The Democratic Party Has Become the Lawyer's PartyH

A friend sent this to me via email. I searched online and could not find a source. It is reprinted here without permission, because I can not track down the author. If you know who wrote this, please contact me at thorntonrose@hotmail.com

That being said, this states the facts beautifully and accurately and honestly!

The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers’ Party.

Barack Obama is a lawyer.

Michelle Obama is a lawyer.

Hillary Clinton is a lawyer.

Bill Clinton is a lawyer.

John Edwards is a lawyer.

Elizabeth Edwards is a lawyer.

Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did
not graduate).

Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd
Bentsen, went to law school.

Look at leaders of the Democrat Party in Congress:

Harry Reid is a lawyer.

Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different.

President Bush is a businessman.

Vice President Cheney is a businessman.

The leaders of the Republican Revolution:

Newt Gingrich was a history professor.

Tom Delay was an exterminator. Dick Armey was an economist.

House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer.

The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work, who are often the targets of lawyers.

The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers’ Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America . And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers’ Party, grow.

Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the leg al system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become “adverse parties” of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of
politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great.

When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers’ Party to provide real change, real reform or real hope in America Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not
restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy..

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work.

Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

The United States has 5% of the world’s population and 66% of the world’s lawyers! Tort (Legal) reform legislation has been introduced in congress several times in the last several years to limit punitive damages in ridiculous lawsuits such as “spilling hot coffee on yourself and suing the establishment that sold it to you” and also to limit punitive damages in huge medical malpractice lawsuits.

This legislation has continually been blocked from even being voted on by the Democrat Party. When you see that 97% of the poitical contributions from the American Trial Lawyers Association goes to the Democrat Party, then you realize who is responsible for our medical and product costs being so high!

From a WW2 Veteran

Found this in my email this morning. Came with this preface:

This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body,he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now.

He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president.

Dear President Obama,

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don't believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert.

I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos'n Mate. Now I live in a "rest home" located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.

One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.

So here goes.

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

I can't figure out what country you are the president of.

You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like:

" We're no longer a Christian nation"

" America is arrogant" - (Your wife even announced to the world,"America is mean-spirited. " Please tell her to try preaching that nonsense to 23 generations of our war dead buried all over the globe who died for no other reason than to free a whole lot of strangers from tyranny and hopelessness.)

I'd say shame on the both of you, but I don't think you like America, nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House.

After 9/11 you said," America hasn't lived up to her ideals."

Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War? I hope you didn't mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.

I don't think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected.

Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.

Shape up and start acting like an American. If you don't, I'll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, & not to apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. You mean you don't want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts, who was putting up a fight? You don't mind offending the police calling them stupid but you don't want us to offend Muslim fanatics by calling them what they are, terrorists.

One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life, but you're the Commander-in-Chief now, son. Do your job. When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out. The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you're thinking of.

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president.

You're not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. That's not our greatest threat. Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now.

And I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

Sincerely,
Harold B. Estes

When a 95 year old hero of the "the Greatest Generation"stands up and speaks out like this, I think we owe it to him to send his words to as many Americans as we can. Sooooo, Please pass it on.

Meet Quality Men on the Internet - wikiHow

Meet Quality Men on the Internet - wikiHow

Doris the Democrat

I was cleaning out the books at Doris' house and I found a few old books that I had to keep. One well-worn volume was "101 Common Mistakes of Etiquette." Published in 1939, it was filled with precise rules on when to wear elbow-length white gloves and when to remove those elbow-length white gloves.

"A lady never removes her gloves," the thin book states, "when shaking hands."

Tucked carefully within its few pages was a handwritten poem. At first I thought my friend Doris was the author, for the poem was written on notepaper in her own hand. But a quick search on the internet revealed that she was not the author. The author is listed at numerous sites as "Anonymous."

I post this poem here, for it was written during the time of Roosevelt's reign, and despite the many kindnesses that school-children's history books have shown this man, I believe he opened up the treasury to the public, something that had been resisted during The Panics (depressions) of 1873, and 1893 and 1908. I believe that history will show that FDR's horrific decision to open up the public treasury will - in time - be proven to be the start of America's decline from hegemony.

"A democracy...can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury." (Lord Alexander Tytler)

An aside: The WPA was "Work's Progress Administration." The NLB was the "National Labor Board." The AAA was the "Agricultural Adjustment Administration."

Rejected
FDR at the gates of Hell

A stranger stood at the Gates of hell
And the Devil himself answered the bell.
He looked him over from head to toe
And said: My friend, I'd like to know
What you have done in the line of sin
To entitle you to come within?

Then Franklin D, with his usual guile
Stepped forth with his toothy smile and said:

"When I took charge in '33
A nations faith was mine," said he
"I promised them this and I promised them that
And I calmed them down with a fireside chat.
I spent their money in fishing trips
And fished from the decks of their battleships.

I gave them jobs in the WPA
Then raised their taxes and took it away.
I raised their wages and closed their shops
I killed their pigs and buried their crops
I double-crossed both old and young
And still the folks my praises sung. I taxed it so high they couldn't drink.
I furnished 'em money with Government loans
When they missed a payment I took their homes.
When I wanted to punish the folks, you know
I'd put my wife on the radio.

I paid them to let their farms lie still
And imported foodstuffs from Brazil.
I curtailed crops when I felt real mean
And shipped in crops from the Argentine.

When they started to worry, stew and fret
I got them to chant the alphabet
With the AAA and the NLB
The WPA and the CCC.

With these many units I got their goats
And still I crammed it down their throats.
My workers worked with the speed of snails
While the taxpayers chewed their fingernails.

When the organization needed dough
I closed their plants with the CIO.
I ruined jobs, I ruined health
And I put the screws on the rich man's wealth.

And some who couldn't stand the gaff
Would call on me and how I'd laugh.
When they got too strong on certain things
I'd pack and head for "Ole Warm Springs."
I ruined their country, their homes and then
I placed the blame on "Nine Old Men."

Now Franklin talked both long and loud
And the devil stood and his head he bowed.
At last he said: "Lets make it clear
You'll have to move, you can't stay here
For once you mingle with this mob,
I'll have to find another job."

And to think that this was a favorite poem of Doris the Democrat. :) But then again, she's really old (born in the early 1920s), and how could someone who lived through that era be expected to really understand anything about it? ;)

This came from a website forum that I frequent. I thought it made for a *very* interesting read. On a personal note, I had an out-of-town guest at my home for several days last week. She's a long-time ER physician in an inner-city hospital. Her concerns echo the comments made below (which were written by a physician based in Atlanta). There's no doubt we need to reform health care, but rushing a massive new (un-read) law into place is not the thing to do.

HE PRACTICES AT ST. JOSEPHS HOSPITAL, ATLANTA , GA.

If we have doubts, the email below should help clear them. It comes from an Atlanta doctor who just could not sit back and be quiet any longer.

ObamaCare and Me

Friends:

I have been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching all of this
national debate on health care. It is time for me to bring some clarity to the table and as your friend by explaining many of the problems from the aspect of a doctor.

First off the government has involved very few of us physicians in the health care debate. While the American Medical Association has come out in favor of the plan, it is vital to remember that the AMA only represents 17% of the American physician workforce.

I have taken care of Medicaid patients for 35 years while
representing the only pediatric ophthalmology group left in Atlanta,
Georgia that accepts Medicaid. Why is this. For example, in the past 6 months I have cared for three young children on Medicaid who had corneal ulcers. This is a potentially blinding situation because if the cornea perforates from the infection, almost surely blindness will occur.

In all three cases the antibiotic needed for the eradication of the
infection was not on the approved Medicaid list. Each time I was told to fax Medicaid for the approval forms which I did. Within 48 hours the form came back to me which was mailed in immediately via fax and I was told that I would have my answer in 10 days. Of course by then each child would have been blind in the eye. Each time the request came back denied. All three times I personally provided the antibiotic for each patient which was not on the Medicaid approved list. Get the point-rationing of care.

Over the past 35 years I have cared for over 1000 children born
with congenital cataracts. In older children and in adults, the vision
is rehabilitated with an interocular lens. In newborns we use contact
lenses which are very expensive. It takes Medicaid over one year to
approve a contact lens post cataract surgery. By that time a successful anatomical operation is wasted as the child will be close to blind from a lack of focusing for so long a period of time. Again extreme rationing.

Solution- I have a foundation here in Atlanta supported 100% by private funds which supplies all of these contact lenses for my Medicaid and illegal immigrants children for free. Again waiting for the government would be disastrous.

Last week I had a lady bring her child to me. They are Americans,
but live in Sweden as the father has a job with a big corporation. The child had the on set of double vision 3 months ago and has been unable to function normally because of this. They are people of means but are waiting 8 months to see the ophthalmologist in Sweden. Then if the child needed surgery they would be put on a 6 month waiting list. She called me and I saw her that day. It turned out that the child had accommodative esotropia (crossing of the eyes treated with glasses that correct for farsightedness) and responded to glasses within 4 days, no surgery was needed. Again rationing of care.

Last month I operated on a 70 year old lady with double vision
present for 3 years. She responded quite nicely to her surgery and now is symptom free. I also operated on a 69 year old judge with vertical double vision. His surgery went very well and now he is happy as a lark.

I have been told, but of course, there is no healthcare bill that has been passed yet that these 2 people because of their age would have been denied surgery and just told to wear a patch over one eye to alleviate the symptoms of double vision. Obviously cheaper than surgery.

I spent two years in the US Navy during the Vietnam war and was
well treated by the military. There was tremendous rationing of care and we were told specifically what things the military personnel and their dependents could have and which things they could not have.

While in Vietnam, my wife Nancy got sick and got essentially no care at the Naval Hospital in Oakland, California. She went home and went to her family's private internist in Beverly Hills. While it was expensive, she received an immediate work up. Again rationing of care.

For those of you who are over 65, this bill in its present form
might be lethal for you. People in England over 59 cannot receive stints for their coronary arteries. The government wants to mimic the British plan. For those of you younger, it will still mean restriction of the care that you and your children receive.

While 99% of physicians went into medicine because of the love
of medicine and the challenge of helping our fellow man, economics are still important. My rent goes up 2% each year and the salaries of my employees goes up 2% each year. Twenty years ago ophthalmologists were paid $1800 for a cataract surgery and today $500. This is a 73% decrease in our fees. I do not know of many jobs in America that have seen this lowering of fees.

But there is more to the story that just the lower fees. When I came to Atlanta there was a well known ophthalmologist that charged $2500 for a cataract surgery as he felt he was the best. He had a terrific reputation and in fact, I had my mother's bilateral cataracts operated on by him with a wonderful result. She is now 94 and has 20/20 vision in both eyes. People would pay his $2500 fee. However then the government came in and said that any doctor that does Medicare work can not accept more than the going rate (now $500) or he or she would be severely fined. This put an end to his charging 2500. The government said it was illegal to accept more than the government allowed rate.

What I am driving at is that those of you well off will not be able to go to the head of the line under this new healthcare plan just because you have money as no physician will be willing to go against the law to treat you.

I am a pediatric ophthalmologist and trained for 10 years post
college to become a pediatric ophthalmologist (add two years of my
service in the Navy and that comes to 12 years). A neurosurgeon spends 14 years post college and if he or she has to do the military that would be 16 years. I am not entitled to make what a neurosurgeon makes but the new plan calls for all physicians to make the same amount of payment. I assure you that medical students will not go into neurosurgery and we will have a tremendous shortage of neurosurgeons. Already the top neurosurgeon at my hospital who is in good health and only 52 years old has just quit because he can't stand working with the government anymore.

Forty-nine percent of children under the age of 16 in the state of
Georgia are on Medicaid so he felt he just could not stand working with the bureaucracy anymore.

We are being lied to about the uninsured. They are getting care. I operate on at least 2 illegal immigrants each month who pay me nothing and the children's hospital at which I operate charges them nothing also. This is true not only on Atlanta, but of every community in America.

The bottom line is that I urge all of you to contact your
congresswomen and congressmen and senators to defeat this bill.
I promise you that you will not like rationing of your own health.

Furthermore, how can you trust a physician that works under these conditions knowing that he is controlled by the state. I certainly could not trust any doctor that would work under these conditions.

One last thing, with this new health care plan there will be a
tremendous shortage of physicians. It has been estimated that
approximately 5% of the current physician work force will quit under
this new system. Also it is estimated that another 5% shortage will
occur because of decreased men and women wanting to go into medicine. At the present time the US government has mandated gender equity in admissions to medical schools. That means that for the past 15 years that somewhere between 49 and 51% of each entering class are females. This is true of private schools also because all private schools receive federal fundings. The average career of a woman in medicine now is only 8-10 years and the average work week for a female in medicine is only 3-4 days. I have now trained 35 fellows in pediatric ophthalmology. Hands down, the best was a female that I trained 4 years ago, she was head and heels above all others I have trained. She now practices only 3
days a week.

Zane Pollard, MD

A needle in a stack of tall grass

Sunday afternoon, I was walking alongside the sidewalk in my front yard on Gosnold Avenue, cleaning up the week's accumulation of trash: Cheeseburger wrappers, discarded cigarette cartons, one well-used diaper, candy wrappers and beer bottles. And as I stooped over to pick up a small piece of unidentifiable trash in the tall grass, I saw something I've never seen before: A hypodermic needle.

I carefully picked it up and showed it to my husband. His response: "I guess some poor diabetic didn't have time to properly dispose of his needle so he tossed it in our yard."

I was not amused.

The needle itself was bent over and the gradations on the side of the syringe were almost faded to obscurity. I surmise that it had been used many times. This morning, I called the police and they were kind and sympathetic, but unimpressed. Not much they could do about it. I understood, kind of, but was still disappointed.

The cop explained that druggies like to hold onto their needles and only toss them when they no longer function correctly. The bend in the needle could have been the reason it was tossed. He also said that sometimes the druggies will throw them out the window when they're afraid of being caught by the cops (as in, when being chased).

I now know more than I ever wanted to know about the habits of druggies.

I'm very unhappy that a needle was tossed into the front yard of my supposedly respectable suburban neighborhood. Heaven knows, we certainly paid enough for this house that we should not be subject to druggies throwing their used hypodermics into our front yard. In fact, we paid well north of $300,000 for this two-story, center-hallway Colonial. I mention that, not as a point of pride, but as a point of context. It boggles my mind that decent-but-not-extraordinary 80-year-old center-hallway Colonial homes in average suburban neighborhoods are fetching more than $300,000.

In 1979, I paid $24,000 for a two-bedroom cinder-block, formerly-a-two-car-garage home in neat and tidy Westhaven/Grove Park (Portsmouth). In 1981, we moved up to a $31,500 three-bedroom, 1250 square-foot cape cod with a view of the river. That may have been my all-time favorite house. It was on a dead-end street and if a strange car ended up on OUR road, we all ran to our windows to see who was entering our sacred and private space.

But now it's 2009 and modest two-story center-hallway Colonials fetch $300,000 and up and it blows my $31,500-nice-house-on-a-dead-end mind.

And even with that handsome, more-than $300,000 price tag, you still are faced with the unpleasant task of walking your yard once a week and picking up other people's filthy trash and disgusting debris and if that's not insult enough (and trust me, it is), sometimes you have to pick up their discarded heroin needles and call the cops.

On March 31, 2007 my 2003 Camry was broken into and all its contents were hastily dumped on the floor. I wept from despair and frustration. My husband told me, "This is life in the big city." The second time my 2003 Camry was broken into (in the back yard), he told me, "This is just life in the big city." The first time a man paused at our side yard to relieve himself on the tree, my husband told me, "Well, there are worse things that could happen." The second time an old drunk stumbled up to our tree to relieve himself, my husband said, "He's obviously intoxicated."

I understand that I must pick up filthy trash if I want to keep my yard nice. I understand that I must tolerate abhorrent behavior on occasion in this highly urban setting, with so many people crammed into such a small space. But I will never understand or accept that every now and then, some drug addict will choose to throw his discarded needles into my beautiful yard.

Soon, there'll be a time when I'm able to move out of The Big City and into a "Gentleman's Farm," far, far away from the maddening crowd.

I'm looking forward to moving from The Big City to My Small Farm. My day is coming.

My very first blog

Today, April 27, 2009, I became a blogger. As a writer, I've always kept a plethora of journals, including private journals, prayer journals, gratitude journals, quotes from favorite book journals, etc. Blogging seemed like the next natural step.

BTW, thanks to precious Lizzy for the blog's name. That was her idea. :)

This morning at breakfast, Wayne and I were discussing the meaning of different words (something we often do, actually), and the word of the day was "prosaic." Before we fetched the dictionary, we each shared our own ideas of this word's meaning and my definition was nearest right, to which Wayne said, "You get a Dewey button."

I had to ask him to repeat this comment, as I had no idea what he was talking about. He added, "that's what the old folks back home used to say, 'You get a Dewey Button.'" And the he laughed out loud. Something about that phrase tickled him greatly.

"Back home" for Wayne is the beautiful mountains of West Virginia.

After breakfast, I had to look up Dewey. All I could remember was that he was a presidential candidate many decades ago.

Turns out that Thomas E. Dewey was the Republican candidate in the 1948 presidential election against Harry S. Truman. Pre-election polling showed that Dewey was leading by double digits. In the wee hours of the morning after election day, The Chicago Tribune called the election for Dewey, and put their prediction in print, creating the now infamous headline that read, "Dewey Defeats Truman." Harry S. Truman, it turned out, won that election.

The 1948 election was Dewey's third (and last) shot at the presidency.

In 1940, Dewey sought the Republican party's bid for president but lost to Wendell Wilkie. Wilkie went up against FDRoosevelt. (Roosevelt, history buffs may recall, was the first president to throw open the doors to the US treasury and loudly proclaim, "Lookie here, there's plenty of money in here for EVERYONE!")

Four years later, Dewey won the Republican bid but lost the general election to Roosevelt (whom, history buffs may recall, was the president who repeatedly violated the constitution with his far-reaching and overreaching "new deal" enactments and stacked the supreme court and confiscated gold from private citizens and should have been impeached for his repeated acts of malfeasance).

On a lighter note, Alice Roosevelt Longworth (dilettante and eldest daughter of Teddy Roosevelt) quipped that Dewey was "The little man on the wedding cake" (a reference to his dapper appearance and thin little mustache). To Dewey's disdain, Alice's comment stuck like glue.

In 1948, Dewey again won the Republican bid for candidacy but (as is stated above) lost to Harry S. Truman, who was the last decent democratic president that we had in these United States.

So, how does that relate to Dewey Buttons? I'm not really sure. Perhaps back in the day, a Dewey Button had little value because that candidate never won in the general election for President. However now they're increasingly rare and a "Dewey for president" button fetches $25 and up.

I'll take a couple hundred.