RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/2/socialized-medicine-from-a-survivor/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS

What to expect from America’s version of Britain’s NHS. Welcome, America, to the British NHS. That may not be what you were promised when your president first dreamed up Obamacare. But the National Health Service is what you’re going to get all the same.

I did warn you about this, four years ago in my (depressingly) prophetic book “Welcome to Obamaland: I’ve Seen Your Future and It Doesn’t Work.” I noted, for example, that your future president had grossly underestimated the costs of socialized health care. I warned that though he said at the time that it would cost between $50 billion and $65 billion, it undoubtedly would cost 10 times that amount. Look it up if you don’t believe me. It’s on Page 37.

But since last week’s Supreme Court ruling, we are where we are, unfortunately. So let me, as a Brit who has been living the whole socialized-medicine nightmare his entire life, give you a few tips as to what you can expect (assuming Mitt Romney doesn’t get in and boot the whole thing into the dustbin of history, where it belongs).

First, don’t panic: It’s not all bad. The National Health Service is what in Britain we call a “curate’s egg” – which is to say, it’s good in parts. The problem is, on any given occasion, you never quite know which it’s going to be. Will the hospital, doctor and nurses’ treatment be as it would by the cloyingly sycophantic maitre’d of your favorite high-class restaurant? Or will they treat you like Oliver Twist with his begging bowl, pleading piteously for a dollop of gruel? Are you a cherished customer or a darned nuisance? The NHS can never quite make up its mind.

More evidence Roberts switched under pressure Breitbart.com Monday, July 2, 2012 News It appears Chief Justice John Roberts did, in fact, switch his vote on the Obamacare decision under pressure from President Barack Obama, the Democrats, and the mainstream media. Read more… Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz1zYG6ptIN   Michelle Obama: Barack, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob The Washington […]

Banning circumcision is dangerous to your health
By Spengler
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NG03Dj02.html

On June 26, the District Court of the Federal State of Cologne ruled that circumcision of children for religious reasons at the instruction of parents constituted the infliction of bodily harm and therefore was a punishable offense. As the judges concerned included their email addresses and telephone numbers in a press release, concerned individuals might wish to express their views directly.

To: State Court Judge Dr Jan F Orth, Cologne
(Jan.Orth@lg-koeln.nrw.de; tel +49-221-477-3304 )
and District Court Judge Jorg Baack (Joerg.back@ag-koeln.nrw.de, tel +49-221-477-2008 .)

Your Honors: Your decision last week to criminalize the religious rite of circumcision presents a threat to the survival of the German people. Germans are failing of the desire to live. At your present fertility rate of 1.3 children per female, there will be virtually no German speakers left to celebrate Goethe’s quadricentennial, although a few Jewish scholars still might learn German as a supplement to Yiddish. In more ways than you imagine, this decision poisons the hearts of your countrymen and reduces their long-term prospects for survival.

Whether the Constitutional Court will uphold your decision remains to be seen; in the meantime, you have put the life of Germany’s small Jewish community into suspension. Physicians at the Jewish Hospital in Berlin have stopped performing circumcisions for fear of legal action. Even worse: you have provided a pretext for every Jew-hater in Germany to denounce a fundamental practice of our religion on the spurious pretext of child welfare.

Not even the Nazis thought of banning circumcision as a way of uprooting Jewish life in Germany. If your decree withstands a constitutional challenge, Germany once again will be Judenrein. The difference today is that you need us more than we need you.

Cross-posted from National Review Online: The Corner

The Islamist destruction underway in Timbuktu (including the tomb of Sidi Mahmoudou, d. 955, and the doors of the Sidi Yahya Mosque, ca. 1400) raises a question: What is it about Islam that so often turns its adherents against their own patrimony? Consider some examples:

* The destruction of Hindu temples in medieval India.
* The Mamluks using the Great Sphinx of Egypt as target practice and the Great Pyramid as a quarry.
* The Turkish destruction of churches in northern Cyprus since 1974.
* The Saudi destruction of antiquities in Mecca since the 1990s,
* The Palestinian sacking of the Tomb of Joseph in 2000.
* The Taliban destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha in 2001.
* Al-Qaeda’s bombing of Ghriba synagogue in Tunisia in 2002,
* The pillaging of Iraqi museums, libraries, and archives in 2003.
* The destruction of an historic Malaysian Hindu temple in 2006.
* The destruction of L’Institut d’Égypte in 2011.

http://www.prudenpolitics.com/newsletter?utm_source=P&P%20Auto%201&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=3977

The much-anticipated operation was a brilliant success, but the patient died.Chief Justice John Roberts is a clever surgeon, and he left a bloody mess to prove it. He’s in the Mediterranean now, on the island of Malta, lecturing to European lawyers about how to “grow” in office, basking in the applause of fans of the welfare state.

Some of our most intellectually resplendent pundits and academics are applauding, too. They’re calling him the dancing master of “finesse,” the lord of the “physics of American politics,” the genius of the conservative attempt to move judicial review back to the center.

What they’re not saying is that John Roberts has bequeathed to the rest of us a monstrosity of a health-care system, now embedded in the law, where it will only grow, fester and metastasize. Worst of all, Mr. Justice Roberts has given Congress, and all the Congresses to follow, the unrestrained power to rob, plunder and pillage and call it a “tax.”

Escape From Sharia — on The Glazov Gang
by Jamie Glazov
Amani Mustafa, Anni Cyrus and Nonie Darwish share their experiences of breaking from the chains of Islamic slavery.

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/jamie-glazov/escape-from-sharia-on-the-glazov-gang/

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3144/egypt-under-islamists Since the US Administration insisted early on that the Muslim Brotherhood be invited to the Cairo speech and presented with the choicest seats there – all in direct violation of the wishes of then-President Hosni Mubarak, who ultimately refused even to attend the speech – all options but surrender seem to have been off […]

  http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3140/radical-islam-spain The report, which examines some of the main Islamist groups operating in Spain, shows that the common thread linking all the groups together is their mutual desire to establish an Islamic Caliphate. Two Islamists have been arrested in Spain on charges of torturing and murdering two fellow Muslims for “abandoning radical Islam.” The […]

http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/health-361378-court-tax.html

Three months ago, I quoted George Jonas on the 30th anniversary of Canada’s ghastly “Charter of Rights and Freedoms”: “There seems to be an inverse relationship between written instruments of freedom, such as a Charter, and freedom itself,” wrote Jonas. “It’s as if freedom were too fragile to be put into words: If you write down your rights and freedoms, you lose them.”

For longer than one might have expected, the U.S. Constitution was a happy exception to that general rule – until, that is, the contortions required to reconcile a republic of limited government with the ambitions of statism rendered U.S. constitutionalism increasingly absurd. As I also wrote three months ago (yes, yes, don’t worry, there’s a couple of sentences of new material in amongst all the I-told-you-so stuff), “The United States is the only Western nation in which our rulers invoke the Constitution for the purpose of overriding it – or, at any rate, torturing its language beyond repair.”

Thus, the Supreme Court’s Obamacare decision. No one could seriously argue that the Framers’ vision of the Constitution intended to provide philosophical license for a national government (“federal” hardly seems le mot juste) whose treasury could fine you for declining to make provision for a chest infection that meets the approval of the Commissar of Ailments. Yet on Thursday, Chief Justice John Roberts did just that. And conservatives are supposed to be encouraged that he did so by appeal to the Constitution’s taxing authority rather than by a massive expansion of the Commerce Clause. Indeed, several respected commentators portrayed the Chief Justice’s majority vote as a finely calibrated act of constitutional seemliness.

Great. That and $4.95 will get you a decaf macchiato in the Supreme Court snack bar. There’s nothing constitutionally seemly about a court decision that says this law is only legal because the people’s representatives flat-out lied to the people when they passed it. Throughout the Obamacare debates, Democrats explicitly denied it was a massive tax hike: “You reject that it’s a tax increase?” George Stephanopoulos demanded to know on ABC. “I absolutely reject that notion,” replied the President. Yet “that notion” is the only one that would fly at the Supreme Court. The jurists found the individual mandate constitutional by declining to recognize it as a mandate at all. For Roberts’ defenders on the right, this is apparently a daring rout of Big Government: Like Nelson contemplating the Danish fleet at the Battle of Copenhagen, the Chief Justice held the telescope to his blind eye and declared, “I see no ships.”

How Islam Ruined My Life — on The Glazov Gang
by Frontpagemag.com
Amani Mustafa, Anni Cyrus and Nonie Darwish share the horrors they endured under Islam.

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/07/02/how-islam-ruined-my-life-on-the-glazov-gang/