The Left’s Sexualizing of Girls leads to Sexual Assaults, Bullying and Suicides

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

The political left is for some reason hell-bent on sexualizing girls.  They are doing everything in their power to make it easier for boys to have sex with them.  They hand out free birth control at school.  And even allow some girls to have an abortion without telling the girls’ parents.  Making life great for boys who want to have a lot of sex.  Because with birth control and abortion there is no consequence to having a lot of sex.  Apart from the occasional venereal disease that will stay with them for life.  And the occasional suicide (see 3 teens arrested for assault after girl’s suicide by MARTHA MENDOZA, Associated Press, posted 4/12/2013 on Yahoo! News).

Eight days after allegedly being sexually battered while passed out at a party, and then humiliated by online photos of the assault, 15-year-old Audio Pott posted on Facebook that her life was ruined, “worst day ever,” and hanged herself…

“After an extensive investigation that we have conducted on behalf of the family, there is no doubt in our minds that the victim, then only 15 years old, was savagely assaulted by her fellow high school students while she lay on a bed completely unconscious.”

Allard said students used cell phones to share photos of the attack, and that the images went viral…

The Pott family is not alone.

In Canada on Thursday, authorities said they are looking further into the case of a teenage girl who hanged herself Sunday after an alleged rape and months of bullying. A photo said to be of the 2011 assault on 17-year-old Rehtaeh Parsons was shared online.

No charges initially were filed against four teenage boys being investigated. But after an outcry, Nova Scotia’s justice minister appointed four government departments to look into Parsons’ case.

It is hard to fathom how anyone could do such a heinous thing as rape.  But to post images online for their friends and schoolmates to laugh about is beyond all comprehension.  How does rape become so trivialized that people can laugh about it?  Continuously?  To even bully the victim over it?  My God, what have we as a society become?

One cannot help but to draw a link between the Left’s sexualizing of girls and these heinous acts.  For it is the Left that is bringing these girls’ sexual identity front and center.  Which the boys are noticing.  And taking advantage of.  Having little else but sex on the mind.  Thinking there is nothing wrong with seeing girls as sexual objects.  And the Left helps them by making birth control and abortion so readily available.  Instead of encouraging these girls to wait until marriage.  Or some other barbaric, backward thinking.  To encourage them to pursue other interests.  Such as school clubs.  The honor’s society.  Girl Scouts.  Something that lets a girl be something other than a plaything for a boy.  For how can that ever end well for the girl?

The Left needs to stop making young girls acting like grownups the cool thing to do.  They should have their childhood.  Which they could.  If we stop encouraging them to please the boys by pushing birth control and abortion on them.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , ,

President Obama has a Lot in Common with the Social Democracy Ideology of the NDP

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

The New Democratic Party (NDP) of British Columbia is a social-democratic political party.  Their political ideology is Social democracy.  And the Social democracy political ideology is to transform capitalism into socialism through progressive social reform.  And they do that with higher taxes and wealth redistribution.  In fact, the current NDP leader in British Columbia has pledged to raise taxes should they win the coming election (see NDP promises tax hikes if elected by Bryn Weese, QMI Agency, posted 4/11/2013 on Vancouver 24 hrs).

Corporations, banks, polluters and the wealthy will pay more if the BC NDP wins the provincial election.

The party’s fiscal plan, unveiled at Simon Fraser University Thursday, calls for: a one point rise in the corporate tax rate from 11% to 12%, reinstating a 3% bank tax, expanding the carbon tax to include vented oil and gas emissions, and raising the personal income tax rate to 19% on incomes over $150,000 a year.

The party, if elected, also plans to run the same $800 million deficits it alleges the ruling BC Liberals are hiding. In total, the NDP would run nearly $2 billion in deficits over the next three years until the party, it says, would balance the budget in year four of a NDP government.

“We’re looking at those who have a little more to give a little more,” NDP finance critic Bruce Ralston told reporters…

The fiscal plan is a broad look at how the NDP will pay for its election platform, which will be detailed during the campaign. On Thursday, the party promised a childcare and early-education plan and a poverty-reduction strategy.

Earlier this week, NDP Leader Adrian Dix proposed increasing the tax credits for TV and film productions in the province to 40% of labour costs.

Sound familiar?  It sounds a lot like what you hear coming out of Washington.  For the Obama administration wants to tax corporations, banks, polluters and the wealthy more.  In fact they’ve used the same language.  “We’re looking at those who have a little more to give a little more.”  The Obama administration is running deficits.  President Obama even talked about expanding funds for childcare so children as young as 4 years old can receive state indoctrination.  I mean, early developmental skills.  The Obama administration has a poverty-reduction strategy.  They call it food stamps.  Some have even called him the food stamp president because more people than ever use food stamps.  And the Obama administration as a special relationship with TV and film production.  He even changed his stance on same-sex marriage in exchange for more Hollywood campaign donations.

So what does this mean?  Does it mean that President Obama is a Social democrat, too?  Because he shares the same political ideology of the NDP?  Social democracy?  Does this mean President Obama wants to transform capitalism into socialism through progressive social reform?  Of course not.  Just because it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it doesn’t mean President Obama is a socialist-leaning anti-capitalist.  It’s just a coincidence that he looks like, walks like and quacks like a socialist-leaning anti-capitalist.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Digital Medical Records have the Medical History Wrong for a Patient in the NHS

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

The keystone to Obamacare is digitizing medical records.  To make it easier for any health care professional to access a patient’s record no matter where they are.  Even if they’ve never met the patient before.  One set of records kept online for all to see.  No errors from duplicate copies.  No waiting for hardcopies to arrive.  It’s efficiency.  And accuracy.  Allowing great potential for cost cutting by automating the health care system to mass produce the delivery of health care services.

Patients come in and data-entry clerks encode them into the system.  As they move from station to station the next health care provider just has to pull up the work-order on the patient.  Do their part.  And ship the patient off to the next workstation.  Like an auto assembly plant.  Where they have economies of scale.  Keeping costs down.  This is what digitizing medical records will give us.  Well, that, and this (see Grandmother handcuffed and escorted from GP surgery by police after demanding to see medical notes by Amanda Williams posted 4/8/2013 on the Daily Mail).

A grandmother was handcuffed and led away from her doctor’s surgery by police after a row over her demand to see her medical notes.

Mary Kerswell, 67, asked for a copy of her GP records after she was called in for a urine test for a kidney condition she did not have.

When the mother of two was shown a brief summary of her medical history she was shocked to see that as well as being wrongly listed as having chronic kidney disease, it said she was a heavy smoker with Alzheimer’s.

The incorrect summary of her notes also said the healthy pensioner had undergone a hysterectomy and a double hip replacement.

Obviously there was a data input error somewhere along the way.  An error that no one caught because she was just a digital record in the system.  If there was a doctor-patient relationship like there still is in the United States (for awhile at least) her doctor would have caught that error.  Because he would have known the patient.  And because he would have known the patient he would have known the medical history in the digital medical record was wrong.  Because he treats a person.  Not just process a work-order in the system.

This is national health care.  Fewer health care providers taking care of more patients.  Where patients are just anonymous sick people with a work-order attached.  Allowing doctors to handle greater patient loads with ever more limited health care resources.  Common in all countries with an aging population.  Fewer workers paying income taxes to fund the health care of a greater number of people who have left the workforce.  Just like they have in the United States.  So what’s happening in the NHS will no doubt happen in Obamacare.  Because we both have an aging population.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Obama’s Rejection of the Keystone XL Pipeline raises Food Prices and makes the World a more Polluted Place

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

President Obama yielded to the environmentalists in his liberal base on the Keystone XL pipeline.  Who opposed it on environmental grounds.  Ironic as the environment will be at greater risk if the president doesn’t let them build the pipeline.  And to make matters worse the price of gasoline will go up also.  Making one of the worst economic recoveries in U.S. history worse.  By leaving less money in consumers’ pockets.  While at the same time raising the price of everything that uses refined oil to get to market (see Killing Keystone Seen as Risking More Oil Spills by Rail by Rebecca Penty & Jim Efstathiou Jr. posted 4/9/2013 on Bloomberg).

A rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline by President Barack Obama would push more of Canada’s $73 billion oil exports onto trains, which register almost three times more spills than pipelines…

Shipping more supplies by rail would lead to higher costs for oil producers because train shipments are more expensive than pipelines…

Without Keystone, designed to carry 830,000 barrels a day of oil, shipments of Canadian crude by rail would rise an additional 42 percent by 2017, according to RBC Capital Markets.

“One of the unintended consequences of delaying Keystone XL is that more oil has been getting to markets in Canada and the United States using rail, truck and water-borne tankers,” Shawn Howard, a spokesman for TransCanada, said in an e-mail. “None of those methods of transportation are as safe as moving it by pipelines,” he said.

Trains are one of the most efficient ways to transport heavy freight.  Bulk freight carriers on the Great Lakes can ship heavy freight cheaper but they don’t travel as fast as trains.  And they can only travel on water.  A train can travel almost anywhere.  Over, under and around bodies of water.  Something a ship just can’t do with land.  But the benefit of train transport comes with a cost.  Rail infrastructure is very costly.  And you have to have it wherever a train travels.  Unlike a ship.  Still, rail is the best way to transport bulk freight.  Except that kind of bulk freight that we can push through a pipeline.

To think of the immense advantage of moving things by pipeline consider the hot water in your house when having a bath.  Without the pipeline system in your house you would have to heat water outside over a fire.  Then carry it in small containers and pour it into your bathtub.  Container after container you would have to fill with cold water.  Carry it to where you converted it into hot water.  Then carry the hot water by foot where you could stumble or fall, spilling your converted cold water.  Leaving you a mess to clean up.  And the need to burn more fuel to convert more cold water into hot water.

Now imagine having a bath by simply opening the hot water tap at your bathtub and letting it fill your tub.  It’s a whole lot easier.  Less chance to spill water.  And you burn less fuel.  So which would you rather do?  Clearly moving anything by pipeline is the best way to move anything.  You reduce the chance of spills because the only moving part is the oil in the pipeline.  And there are no loading and unloading costs to factor into the price of gasoline.  As the refineries basically have a hot water tap to turn on when they want to refine oil.  It just doesn’t get simpler than that.

Keystone XL pipeline doesn’t put the people or the environment first.  Just those people who oppose businesses and capitalism.  Who don’t care that people have to spend more to put gasoline into their cars.  Or have to spend more at the grocery store thanks to higher fuel costs passed along in higher food prices.  For if it were up to them people wouldn’t even have cars.  Or enjoy eating anything that came from an animal.  That’s the world the environmentalists have in mind for the American people.  Where the people sacrifice.  So the animals can enjoy a pristine environment.  Where they can happily eat each other.  And crap all over the place.  The way Mother Nature meant it to be.  Before God created man.  Who the environmentalist hate.  And blame for making a mess of everything.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obamacare is Raising Health Care Costs and Causing People to Lose their Health Insurance

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 13th, 2013

Week in Review

Members of Congress think they’re smarter than the average business owner.  But they’re not.  In fact, when it comes to running a business most Congress people don’t have a clue.  Yet they continuously pass new legislation.  Discounting any concerns business owners may have.  With a certain measure of disdain.  For business owners are, after all, the enemy.  Because they object to paying higher taxes.  And they object to higher regulatory costs.  Just so they can keep their earnings.  And that’s just being greedy.

When the Democrats rammed Obamacare through Congress on a straight party vote the business community said this legislation was going to hurt them.  But Congress didn’t care.  Their basic attitude was ‘screw them’.  They’re just greedy.  But they weren’t being greedy.  They were just worried how they were going to stay in business under Obamacare (see Some Small Businesses Opt for the Health-Care Penalty by EMILY MALTBY and SARAH E. NEEDLEMAN posted 4/8/2013 on The Wall Street Journal).

Mr. Levi currently spends about $140,000 a year on insurance premiums to cover 25 managerial staff at his business, Consolidated Management, which runs cafeterias at schools, offices and jails.

Under the new law, he will have to offer insurance to all of his 102 full-time employees starting in January. Assuming all of them take the coverage, Mr. Levi says the cost of premiums could exceed $500,000.

“I’ve never made a profit in any year of the company that has surpassed that amount,” says Mr. Levi, 62 years old. “I don’t make enough money.”

He says it makes more sense to drop insurance entirely and pay a penalty of about $144,000…

Mr. Levi…is worried that failing to offer insurance could entice employees to seek employment at competing businesses that do offer benefits.

“If we don’t offer coverage, will it be harder to hire people?” he asks. “That’s the unknown.”

Meeting the new health care mandate will turn an operating profit into an operating loss.  Now as much as the Democrats may hate the very idea of profits a business just can’t remain in business if it doesn’t make a profit.  So his choices are go out of business or cut health care.  But if he cuts health care he may lose employees.  And have trouble hiring new employees.  For even though the majority of his employees were happy to work without health insurance those positions that had it may be very hard to fill without it.  Which may leave the only option available is the going out of business option.  Putting 102 people out of a full-time job.  And he’s not alone.

Mr. Epstein, 52, employs about 250 workers and currently provides health insurance to his 20 office personnel. If he were to start covering the 100 or so nurses and nursing assistants that work full time, his annual health-insurance costs would jump to roughly $600,000 from the current $100,000, he says.

Even if he takes the penalty option, he estimates he would have to pay about $240,000—a cost he doesn’t think his business could absorb. To compensate, he plans to cut the number of hours his nurses and nursing assistants work so they will be considered part-time under the law. He says he will hire more part-timers to ensure patients receive the same level of care.

Few business can just absorb another $500,000 in costs.  Even absorbing an additional $140,000 is not that easy.  Unless you have a monopoly and can just increase your prices.  But few have the privilege of just increasing their prices to absorb additional costs.  Most have to figure out how to cut costs elsewhere.  Such as dropping insurance coverage.  Forcing full-time workers to part-time.  Or deducting more out of their paychecks for the higher insurance cost.

To avoid the employer mandate, some small firms are considering other strategies, such as increasing employees’ share of the premiums, so they don’t have to shoulder the entire cost of offering benefits. Others say they will stay under the 50 full-time employee threshold or deliberately turn full-time workers into part-timers.

This is the reality of Obamacare.  And when it hits our businesses with higher regulatory costs it is ultimately the employees of the business that pay.  If you have ever wondered why the current economic recovery is one of the worst in history this a big reason why.  Obamacare.  It has frozen hiring.  And even pushed full-time workers to part-time.  All in the name of trying to pay the costs of Obamacare.  Which, according to the geniuses in Congress, was going to make everything better.  Giving everyone high-quality health care.  While cutting health care costs.  So far it appears to be doing the exact opposite.  And they’re still rolling it out.  So the worst is, no doubt, yet to come.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,