as born. The savages of Guiana kill any child that is “deformed, feeble, or bothersome.” The Fans kill all sickly children. In Central America “it is suspected that infant murder is responsible for the rarity of the deformed.” In Tonquin we hear of a law which forbids the exposing or strangling of children, be they ever so deformed. In Japan, deformed children were killed or reared according to the father’s pleasure. Among the Prussians the aged and infirm, the sick and deformed, were unhesitatingly put to death.”

“Unhesitatingly put to death”, thus ends the quote. The biocrats who pull the strings of the scientific dictatorship are very much aware of the origins of their belief-system, which is firmly rooted in the ancient practice of infanticide. Roper continues to say modern eugenicists have refined the ancient practices of primitive man to the degree that in modern times the state is the deciding factor. Roper:

“Limitation of numbers, though it does not itself constitute “aggeneration” of the race, improves to a considerable degree the individuals of which the race is constituted. When the undesired children are out of the way, more attention can be paid to the desired. The savage bred recklessly, compensating his recklessness by infanticide, but a natural law of civilization has superseded the artificial law of primitive man. Control of reproduction, and resulting from it a falling birth-rate and a diminished death-rate, is a tendency which, first showing itself in Imperial Rome, is conspicuous today in every civilized community.”

Roper also mentions the obsession of the biocrats, including Plato, with numbers:

“Obsessed by the idea of the mean and a mystic doctrine of numbers, he (Plato) would fix the number of the state at an unalterable 8,000. To attain this static equilibrium the guardians are to regulate the number of marriages.”

The idea that numbers have a mystical dimension is prevalent amongst biocrats. The before-mentioned statement is also reminiscent of the Georgia Guidestones, which reads:

“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.”

“(…) there is”, Roper continues, “the question of the numbers of the population. It is no definitely Eugenic conception that leads to the limitation of 5,040: there is a certain Malthusian element, and something of a prepossession with a mystical doctrine of numbers.”

Although Roper invokes the Platonic way of conducting eugenics- quick and openly- he states that to the modern eugenicist “the chronic pauper is the victim of the germ-plasm- heredity.”

“With increased knowledge to justify restrictions”, Roper explains, “the modern state may be purged of the pauper more slowly, but no less surely, than the Platonic state of the Laws.”

Since 1913 two World Wars have raged over the earth, leaving a pile of dead in their wake. Eugenics became a thing of the state. In Nazi-Germany, eugenics was the norm, in Europe and the United States it became a more or less covert enterprise. Finally, the UN was constructed to make sure that the ancient Eugenic ideal would be preserved and passed on into the 21st century on a global scale.

What is the Real Purpose of Birth Control?  Why is it So Important to Progressives?

Bill Gates Confirms Population Reduction Through Vaccination on CNN

Bill Gates: Register Every Birth by Cellphone To Ensure Vaccination, Control Population Growth

Hillary Clinton: Population Control Will Now Become the Centerpiece of U.S. Foreign Policy

UN Ordered Depopulation of 3 Billion People by Food Malnutrition has Started – PBSpecial Report

Vaccines ARE (In Many Cases) Germ Warfare

Sterilization of Children… - See links at bottom of article as well

Eugenics and Other Evils

Hangover Cures that Really Work

For those that celebrated a little too much on Fat Tuesday, here are some of the hangover cures and remedies that really work:

Hangover Cures that Work #1
The first cure is a very effective remedy for hangover cures. Nausea is a common symptom that is seen is on the next day or a few hours after the consumption of alcohol. One of the best ways to keep the digestive system on track and prevent nausea and vomiting, is by drinking the juice of the passion fruit the next morning itself. The best advantage of consuming the natural juice, is that being citrus in nature, the juice (or even raw fruits) tend to contain a huge amount of fructose. The fructose actually helps the digestive and respiratory system to burn up the toxic alcohol. The fructose also tends to activate the digestive system and aids in bowel movement.

Hangover Cures that Work #2
Another relatively simple hangover cure involves food intake of any kind, which plays a very instrumental role in diluting the effect of the hangover. Eating eggs is one of the best ways to cure a hangover. Albumin, which is a natural egg protein, works wonders as it acts as a catalyst in replenishing the percentage of water that is present in the dehydrated cells of the body.

Hangover cures that Work #3
Most of us resort to man-made hangover cures. Vomiting and headaches, on the other hand are naturally curable, if you are ready to eat, try bark. Yes! that's right, you did not hear me wrong, the word is willow bark. The willow bark is a very excellent natural remedy that tends to be very helpful in relieving pain, due to the very good natural content of aspirin in it.

Hangover Cures that Work #4
Among the many tips for curing a hangover, I would personally recommend that you resort to the universal solvent in order to come back to a state of normalcy - water. Drink plenty of water and also replenish the amount water after you visit the washroom. The biggest advantage of this is that not only does the body get the desired water content, but all the toxic matter also gets flushed out of the body through the urinary track. Other hangover remedies that are related to water include sports drinks, all types of juices and also simple mineral water. It is also helpful for you to take a nice shower. Start off with regular warm water and then gradually move onto cold water.

For more information on the subject of hangover solutions, you may refer to:

Monday, February 20, 2012

Not Even the Nazis and the Communists Tried To Control What their Subjects Ate


What kind of country do we now live in. Children have their lunches taken away by the state because the lunches don't comply with what some nanny with a badge thinks is a proper meal.

I can't get fries for my kids when we go to the Olive Garden now because they have voluntarily removed fries from their menu.

And now we see that overweight Michelle Obama is going around getting candy companies to restrict their candy offerings.

The Nazis and the Communists were all-time control freaks. But not even they thought to control what their subjects ate.

As far as I can recall, what is going on right now in our country is a first. No dictatorship has ever tried to control the diet of its citizens probably because they suspected that doing so might cause a revolt.

But what do we Americans do. We sit by and take it. If George III could see what is going on now in America, he would laugh and rue the fact that he was born there centuries too early.

Healthy eating is a good thing, but many feel that the goal of all the health and wellness is tied into what they can find that is wrong with people so they can implement EUGENICS. Whether it comes to that point is a discussion for another day… but the present administration is definitely over-reaching in all areas of our lives!

Perhaps today… George Washington’s Birthday… President’s Day is a good day to reflect on just how long it will take the majority to wake-up, how much we are willing to take and whether we will wake-up in time to save our Country and the system our Founding Father’s gave so much for, in order to give to us Freedom.

h/t to the FreeRepublic where to can check out the comments.

One that was made over and over again was that our children are being taught about sex, sex positions, sodomy and the gay lifestyle in school, but they can’t eat potato chips.  Wake-up America.  Our former presidents and Founding Fathers are spinning in their graves!!

Sex Ed Hits the Road - Look at these CA 5th Grader’s Faces and then ask yourself with a reaction like that to the basics… why is CA talking about burdening and sexualizing Kindergartners with “gay curriculum”? Stop over-sexualizing our children!!

Remember that little girl who was forced to have (yucky) chicken nuggets instead of her mommies (yummy) turkey and cheese sammich? **Update** School Busted Lying


Just the Facts: State (nugget pushers) vs. Federal (science-based) School Nutrition Programs

Scientists Find Arsenic in US Baby Formula Sweetener: FDA Doesn't Know


Fed Instructs Teachers to Facebook Creep Students

Keving Jennings (Safe Schools Czar) is teaching your kids to live the porn life

Breaking:  Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Promoting Child Porn in the Classroom…

Wake-up America… the hour is later than you think… much later!!!

Friday, February 17, 2012

Breaking: U.S. Supreme Court Meeting Today on Health Care/Eligibility Challenge


by Sharon Rondeau

Will the U.S. Supreme Court Decide to Hear Purpura v. Sebelius, which challenges Obama's eligibility to have signed the health care law?

(Feb. 17, 2012) — 11:49 a.m. ET – The Post & Email has just learned that the U.S. Supreme Court will be conferencing today to decide whether or not to hear the case of Purpura v. Sebelius, which challenges the constitutionality of the health care bill and Obama’s eligibility to hold office.

Plaintiffs Nicholas Purpura and Donald R. Laster, Jr. call their challenge the “We the People” brief.

Purpura stated that his case is “the best one” to challenge the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed in March 2010 by the 111th Congress and signed by Obama. He had submitted a Request for Reargument to the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the case on January 17, 2012.

Purpura has stated that “the reason they don’t want to take the case and why they’re most frightened is Count 6,” which claims that if Obama is not eligible to serve as President, the bill is null and void.

A prayer request was put out by Purpura, and today he stated that he is “getting calls from all over the country” in response to it. “People are praying at the Oklahoma Air Force base; people throughout the country…they’re even praying at the Supreme Court! They want their lawsuit heard,” he said.

A new 17-page brief with 15 pages of argument sent to the Supreme Court was dated January 27, with Purpura representing himself. “What I told them flat-out is that you have no choice but to hear this,” Purpura told The Post & Email. “Count 6 is the most important.”

Purpura also said that “Sotomayor and Kagan cannot hear this case” because of their conflict of interest, having been appointed to the court by Obama.

"Count 6" asks how Obama can "exercise the authority of the office of President" if he is not a "natural born Citizen"

Page 7 explains "Count 6," which asks if Obama is a "natural born Citizen" and therefore eligible to serve as President

Count 6 reads:

18. Count 6 Violation Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5; No Constitutional question before this Honorable Court surpasses the importance concerning this issue that must be adjudicated. Petitioner has never stated Mr. Obama is not a citizen of the United States. That being said, the Constitutional question exists: is Mr. Obama a “natural born Citizen”, if not; how can he exercise the authority of the office of President? Failure to address this Count would constitute a desertion from ones [sic] sworn fiduciary duty and betrayal of the United States Constitution. (See Article 6, Paragraph 2). The Court must consider during the years Mr. Obama was developing a power base and running for President Congress 8-times attempted to remove the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural-born citizen,” suggesting an organized strategy…

19. Therefore, the question still exists whether Mr. Obama was eligible to sign “Act” in law, make appointments, institute regulations or hold the office of president?

Of this new development, Purpura told The Post & Email:

This is really important, because they’re disenfranchising the voters if they don’t hear it. The first three pages, which are the opening statement, will tell you everything, and so will the last page. The only count that really counts here is Count 6. As you know, there are ballot challenges throughout the country, and what I told them flat-out is, “You have no choice but to hear this because we have a constitutional crisis.” I’m believing, that if you read Count 6, because that’s the most important one in the whole brief, they’re sort-of trapped if they’re honest. Kagan and Sotomayor cannot by U.S. statute participate. So we’re in great shape in reality. But will they obey the statutes, or will they do what this administration is doing: ignoring the law that are on the books in the United States.

Purpura then read from the third page of the brief:

It is incumbent upon this Court to settle the issue of ‘eligibility’ post haste to afford those in the Democrat Party an opportunity to choose an “eligible” candidate to be on the ballot in November. To do otherwise disenfranchises all voters and continues the constitutional crisis that has been escalating since the Courts refused to address Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential campaign’s challenge. To ignore this constitutional challenge will have devastating consequence which this Court bears full responsibility for failing to perform its fiduciary duty pursuant to your sworn oath taken by every Member of this Court.

Source: The Post & Email

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

Judge Rejects Health Care Law

SCOTAS ObamaCare Hearing

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

Think the contraception decision was bad? Wait until bureaucrats start telling your insurer which cancer screenings to cover.

Offended by President Obama's decision to force health insurers to pay for contraception and surgical sterilization or my religious institutions mandated to go against their core beliefs? It gets worse: In the future, thanks to ObamaCare, the government will issue such health edicts on a routine basis—and largely insulated from public view. This goes beyond contraception to cancer screenings, the use of common drugs like aspirin, and much more.

Under ObamaCare, a single committee—the United States Preventative Services Task Force—is empowered to evaluate preventive health services and decide which will be covered by health-insurance plans.


The task force already rates services with letter grades of "A" through "D" (or "I," if it has "insufficient evidence" to make a rating). But under ObamaCare, services rated "A" or "B"—such as colon cancer screening for adults aged 50-75—must be covered by health plans in full, without any co-pays. Many services that get "Cs" and "Ds"—such as screening for ovarian or testicular cancer—could get nixed from coverage entirely.

That's because mandating coverage for all the "A" and "B" services will be very costly. In 2000, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the marginal cost of similar state insurance mandates was 5%-10% of total claims. Other estimates put the cost of mandates as high as 20% of premiums.

Health plans will inevitably choose to drop coverage for many services that don't get a passing grade from the task force and therefore aren't mandated. Insurance companies will need to conserve their premium money, which the government regulates, in order to spend it subsidizing those services that the task force requires them to cover in full.


David Klein

Americans first became familiar with the task force in November 2009, when it made the controversial decision to recommend that women ages 40-49 shouldn't get routine mammograms. More recently, it rebuffed routine prostate-cancer screening and the use of tests that detect the viruses that can cause cervical cancer.

The task force relishes setting a very high bar. Like the Food and Drug Administration in approving new drugs, it usually requires a randomized, prospective trial to "prove" that a diagnostic test or other intervention improves clinical outcomes and therefore deserves a high grade of "A" or "B."

This means its advice is often out of sync with conventional medical practice. For example, it recommended against wider screening for HIV long after such screening was accepted practice. As a result, many of its verdicts are widely ignored by practicing doctors.

The task force is a part-time board of volunteer advisers that works slowly and is often late to incorporate new science into its recommendations. Only in 2009 did it finally recommend aspirin for the prevention of stroke and heart attack among those at risk—decades after this practice was demonstrated to save lives and had become part of standard medical practice.

The task force is also the only federal health agency to have the explicit legal authority to consider cost as one criterion in recommending whether patients should use a medical test or treatment.

Over time, the task force will surely recommend against many services that patients now take for granted, while mandating full insurance coverage for things that they'd be just as happy paying for. Among the interventions that it plans to consider in 2012 are screening for hepatitis C in adults, for osteoporosis in men and for depression in children; counseling for obesity in adults and for alcohol use in adolescents; and daily aspirin for heart-attack and stroke prevention in people over 80.

The task force's problems are compounded by the fact that it is deliberately exempted from the rules that govern other government advisory boards and regulatory agencies. Thus it has no obligation to hold its meetings in public, announce decisions in draft form or even consider public comments. Consumers have no way to directly appeal its decisions. And health providers or product developers affected by its decisions can't sue it for recourse.

To begin addressing these problems, Congress should make the task force subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which would at least require it to hold its deliberations in public. Congress could also make it a full-fledged part of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which already convenes its meetings. That would make the task force subject to the Administrative Procedures Act and all the rules that bind other regulatory bodies, including the legal requirement to consider public comments and provide avenues for appeal.

Better still, Congress could let private health plans—and their members—decide on their own how preventive tests and treatments should be covered. If not, Americans will soon be surprised by all the important tests and treatments that become more costly, and all the less relevant stuff that's suddenly free.

It's all a reminder that President Obama's decision on contraception isn't a one-off political intervention but the initial exploit of an elaborate new system.

by Dr. Gottlieb, a physician and resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has served as deputy commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration and senior policy adviser to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. He consults with and invests in health-care companies.  -  WSJ

As time goes on… if people don’t start reading the ObamaCare Bill and make sure it is repealed in its entirety, either by the Supreme Court or a New President and a primarily new Congress in November 2012, Americans will soon find out that former Alaska Governor and GOP VP candidate in 2008, Sarah Palin plus others who were paying attention, was 100% right about rationing, death panels or whatever you want to call it in ObamaCare and a lot more that we all won’t like… especially seniors, the disabled and special needs children and adults!  Wake-up America… before it is too late.


Breaking:  U.S. Supreme Court Meeting Today on Health Care/Eligibility Challenge (Purpura vs. Sebelius)

Senate Republicans Ask Supreme Court to Strike Mandate

Judge Rejects Health Care Law

SCOTAS ObamaCare Hearing

More Doctors Fire Vaccine Refusers

Thursday, February 16, 2012

More Doctors 'Fire' Vaccine Refusers

Families Who Reject Inoculations Told to Find a New Physician; Contagion in Waiting Room Is a Fear

Pediatricians fed up with parents who refuse to vaccinate their children out of concern it can cause autism or other problems increasingly are "firing" such families from their practices, raising questions about a doctor's responsibility to these patients.

Medical associations don't recommend such patient bans, but the practice appears to be growing, according to vaccine researchers.


Adam Bird for The Wall Street Journal

Dr. Allan LaReau in Michigan stops treating families who refuse to vaccinate their children. 'You feel badly about losing a nice family,' he says.

In a study of Connecticut pediatricians published last year, some 30% of 133 doctors said they had asked a family to leave their practice for vaccine refusal, and a recent survey of 909 Midwestern pediatricians found that 21% reported discharging families for the same reason.

By comparison, in 2001 and 2006 about 6% of physicians said they "routinely" stopped working with families due to parents' continued vaccine refusal and 16% "sometimes" dismissed them, according to surveys conducted then by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

"There's more noise among pediatricians, more people willing to argue that it's OK to do this versus 10 years ago," said Douglas Diekema, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Washington in Seattle. Dr. Diekema wrote the AAP's policy on working with vaccine refusers, which recommends providers address the issue at repeated visits, but respect parents' wishes unless it puts a child at risk of significant harm.

Most pediatricians consider preventing disease through vaccines a primary goal of their job. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and AAP issue an annual recommended vaccination schedule, but some parents ask if their child's immunizations can be pushed back or skipped altogether, pediatricians say.

It's hard to imagine an outbreak of smallpox today. But for centuries the deadly virus wiped out entire populations. WSJ's Christina Tsuei reports on how the discovery of vaccines (with the help of cows) eradicated the disease and led to the prevention of many other diseases.


While rates for several key inoculations in young children rose between 2009 and 2010, according to the CDC, lower immunization rates have been blamed as a factor in U.S. outbreaks of whooping cough and measles in recent years.

Parents often voice concerns about autism or that their child's immune system may be overwhelmed by too many vaccines at once. Worries about a link between vaccines and autism arose because some parents noticed their children regressed, or lost some skills, around the time of their vaccinations at two years of age. Another concern centered on the former use of mercury as a vaccine preservative.

Numerous studies since have dispelled these concerns among scientists. Rather, scientists say, it is more likely that autism symptoms begin showing up around the same age children are vaccinated.

The rise in patient firings reflects another factor. As patients have become savvier and more willing to challenge doctors, physicians have become increasingly reluctant to deal with uncooperative patients, said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at the University of Pennsylvania. In addition, doctors may feel financial pressure to see more patients and so have less time to contend with recalcitrant ones.

Pediatricians fed up with parents who refuse to vaccinate their children out of concern it can cause autism or other problems increasingly are "firing" such families from their practices. Stefanie Ilgenfritz has details on Lunch Break.

For Allan LaReau of Kalamazoo, Mich., and his 11 colleagues at Bronson Rambling Road Pediatrics, who chose in 2010 to stop working with vaccine-refusing families, a major factor was the concern that unimmunized children could pose a danger in the waiting room to infants or sick children who haven't yet been fully vaccinated.

In one case, an unvaccinated child came in with a high fever and Dr. LaReau feared the patient might have meningitis, a contagious, potentially deadly infection of the brain and spinal cord for which a vaccine commonly is given. "I lost a lot more sleep than I usually do" worrying about the situation, he said.

<div class="noFlash"> {if djIsFlashPossible} <p>The version of Adobe Flash Player required to view this interactive has not been found. To enjoy our complete interactive experience, please download a free copy of the latest version of Adobe Flash Player <a href="">here</a></p> {else} <p>This content can not be displayed because your browser does not support the Adobe Flash player required to view it.</p> {/if} </div>

"You feel badly about losing a nice family from the practice," added Dr. LaReau, but families who refused to vaccinate their kids were told that "this is going to be a difficult relationship without this core part of pediatrics." Some families chose to go elsewhere while others agreed to have their kids inoculated.

Pediatricians disagree about what their duty is to these families. "The bottom line is you should try to do whatever you can to maintain the family in the best care," said Michael Brady, chair of the pediatrics department at Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio, and a member of the AAP's immunization committee. "If they leave your practice, they're probably going to gravitate toward another practice with unhealthy practices."

Other physicians say they rarely have had luck persuading vaccine opponents to change their minds.

David Fenner and his 20-plus colleagues at Children's Medical Group in Rhinebeck, N.Y., discuss vaccine concerns but ask families to leave if they don't comply by a certain point.

Dr. Fenner said he tells new families, "You've been bombarded with information before you came here, some accurate and some not." Iif a family refuses to vaccinate after a discussion of the issue, he tells them "there are so many things we're not going to see eye-to-eye on."

So far, the practice has fired a couple of families per year since it implemented the policy about five years ago.

Pamela Felice, who lives in an Atlanta suburb, had difficulty finding a pediatrician for her two children though they have waivers from a previous pediatrician exempting them from school requirements for immunizations. Her older child had gastrointestinal trouble and regressed development after receiving vaccines, she said, which she believes were related to the shots.

Ms. Felice received a letter from her pediatrician a few years ago stating that because the family chose not to vaccinate, it needed to find another doctor. She called four or five other practices but none would agree to an appointment after she told them she was opposed to vaccines. The family ended up with an elderly family doctor who said he had "seen it all" and was willing to treat the children if they got sick, Ms. Felice said.

"A doctor should feel obligated to discuss [potential vaccine] risks with any parent who wants to discuss them," said Ms. Felice.

By SHIRLEY S. WANG  -  Write to Shirley S. Wang at  -  WSJ

Read More About Vaccines

Medical Journal Says Autism Study 'Fraud' (Jan. 6, 2011)

More Parents Seek Vaccine Exemption (July 6, 2010)

Book Review: The Shot Heard Round the World (March 26, 2011)

Additional Related:

Alert: Hallmark Now Distributing Vaccine Shot Compliance Cards Targeting Newborns Across America

83 percent of brain injury vaccine compensation payouts were for autism caused by vaccines

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Tells Truth About Government Coverup of Vaccine Dangers

Healthy 7-Year-Old Girl Dies in Her Mother's Arms After Flu Shot

Eugenics in Action: 3-Year Old Denied Kidney Transplant

Anyone Recall Jane Bergermeister and the Letha Vaccinations??? It’s Back!

War On: Obama and ObamaCare verses Constitutional Patriots and Religious Freedom

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sibelius answered questions in Congress this week about the left framed ‘contraception compromise’ or the ‘first amendment un-compromise’ as framed by the right.

Sibelius essentially said that the decision has been made and this mandate along with many other surprises for those who did not follow the ObamaCare fight on in August 2013… PERIOD!  The decision has been made and will go into affect regardless of the Constitution, religious freedom or what the American people want. 

Remember what Nancy Pelosi said… “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in the bill!”  Well, you are beginning to find out.

So why is this so important to progressives? Rush Limbaugh keeps saying that "abortion is the sacrament of liberalism." What makes this so? Let's ask Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, In her book "Women and the New Race", Sanger explains the purpose of birth control:(Page 229)

Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives. So, in compliance with nature’s working plan, we must permit womanhood its full development before we can expect of it efficient motherhood. If we are to make racial progress, this development of womanhood must precede motherhood in every individual woman. Then and then only can the mother cease to be an incubator and be a mother indeed. Then only can she transmit to her sons and daughters the qualities which make strong individuals and, collectively, a strong race.

Now it should all start making sense to everyone. Birth control is the sacrament of eugenics, which also explains Ultra Left Wing HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ Spin, based on her ideology and history. She was an ardent supporter of murdered partial birth abortionist, Tiller and her extreme record on abortion has sadly been ignored (or hidden) by the media.

America just celebrated 54 million abortions, a ‘choice’ everyone in the Obama administration supports. On the other side, the Priests for Life Group Just Sued the U.S. Government over the Birth Control Mandate. Sebelius admitted to Senator Orin Hatch during the hearings that she didn't consult bishops over contraception rule and also admitted that she/they did not consult with the Justice Department as to the constitutionality.

President Obama himself said that he had done the same thing when he was a community organizer.  He got leftist priests and nuns in Chicago to compromise the values of the church.

The backlash over Sibelius' interpretation of the mandate built to a crescendo last week. Obama went to the podium and announced a "compromise." It was no compromise at all ...  In reality, Obama’s contraception mandate tramples religious freedom.

This is not an issue that will go away and may haunt the president through the 2012 Election cycle.  It is a huge power grab and the first of many frightening realities of the what is really in the ObamaCare Bill.  It should be a flag to all concerned Americans that each us needs to read that bill and insist that our Congressman and Senators read it immediately… and act.  It should also be a flag to all Americans about the ideology of the President and his team and what is in our future if Obama survives this and is re-elected.

Socialized Medicine, which ObamaCare is, is he crown jewel of socialism… progressivism.  It gives the government the control over one sixth of the U.S. Economy and decisions over who get care and who doesn’t, who lives and who dies, and this fight in addition to being a fight over religious freedom and the first amendment, not contraception, is also a fight over what the government can make each of us buy and pay for from here on out.

One of the best explanations of this fight I’ve heard is:

If you are against murder and someone says, “Okay, you don’t have to kill anyone yourself. We will hire someone to kill them for you.”, there is no resolution to the issue. It goes against your values, against God and against everything you stand for. That is exactly what is happening with the birth control mandate being forced on the Catholic Church by the administration and ObamaCare.

Beck Announces ‘We Are All Catholics Now’ Movement to Stand Up for Religious Freedom

The controversy over the Obama administration’s contraception mandate is at a boiling point, as many Catholic leaders continue to view the president’s so-called “accommodation” as a failure to protect religious liberty.

Now, Glenn Beck is coming forward with a new movement called “We Are All Catholics Now.” The main goal of the initiative is to ask Americans to reach out to Congressional leaders (at the moment, Senators) to encourage the passage of legislation that would protect religious groups’ conscience rights.

Watch Beck discuss the effort on his radio show this morning:

Video:  Glenn Beck Announces 'We Are All Catholics Now' Campaign

The main push, Beck says, is to support the highway transportation bill, which will likely be voted upon this week. It will include an amendment – Blunt Conscience Protection Amendment – from Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) that would protect religious conscience rights. In the House, Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.) is working on companion legislation, though it may not be voted on for a few weeks.

Glenn Beck Announces We Are All Catholics Now Movement to Fight Mandate

Beck is encouraging individuals to get involved by calling their Senators and letting them know that “we are all Catholics now.” The issue at hand is not about contraception as it has been framed by many media outlets, he says. Instead, it is a religious freedom issue that hinges upon the separation of church and state’s mandate that the government not force churches to violate their values and principles.

Here are his directions for getting involved and making an impact:

Call the Capitol and speak with your Senator. The numbers are: 202.224.3121; 202.225.3121; the toll free numbers for the Capitol Switchboard include: 1-866-220-0044 1-877-851-6437, 1-800-833-6354, 1-888-355-3588, 1-866-808-0065, 1-877-762-8762, 1-800-862-5530.

Call the switchboard, ask to be connected to a Senator from your specific state (it will take two calls, one for each Senator).

Whoever answers:

1. Tell them that you want to tell the Senator to vote for the Blunt conscience protection amendment.
2. Ask them if they know how the Senator will vote on that amendment
3. Tell them you want to be contacted back about how he voted (be sure to ask for accountability — they hate it, but it makes them call you back).
4. When you call, be sure to tell them “We are all Catholics now”. This key phrase will let them know you are part of a larger, organized movement working in support of religious freedom.

You can read more about the movement at

Sitting in yesterday at GBTV was the co-author for Indivisible talking about the importance of his book as well as Glenn’s book Being George Washington during this pivotal times.

He spoke on the importance of uniting and turning back to God for divine intervention was our only chance to turn our country around.

This is the time to stand-up and choose your side.

Governor Palin appeared on On the Record calling this mandate an ‘Un-American Act’

Add this fight to the expected rise in unemployment (even with the job number game) and possible $5 gas prices at the pump… and this might end up being Obama’s Waterloo!  Some believe the timing of this fight is an answer to the prayers for intervention being said daily by many Americans.

This is not a fight over contraception and who will pay for it.  It is a fight over religious freedom vs. secularism, a fight over the Constitution vs. Progressivism, a fight over limiting the powers of the commerce clause vs. the government being able to force us to purchase and pay for anything they choose, and the fight over the ideology that will control this country.  This is not a fight that anyone can afford to sit out.

Ask Marion~


Updated: 5-Reasons Obama is Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle… But Could be Winning the Power Grab Mandate War

What is the real purpose of birth control? Why is all of this so important to progressives?