Saturday, January 19, 2019
Friday, January 18, 2019
Thursday, January 17, 2019
Wednesday, January 16, 2019
Tuesday, January 15, 2019
Monday, January 14, 2019
Saturday, January 12, 2019
Money -> Hole: Why the Hell Not? - American Digest
Money -> Hole: Why the Hell Not? - American Digest: ghostsniper January 12, 2019, 1:10 PM
NOT YOURS TO GIVE
From The Life of Colonel David Crockett, compiled by Edward S. Ellis
(Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)
David Crockett
Member of Congress 1827-31, 1832-35
One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in it’s support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:
“Mr. Speaker– I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.” etc
NOT YOURS TO GIVE
From The Life of Colonel David Crockett, compiled by Edward S. Ellis
(Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884)
David Crockett
Member of Congress 1827-31, 1832-35
One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful speeches had been made in it’s support. The Speaker was just about to put the question when Crockett arose:
“Mr. Speaker– I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him. Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.” etc
Friday, January 11, 2019
Memo to Trump: Declare an emergency - WND
Memo to Trump: Declare an emergency - WND: MEMO TO TRUMP: DECLARE AN EMERGENCY
Receive author alerts
Subscribe to feed
In the long run, history will validate Donald Trump’s stand on a border wall to defend the sovereignty and security of the United States.
Why? Because mass migration from the global South, not climate change, is the real existential crisis of the West.
The American people know this, and even the elites sense it.
Think not? Well, check out the leading liberal newspapers Thursday.
The Washington Post and the New York Times each had two front-page stories about the president’s battle with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer on funding the border wall.
Inside the first section, the Post had more stories, including one describing walls in history from China’s Great Wall to the Berlin Wall to the Israeli West Bank wall to the wall separating Hungary from Serbia.
Inside the Times was a story on a new anti-immigration party, Vox, surging in Andalusia in Spain, and a story about African migrants being welcomed in Malta after being denied entry into Europe.
Another Times story related how the new president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, has pulled out of a U.N. pact on migration, declaring, “Brazil has a sovereign right to decide whether or not it accepts immigrants.”
Half the columns on the op-ed pages of the papers dealt with Trump, immigration and the wall. And there was nothing significant in either on the Democrats’ hot new issue, a Green New Deal.
Consider. In 1992, this writer’s presidential campaign had to fight to have inserted in the GOP platform a call for “structures” on the border.
Now, the whole Western world is worried about its borders as issues of immigration and identity convulse almost every country.
Looking ahead, does anyone think Americans in 2030 are going to be more concerned about the border between North Korea and South Korea, or Turkey and Syria, or Kuwait and Iraq, or Russia and Ukraine, than about the 2,000-mile border between the U.S. and Mexico?
Does anyone think Pelosi’s position that a wall is immoral will not be regarded as absurd?
America’s southern border is eventually going to be militarized and defended, or the United States, as we have known it, is going to cease to exist. And Americans will not go gentle into that good night.
Whatever one may think of the face-off Tuesday with “Chuck and Nancy,” Trump’s portrait of an unsustainable border crisis is dead on: “In the last two years, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records, including those charged or convicted of 100,000 assaults, 30,000 sex crimes and 4,000 violent killings.”
The Democrats routine retort, that native-born Americans have a higher crime rate, will not suffice as new atrocities, like those Trump related, are reported and repeated before November 2020.
What should Trump do now? Act. He cannot lose this battle with Pelosi without demoralizing his people and imperiling his presidency.
Since FDR, we have had presidential government. And when U.S. presidents have been decisive activists, history has rewarded their actions.
Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. On taking office, FDR declared a bank holiday. When Britain was barely hanging on in World War II, he swapped 50 destroyers for British bases. He ordered U.S. ships to chase down German submarines and lied about it. Truman fired Gen. MacArthur.
Reagan fired the striking air controllers and ordered the military to occupy Grenada to stop Marxist thugs who had taken over in a coup from taking 500 U.S. medical students hostage.
Critics raged: Reagan had no right to invade. But the American people rewarded Reagan with a 49-state landslide.
Trump should declare a national emergency, shift funds out of the Pentagon, build his wall, open the government and charge Democrats with finding excuses not to secure our border because they have a demographic and ideological interest in changing the face of the nation.
For the larger the share of the U.S. population that requires welfare, the greater the need for more social workers, and the more voters there will be to vote to further grow the liberal welfare state.
The more multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual America becomes – the less it looks like Ronald Reagan’s America – the more dependably Democratic it will become.
The Democratic Party is hostile to white men, because the smaller the share of the U.S. population that white men become, the sooner that Democrats inherit the national estate.
The only way to greater “diversity,” the golden calf of the Democratic Party, is to increase the number of women, African-Americans, Asians and Hispanics, and thereby reduce the number of white men.
The decisive issues on which Trump was elected were not the old Republican litany of tax cuts, conservative judges and increased defense spending.
They were securing the borders, extricating America from foolish wars, eliminating trade deficits with NAFTA nations, the EU and China, making allies pay their fair share of the common defense, resurrecting our manufacturing base and getting along with Russia.
“America First!” is still a winning hand.
Wednesday, January 09, 2019
A NOVEL APPROACH TO TREATMENT FOR CHRONIC AVULSION FRACTURE OF THE ISCHIAL TUBEROSITY IN THREE ADOLESCENT ATHLETES: A CASE SERIES
A NOVEL APPROACH TO TREATMENT FOR CHRONIC AVULSION FRACTURE OF THE ISCHIAL TUBEROSITY IN THREE ADOLESCENT ATHLETES: A CASE SERIES: Go to:
CASE 3
The third patient was a 16‐year‐old female school dance team member who reported onset of symptoms after performing a high kick with the right leg in practice. Initially she thought that she had “pulled her hamstring” but her symptoms continued to worsen with time, therefore she sought an orthopedic consult approximately five weeks post injury. At that time she complained of a sharp pain in her right proximal buttock that became worse with stretching or kicking activities. Past medical history was unremarkable other than a prior T7 compression fracture sustained snowboarding at age 10 that healed uneventfully. Radiographs were taken which revealed asymmetry in the apophyseal origin consistent with an avulsion fracture. (Figure 5a) She was instructed from the orthopedic surgeon to take six weeks off dancing activities then referred to physical therapy. Physical therapy consisted of ten visits over a two month period utilzing instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization, exercise (hamstring stretching, isometrics, concentric and eccentric exercises) and interferential stimulation. She experienced a decrease in her pain but when she attempted to return to sport she still reported pain with running and kicking activities in dance. She then returned to the orthopedic surgeon who obtained follow up radiographs, approximately three months following her initial radiographs. (Figure 4b) There was no appreciable healing demonstrated. An MRI was obtained that showed widening of the apophysis without any significant displacement of her ischial tuberosity.
CASE 3
The third patient was a 16‐year‐old female school dance team member who reported onset of symptoms after performing a high kick with the right leg in practice. Initially she thought that she had “pulled her hamstring” but her symptoms continued to worsen with time, therefore she sought an orthopedic consult approximately five weeks post injury. At that time she complained of a sharp pain in her right proximal buttock that became worse with stretching or kicking activities. Past medical history was unremarkable other than a prior T7 compression fracture sustained snowboarding at age 10 that healed uneventfully. Radiographs were taken which revealed asymmetry in the apophyseal origin consistent with an avulsion fracture. (Figure 5a) She was instructed from the orthopedic surgeon to take six weeks off dancing activities then referred to physical therapy. Physical therapy consisted of ten visits over a two month period utilzing instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization, exercise (hamstring stretching, isometrics, concentric and eccentric exercises) and interferential stimulation. She experienced a decrease in her pain but when she attempted to return to sport she still reported pain with running and kicking activities in dance. She then returned to the orthopedic surgeon who obtained follow up radiographs, approximately three months following her initial radiographs. (Figure 4b) There was no appreciable healing demonstrated. An MRI was obtained that showed widening of the apophysis without any significant displacement of her ischial tuberosity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
