More inconvenient Hasan jihad evidence

While the President and most of the media wonder just what possibly could have prompted Maj. Maj. Nidal M. Hasan to do what he did last week, evidence keeps surfacing inconveniently and pointing to jihad:

The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that to avoid “adverse events,” the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims.

This will be dismissed by the PC adherents as a wholly reasonable concern by Hasan, sort of like similar concerns by American Catholic soldiers concerned with going to war with fellow Catholics in Germany in World War II. Oh, wait. That didn’t happen did it?

As he told fellow officers, he is a Muslim first and an American second.

SAS Report on Wake Schools Isn’t Going Away

Kudos to Wake County Commissioner Tony Gurley for not letting the SAS report on Wake schools fade into the background. It matters not that Gurley is a Republican, as the N&O blog seems to imply. The SAS report is about getting to accurate data about the performance of low-income students.

Pfizer abandons Kelo land

And what does the city of New London, Conn., tell Suzette Kelo? “Uh, our bad”?:

The private homes New London, Conn., took through eminent domain from Suzette Kelo and others, are torn down now, but Pfizer has just announced that it closing up shop at the research facility that led to the condemnation.

Leading drugmakers Pfizer and Wyeth have merged, and as a result, are trimming some jobs. That includes axing the 1,400 jobs at their sparkling new research & development facility in New London, and moving some across the river to Groton.

Cognitive dissonance

FBI: Hasan tried to contact Al Qaeda.

Law enforcement official: We’re not sure what his motive was.

This kind of politically correct denial has gotten a lot of people killed.

Apparently the Blue Dogs Don’t Know What to Say

As far as I can tell, the Web site of the Democratic Blue Dog Coalition hasn’t been updated since Saturday night’s vote on HR 3962. As I blogged previously, if my math is correct, 28 of these 52 “fiscal conservatives” voted FOR the astronomically expensive, freedom-killing, nearly 2000-page health care bill.

I’m waiting to read/hear how this group spins Saturday night’s vote, which I mark as the day the Blue Dogs died.

“And where is the constitutional basis for requiring everyone to buy insurance?”

From Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, writing for The Hill, comes this key question:

And where is the constitutional basis for requiring everyone to buy insurance? It is OK for a state to make drivers pay for automobile insurance? Driving is not a right, it is a privilege, and the state may regulate it by demanding insurance. Banks can require homeowners to buy insurance as a condition of their lending. But how does the federal government get the right to require a family to buy health insurance or face a civil penalty and, failing that, to face either a criminal fine or jail?

So, under HR 3962, if you don’t buy insurance and don’t pay the fine, you face an incredible penalty. More from Morris and McGann:

The bill describes the penalties as follows:

• Section 7203 — misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.

• Section 7201 — felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]

It is hard to believe American society has degenerated to the point where a draconian government punishment like this doesn’t alarm the citizenry.

There IS a way to improve the delivery of health care in this country and drive down costs. Competition is key. JLF’s Joe Coletti explains the benefits of consumer-driven health care in this interview.

NARAL Outraged By House Vote, But Not By Abortion

NARAL is outraged by Saturday’s House vote on HR 3962, which included an amendment to ban federal funding of abortion in most cases.

Well, I’m saddened by NARAL’s outrage that some politicians voted to protect the most innocent human life. By the way, earlier this year, Gallup reported this:

A new Gallup Poll, conducted May 7-10, finds 51% of Americans calling themselves “pro-life” on the issue of abortion and 42% “pro-choice.” This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995.