Protecting Life: Michigan Mother Dies After Refusing Chemotherapy So That Her Daughter Could Live

download-2This week, many people said goodbye to a woman who they did not know personally, but someone who became an inspiration for many of us.  Carrie DeKlyen was given a horrific choice recently: take chemotherapy to prolong her life or accept her own death to allow her unborn daughter to live.  She chose the life . . . of her daughter.  She died two days after giving birth.  With so many people who seem to live on hate and anger these days, there remain those who offer the ultimate proof of the grace and sacrifice that truly defines humanity.  Carrie was one of those rare individuals.

The baby’s name will be Life Lynn DeKlyen.


Carrie gave birth at the University of Michigan Hospital in Ann Arbor.  Her final words two days later to the family gathered around her was “I’ll see you in Heaven.”

Doctors told Carrie that she could used chemotherapy to treat her brain cancer but she would have to terminate her baby.  Carrie had five other kids aged from 2 to 18 but she refused to terminate her daughter, who was born 24 weeks in the pregnancy.


Life is doing well in neonatal intensive care.

530 thoughts on “Protecting Life: Michigan Mother Dies After Refusing Chemotherapy So That Her Daughter Could Live”

  1. Turns out she didnt save the baby Life Lynn has now died. While she would get the same outcome,they make it political. Im pro life learning which IMO means you must alos think about how your decision impacts your kids already here. Pro-life doesn’t take two lives.

  2. Love is the most excellent way. We all die, but we don’t all die well. This mother died knowing that she both gave and received love. She brought a new life into the world, her dear daughter Life.

  3. Paul Schulte
    September 12, 2017 at 3:07 PM
    anonymous – you have been forewarned.

    lol, Paul

    “You’ve been forwarned,”

    You’ve got to be kidding me.

  4. I’m not a sockpuppet and I don’t use sockpuppets, so cut the crap, Nick. If you truly have “an inside source” who is providing you with any information about anyone who comments here, then the two of you should be cut loose.

    Enough is enough. You have an unhealthy obsession with sockpuppets.

    I don’t know “Annie” or “Inga.” And I’m not “Louise” or any of the other names you are linking to “anonymous.” (A few weeks ago, you were dead certain that I was “Elaine.”) Knock it off, Nick, and get help. You clearly need it.

  5. It was Halloween 2015 when Annie/Inga crossed the line and was shown the door. Well, she crossed it many times but she was vile toward Darren and finally she was exiled. In the interim 2 years we have had a few problems, but JT has not had to do much, if any policing. Hell, we went through a contentious election w/o JT having to step in. However, when the mutated virus returns it is even more deadly. I don’t know the particulars of Annie/Inga.anonymous and countless other sockpuppets returning. But, this cancer requires immediate surgery. Just sayn’.

        1. Nope,mas far as I know I never had a relative who was in prison. How about yours? How abkut a mental institution? None of mine were in mental institutions, either.

  6. Darren,

    Who are you to tell anyone what to express and not? This blog is here is to express opinions, and I have never seen a rule that says we have to agree with certain viewpoints. You say not to judge. You kidding me? Everyone judges. You are judging the woman and then us who disagree with you. Prof. Turley has his own judgment as indicated in the blog. And besides what is wrong with judging anyways. Everyone is doing all the time, or you might not be aware of your own. Do you respect the first amendment?

    1. Darren is expressing his opinion on the comments made about a family’s tragedy. I agree with your statement that the blog allows the expression of everyone’s opinions, but that includes Darren’s, mine, and anyone else who disagrees with a post. No one is deleting comments based on content, but all of us, including Darren, can express our opinions about them.

      Expressing disappointment at how people have responded to the loss of a mother does not mean there is any rule on content.

      1. Darren didn’t just express disappointment. He slams and insults anyone who disagrees with him. There is a big difference between “disappointment” and slamming. Disappointment sounds so benign. That’s not what Darren expressed. Read his comments again.

        1. Darren is just as entitled to express his opinion as you, me, or anyone else. A lot of us are at a loss at the vitriol expressed against this family, or those who support and honor her decision. It’s very strange.

          Darren is allowed to speak his mind and write a rebuke with the exact same freedom of expression as you have used here.

          So in response to the question “who are you to tell anyone what to express and not” – we are all equally free to express our thoughts on the opinions expressed here. Vigorously criticizing what is expressed is not the same as claiming they may not speak.

  7. How sad, yet how loving. Do you celebrate her love for her unborn child or do you morn her death? I imagine it would be a mixture of feelings for the family. I wish the family well.

  8. This mother’s decision was her own and trying at the very least. She relinquished her own life for the purpose of providing the gift of life for her child. In any sensible society that would be praised. And I can say with certainty nearly everyone in ours will say the same. She did the best she could, under some terrible odds. The outcome certainly is not one without immense cost to many of her family and herself especially. She is of high virtue.

    Ordinarily I would not allow anything other than these tenets to stand for themselves, and leave the controversies and vitriol to those in their easy chair to fight among themselves; staying clear of the fray out of respect for a dying mother and her family. But given what I read here, too many comments are so completely divorced from common decency that my ire will not allow me to simply bite my tongue and remain silent.

    Some of you folks conveyed with no uncertainty that you are devoid of any notion of honor or awareness of the toll life can exact from ordinary people. Comfortable lives you must lead, for it is apparent you have never experienced such a tragedy. You are pogues when it comes such matters–pogues who go to great lengths to profess your expertise of the human condition, kindred to arm-chair quarterbacks. Had you been in such a position and were realistic to yourselves and others you wouldn’t cast such judgment against this woman as you shamefully did here.

    In your unrelenting need to virtue signal your politics you ascribe both your political fears and loathing to this woman and her baby as if she was wrong in her decision and should be punished and that the child better off disposed of. Who the hell are you to judge her? You forsake both she and her baby as a convenient whipping post for your ambition to spout off drivel. I can say without a doubt that politics about her baby’s life was never a factor in her difficult situation or decisions. And it should be for you as well if you actually experienced her pain.

    I don’t expect those of you who engaged in such banal commentary will ever reexamine your approach to families similarly situated in tragedy. Because you wouldn’t know honorable behavior if it slapped you in your scowling faces. If we lived in an Honor Society, there would be an endless procession of people willing to perform that service and smack some decency into you. That is all you deserve here.

    1. I am truly sorry, Darren. I plead guilty to failing to ignore what I should have ignored and making the problem worse in the process.

    2. Darren, Great comment. This thread has been one of the most disheartening in my 5 years here.

    3. Who afe YOU, Darren Smith, to criticize people for expressing their opinion–which is exacrtly what you have done here, yet you present a high and mighty attitude that YOU are right in your opiniom and others are wrong just because, what? You have elected yourself the world’s arbiter of opinion and are automatically right–so right that you can superciliously berate anyone whose opinion is different than yours? Who elected you god, I’d like to know?

      To use your own phraseology, “i don’t expect you who engaged in such banal commentary will ever reexamine your approach to families similarly situated in tragedy. Because you wouldn’t know honorable behavior if it slapped you in your scowling face. If we lived in an Honor Society, there would be an endless procession of people willing to perform that service and smack some decency into you. That is all you deserve here.” I’d be the first to line up to start the smack fest.

      This is a blog for all kinds of opinions. The family involved in this situation will probably never see the opinions expressed here, and I can’t imagine the would want to. The opinions of people who think the decision of the morher was not a wise one are no more intrusive than yours are. We live in a country where anyone can express his opinion. But you have elected yourself to be judge and jury regarding anyone’s opinion but your own. It’s the likes of you who should have some decency smacked into you. You have no appreciation for free speech. Nobody here has had any effect on the family involved. A person can express an opinion without harming the family who has to live with this situation. If anyone is adding fuel to the fire, it’s you galumphing into the fray, setting yourself up as the person expressing the right ooinion and deeming everyone else wrong. You and people like you are the scum of the earth.

      1. Louise hates Down’s babies, all disabled, conservatives, etc. But, she REALLY hates Darren, one of the nicest people here. You decent liberals better get control of the Louise in your fold. They are becoming your identity.

        On a factual note, in my 5 years here I have seen at least a dozen times, probably more, where the subject[s] of a post weigh in and comment. This is a widely read blog and along w/ being hateful, Louise is woefully uninformed.

        1. Nick – I can remember in my time on this blog at least 3 and maybe 4 times the subject came on to the blog to discuss the situation. And we have had friends and neighbors of subjects weigh in.

          1. Again Paul claims to be able to read minds. Nobody should give Paul the time if day. He can no more can read minds that the neighborhood “psychic” plying her trade on the streetcorner. He apparentky doesn!t even know his own mind, let alone other people’s, no matter how often he claims to know.

        2. “Louise hates Down’s babies, all disabled, conservatives, etc. But, she REALLY hates Darren”

          So says — gee, let’s guess. Yep, Nick.

          Despicable and unconscionable.

            1. To be clear:

              Nick said, ““Louise hates Down’s babies, all disabled, conservatives, etc. But, she REALLY hates Darren…”

              WTF is wrong with you, Nick.

              (It’s despicable and unconscionable for you to make such a claim.)

              1. Nick doesn’t mind, he thrives in despicable and unconscionable. It’s his life’s blood. He reads minds, too.


              2. anonymous – from what i have read of Louise’s stuff, Nick is spot on. Why are you defending her?

                  1. And I see — down-thread — that you’ve apparently joined in and are singing the Inga/Annie refrain.

                    1. anonymous – Inga/Annie and I have history, and it would be best if you stayed out of it.

                    1. I have never in my life been called a bully. This is a new phenomenon for me. Perhaps people on this blog call people bullies when they can’t think if a rational argument. That would explain it. Bullies often call other people bullies.

                    2. Louise – maybe nobody has had the nerve to call you a bully to your face. You would be amazed at what they call you behind your back.

                    3. No, you are stating an OPINION. It’s too bad you don’t know the difference. But it explains a lot about your posts here.

                    4. Paul wrote: “Louise is clearly a bully, so why are you defending her?”

                      Paul is projecting.

                      Paul wrote: “anonymous – Inga/Annie and I have history, and it would be best if you stayed out of it.”

                      lol. I’m free to comment as I see fit. If this “Annie/Inga” is a problem, take it up with Jonathan, but stop the childish accusations and sniping.

                    5. What are you threatening Anonymous with, Paul? Physical violence? You just said what a sweet guy you are. I was beginning to think you might be, but not now that you’ve threatened Anonymous.

                    6. Louise – in every battle there is the possibility of collateral damage. I do not want anonymous caught in the crossfire.

              3. anonymous – Nick’s comments were in reference to Lousie complaining about people “stumping for Down’s children” and aren’t there “enough of them”. It was a strange statement, and I know it made me very uncomfortable. We should protect handicapped children and adults, and value them just as much as anyone else. Maybe it came out differently than Louise intended, but I found it chilling.

                1. I never said anything like that. I was referring to people like you who think there aren’t enough Down’s syndrome babies in Iceland. I never said a word about about people “stumping for Down’s children” and aren’t there “enough of them”. If you think I said that please orovide the post where I said it. It is not unususl for people in favor of forced childbirth to make up quotes and attribute them to those who have different opinions. In fact I would not put ANYTHING scurrilous past people who would force women to give birth. Pro-forced childbirth supporters have proven that they will say ANYTHING to make their arguments hold water. But anyone with at least half a functioning brain can see right through their disgusting tactics.

                    1. Copy the post where I said it, then, if you can’t or won’t, it’s proof that you are a lying P.O.S–not at all unusual for someone who woukd force pregnant women to give birth under any and all circumstances. .

                  1. Louise:

                    On 9/11 at 12:23 AM you wrote: “Are you stumping for more children to be born with Down’s in Iceland? There aren’t enough of them?”

                    Handicapped children and their families struggle with this acrimonious feeling from some members of the community every day. There are those who feel that handicapped babies shouldn’t even be alive. I know one of my own relatives, who had an injury at birth from low oxygen, faced terrible bullying her entire life, often from adults.

                    Statements such as yours really make me uncomfortable. Handicapped children and adults should not be made to feel that they should not have been born, that there are “enough of them”, or that they are unwelcome.

                    1. Karen S.,

                      Louise flatly denied making those statements, even when quoted verbatim.
                      Her initial denial was “I never said anything like that”, and “If you think I said that please provide the post where I said it”.
                      Her initial denial of making those statements now morphs into a pathetic defense that you and Nick got it “ass-backwards”, since she can long longer deny making a statement she previously denied making.
                      I don’t know if there is a dementia/ memory ussue involved, if she’s simply a liar, or both.

                      Regarless of the cause, it’s not productive to engage in exchanges with someone of makes a statement, denies making the statement when quoted, then accuses of others of getting it “ass-backward”when she’s called on it.

                    2. You apparently have a communication problem. It may come from dementia. I know it’s no use trying to explain it to you, but I will do it one last time in the hopes tha someone else here can do it. I was asking if he actually believed that there should be more Down’s babies in Iceland since he was complaining that there were hardly any. If you can’t understand that, it’s very sad. Some people who have no rational response to an argument will twist what peoole say and deliberately misinterpret it. They don’t seem to have any other response, Unfortunately we have several examples of this on this blog–people who are deliberately dense because they are incapable of arguing their position rationally . Now we have another one! Perhaps there is something about Jonathan Turley’s blog that draws in these kinds of mentally challenged people. I have engaged in many discussions, online and in person and I have never come across so many people who can’t or who deliberately refuse to understand a simple English statement. I feel as if I’ve walked into a Fellini play. I won’t play this demented game and I won’t write in words of one syllable because there are several people here who don’t understand the English language beyond the kindergarten level. It’s not worth my time to explain my statements to people who are deliberately stupid. I wish you would find a blog designed for people who are mentally challenged. It didn’t look to me as if this was one. I really did think It was a place where people could engage in rational debate. Apparently I was wrong. There are a few people who are capable of engaging in rational debate but it’s like trying to carry on a discussion in a roomful of hecklers. It’s sad that a blog with so much potential has been highjacked by seriously disturbed people.

                    3. Louise – I didn’t know Fellini did plays, I have seen a lot of his movies and this is not even close.

                    4. Louise,…
                      Nobody “twisted” your meaning; you denied making a statement that you clearly DID make, issued a challenge to produce evidence of that statement, and then claim that your words and meaning were distorted.
                      You had EVERY opportunity to initially explain what you meant in your comments about Diwn’s children.
                      In fact, Karen actually suggested that maybe you didn’t mean it the way it sounded.
                      You responded by denying that you even making that statement, tgen, and ONLY then, you now say that you are misinterpreted, that your word….words you denied postnig…are being “twisted.
                      What a liar.

                    5. I’m not the one who said there are not enough Down’s babies in Iceland. I was simply trying to confirm that that was the outrageous statement he was making. . Apparently that is exactly what he was saying. If you were offended by that statement, blame the person who made it, not the person who was trying to confirm what he said. I was giving him an out but he never said that was not what he meant so I had no choice but to assume he meant what he said. Apparently you agree with him because you never said otherwise and you had plenty of opportunity to do so if you weren’t so hell-bent on deliberately misinterpreting what I said.

                2. As I have said several times my comments were in response to Nick saying there weren’t enough Down’s babies in Iceland. If you’d read the exchange you would not have made the error. I expected Nick to get it ass-backwards–that goes without saying–but I was surprised that you did, too. You didn’t read what I was responding to. If you had you could never have made that error–unless you are as clueless as Nick is. I didn’t think that was possible, but I could be wrong.

                  1. “I didn’t deny making the statement”.

                    You DID deny making the statement, Louise.
                    Then you compound that original lie by going through tortuous machinations about how you were misinterpreted.
                    I’ve seen some wildly inaccurate and extreme statements made on this site from time to time, but I’ve never seen anyone put so much effort into doubling down on a blatant lie.

                    1. I didn’t deny making the statement, i denied that your misinterpretation of it is what I said or meant. Any person with an IQ over 50 should have known what I meant without my having to explain it. But I hadn”t yet realized the stupidity of some of the posters here. It was a real shock. You prove your ignorance every time you post. You apparently have a serious problem understanding the English language and its nuances. You have a lot of company, especially on this blog. It’s better to say nothing and be thought of as a possible fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

                3. Karen wrote: “Maybe it came out differently than Louise intended, but I found it chilling.”

                  I think it did, but that’s just my opinion. She’s the only person who can explain it — and if she already has — I’ve missed it.

                  1. Karen, I just spotted a 1 a.m. comment, so it would appear that Louise has written back to you about this. I haven’t read her comment, yet.

                  2. I’ve explained it more than once, Karen. I asked him whether he was really saying there aren’t enough Down’s babies in Iceland and whether he was stumping for more. That’s what his remarks sounded like to me–but nobody, including him, has responded with a rational response to my questions. I was asking for clarification. On what he meant. All I’ve received are insults based on a deliberate misinterpretation of what I wrote. If he was NOT saying he thinks there aren’t enough Down’s babies in Iceland, what was he saying? I would like a rational answer as to what he meant but I doubt I’ll get one from him or anyone else here. Few posters here are interested on honest discourse. They’re apparently only interested in hurling invective. They have found a perfect venue for it.

                    1. Virtually anyone who comments here is in a better position than you to talk about “honest discourse”.You deny making statement that is in black and white, now you deny that you denied making the statement.
                      I get it ….you’re just “misunderstood”, and “few bloggers here” can understand you well enough to engage in honest discourse with you.
                      I don’t think you are a clone of Inga/ Annie or anyone else….I’ve never seen anybody else stupid enough to deny sayiny what they wrote, then deny that they denied the making the original denial.

                    2. Never mind. It’s imoossible to talk to you as if you are a rational,person, i thought and hoped I could, I was wrong.

                    3. Tom Nash – were you here when Annie/Inga was 18 different sockpuppets? JT had gone to some conference and poor Darren was trying his best to shut them down. Nick and i were exposing them one by one, since she has a distinctive writing style. However, it has been awhile, so I am not 100% sure that Louse is Annie/Inga. However, she does argue the same way and writes at about the same length and starts to misspell after 6pm Wis time.

                4. I am uncomfortable with you calling immigrant children aliens. Children should not be called aliens no matter what their immigration status is. Just sayin.

                    1. frankly: I searched — but I forgot to look at the “older comments.” Thanks. Anyway, I agree about the use of the word.

                      (Yep, I was “Elaine” not long ago — and according to Nick — there were numerous “tells.” Nick and his crackpot ideas…)

                    1. That is right. You call the children “aliens” and the black people “savages”. Karen would not do the latter.

                    2. It has nothing to do with being “liberal” or PC.

                      “So let’s stop calling non-citizens aliens. Let’s just call them people.”

                    3. Anonymous, some people feel,the need to use epithets in an attemot to cover up outright racism. They are apparently unaware that everyone with a modicum of sense can see right through their attempts at subterfuge. They are talking to each other in code. They are as obvious as if they were using pig Latin.

                    1. Sheriff Joe did trigger me when I read about him making women give birth while shackled. I know I know you love the guy.

                    2. That’s exactly what rabid anti choice people do. They want to force women to give birth while shackled. That the shackles are symbolic doesn’t make them any less torturous.

                    3. frankly – he was following the standard at the time. The court changed the standard. Joe complied.

                    4. He didn’t comply with anything else. Otherwise he woukdn’t have been convicted of criminal contempt of court. Not surprised to see you defending him.

                    5. Louise – he was the elect sheriff of Maricopa County, not a federal employee. He was convicted of criminal contempt for doing his job.

                    6. For doing his job as a tin pot dictator. People are usually expected to do their jobs responsibly. He didn’t. He did it like a fascist operative. But you’re free to support a convicted criminal.

                    7. Louise – he has been pardoned, he is no longer a convicted criminal. And even at that, it was a misdemeanor, in which they charged him under the wrong statute so he didn’t get a jury trial.

                    8. He agreed to no jury trial. He could have had one if he wanted one. The charge was criminal contempt whether they call that a misdemeanir or not. Yes, he was pardoned by an unconvicted criminal, in my opinion. Like attracts like. That you are defending him tells more about you than it does about him. I’m sorry to have this information.

                    9. Louise – I have no cover to be blown. I am who I am. I don’t hide behind a fake name or a single name, I use my real name.

                    10. So you say. You hide behind your racism, though.

                      My real name is Louise Hudson. Does that help?

                    11. That’s exactly what rabid anti choice people do. They want to force women to give birth while shackled.

                      There is a living being inside them. If their sensibilities were not disordered, there would be no objections to ‘giving birth’.

                    12. DSS – I have talked to a couple of men whose wives broke their fingers while giving birth. Now do you think they should be shackled? 😉

                  1. Paul Schulte,…
                    I remember Inga/Annie’s departure from this blog a couple of years back….I didn’t know she was posting under other names.

                    1. Tom Nash – it is my understanding from comments yesterday by Nick that Annie/Inga was back. He has ‘inside’ knowledge of this. I do not know when she was allow aboard. However, your fight with Louise was a possible hint.

                    2. Ha ha, you’re really funny. Are you so far gone that you have to make up ridiculous accusations? I never posted to this blog under any other name.but Louise. How do we know it wasn’t you, Paul? You are as much a candidate as anyone. It says a lot about you that you would throw around iaccusations so irresponsibly. So much for the sweet guy you tried to pass yourself off as.

                    3. Louise – I was here before Annie/Inga was ‘invited’ to leave. And she actually doxxed herself, so we know its not me. And I was unaware she was back until Nick mentioned it. Surprised the hell out of me.

                    4. How does the fact that she was asked to leave mean that she isn’t posting under the name of Paul Schulte? Can you explain that?

                  2. frankly – I don’t understand. Is the legal term gauche now? Alien obviously does not refer to extraterrestrial. The legal definition is below. Plus you can look it up in the Immigration Code. The negative connotation is “illegal” rather than “alien”. By definition, people who immigrate here illegally are “illegal aliens” according to our laws. But if “alien” makes you think of otherworldly, then “illegal immigrant” works just as well. I don’t think the choice of “alien” or “immigrant’ is material to any argument about whether they should go through the legal process or not.

                    Is anyone’s use of the legal definition somehow a moral equivalent with Louise saying that there are enough Downs children (max 3 a year) in Iceland and I shouldn’t “stump for more” to survive instead of being killed through Eugenics? Or is this a false hare to try to claim that anyone who wants immigration to go through the legal process must be racist, or doesn’t care about kids, and therefor worse than someone who wants to selectively kill handicapped kids? Because that false logic is so lazy and intolerant it’s boring.

                    If you find the legal term “alien” distasteful for some reason, then just use “illegal immigrant.” What’s the trouble? You don’t have to use the legal term if you don’t want to.

                    The word “alien” has been used to describe non citizens since the 1300s:

                    “alien (n.) Look up alien at
                    “foreigner, citizen of a foreign land,” early 14c., from alien (adj.) or from noun use of the adjective in French and Latin. In the science fiction sense “being from another planet,” from 1953.
                    alien (adj.) Look up alien at
                    c. 1300, “strange, foreign,” from Old French alien “strange, foreign;” as a noun, “an alien, stranger, foreigner,” from Latin alienus “of or belonging to another, not one’s own, foreign, strange,” also, as a noun, “a stranger, foreigner,” adjective from alius (adv.) “another, other, different,” from PIE root *al- (1) “beyond.”

                    Meaning “residing in a country not of one’s birth” is from mid-15c. Sense of “wholly different in nature” is from 1670s. Meaning “not of this Earth” first recorded 1920. An alien priory (c. 1500) is one owing obedience to a mother abbey in a foreign country.”


                    One has to ask, why does the Left continually target words in the English dictionary for excision? They suddenly attach a nefarious meaning and want it struck from our lexicon. “Thug” is another example, although it has been applied to violent criminals since 1810 (origin – Hindu). Definition – ruffian, cutthroat, lowbrow. It’s commonly used in reference to any violent criminal. If we keep excising any artist, philosopher (like the Greeks), mathematician, writer, playwright, or anyone else who ever had opinions common for his or her time which are at odds with today’s mores, and we continually cut down our lexicon, we are essentially lobotomizing our sum total of knowledge. How self defeating. Perhaps this is a reflection of how public schools have eroded from teaching Greek, Latin, debate, poetry, and higher math in high school to graduating students who cannot read or complete basic algebra.


                    Department of Homeland Security:

                    “Alien – Any person not a citizen or national of the United States.”

                    “An illegal alien who entered the United States without inspection, for example, would be strictly defined as an immigrant under the INA but is not a permanent resident alien. Lawful permanent residents are legally accorded the privilege of residing permanently in the United States.”

                    1. Karen S At one time they referred to children with Down’s syndrome in unflattering terms. Mongoloid was the term used. It has not been used since the eighties. It is not respectful to call the DACA kids aliens. I don’t consider the showing of respect for all children no matter what there status is to be a left or right issue.

                    2. They ARE illegal aliens. We can debate what to do w/ them but don’t try and play your PC horsesh!t games here. They are not “undocumented citizens” which the new PC Orwellian term is. You want to make them legal, well write to your Congressman. Until then they are illegal aliens. You alt leftists are losing w/ this PC crap, but you keep digging. It’s why Trump is prez and you are working on his reelection, you just don’t get it.

                      In the very good flick, Precious, the lead character named her Down’s kid “Mongol.” I understand sensibilities change. I don’t care if you call me a “dago.” JT would mind. But don’t ever try and rewrite the law w/ PC Orwellian language. What’s next, convicted felons are “misunderstood wards of the state.”

                    3. Karen, Just another knockout comment. frankly/SWM doesn’t know any better, she only associates in her actual life w/ like minded people. An echo chamber. That’s why she’s so shocked here. As you know, she and her crew had a bully echo chamber here 5 years ago. We and many others helped change that.

                    4. No, sometimes it’s about rule of law. The ‘dreamers’ ARE here illegally. That does not make them illegal citizens – it makes them illegal aliens. What don’t you understand?

                    5. Call ’em whatever you want TBob. I don’t give a rat’s a$$.

                      As far as the rule of law? It’s an illusion. But perhaps you’re naive, with limited experience.

                    6. “The yardstick we use for others will be the yardstick which time will use for us.” – Pope Francis


                      “Pope Francis called on Americans to fully embrace the Golden Rule in politics as the head of the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics delivered a sermon on Capitol Hill on Thursday, challenging Congress and voters alike to serve the needy and to see the world in nuance rather than the “simplistic reductionism which sees only good or evil.”

                      “He also urged Americans to embrace immigrants from Central and South America, saying they are only doing what anyone else would in their situation. He said their plight should invoke the Golden Rule and implored compassion from the U.S.

                      ““This rule points us in a clear direction: Let us treat others with the same passion and compassion with which we want to be treated. Let us seek for others the same possibilities which we seek for ourselves,” he said. “In a word, if we want security, let us give security. If we want life, let us give life. If we want opportunities, let us provide opportunities.

                      ““The yardstick we use for others will be the yardstick which time will use for us,” the pontiff said, drawing a standing ovation from the assembled House and Senate.

                      “Absent from the nearly hourlong speech was any specific mention of Jesus. Pope Francis made just a single reference to Scripture, when he quoted the origins of the Golden Rule from the Gospel of Matthew.”

                    7. Just a reminder that the DREAM Act is an acronym for ‘Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors’. See where the ‘A’ stands for Aliens?

                    8. Please spare me the input offered by the Marxist overly political pope. I tuned him out a long time ago. Tend to the problems in your own church papa.

            2. Karen S.,

              Louise flatly denied making those statements, even when quoted verbatim.
              Her initial denial was “I never said anything like that”, and “If you think I said that please provide the post where I said it”.
              Her initial denial of making those statements now morphs into a pathetic defense that you and Nick got it “ass-backwards”, since she can long longer deny making a statement she previously denied making.
              I don’t know if there is a dementia/ memory ussue involved, if she’s simply a liar, or both.

              Regarless of the cause, it’s not productive to engage in exchanges with someone of makes a statement, denies making the statement when quoted, then accuses of others of getting it “ass-backward”when she’s called on it.

              1. If she is who several of us think she is, then she is just a liar who enjoys disrupting the flow of the conversation. Like some little kid, who if her sister is getting Mommie and Daddie’s attention at the moment, will fall down and get a boo-boo so that the attention will then be focused on her.

                If there is an underlying psychological disorder, it is probably related to the Borderline Personality Disorder spectrum.

                Squeeky Fromm
                Girl Reporter

                1. Squeeky: “…enjoys disrupting the flow of the conversation. ”

                  Two great options:

                  1) Scroll.

                  2) Ignore.

                  Not. Your. Blog.

                    1. I do both, Squeeker. All. The. Time.

                      One is free to comment, not comment, post things that “disrupt the flow”, post anything that strikes one’s fancy…, say pretty much anything that one wants… — that’s the way it works.

                      No one has to conform to anyone else’s notions about what “disrupts the flow”…

                      I don’t read most of your comments, but it’s good to know that your bunker is ready to go. Keep “preppin'” for that ZA. And have a lovely day.

                  1. You’re right, Anonymous. And Sqeeks is unfortunately not alone in her habit of disrupting on this blog.

              2. Tom, As I’ve said many times, there is a written archive of everything said here. You can’t erase it like you can on many blogs. You’re right, she’s not worth debating on this. She dug her hole, let her keep digging.

    4. Great post, Darren. You are right. We shouldn’t have engaged and quarreled. I don’t think I’ve ever changed anyone’s mind, and engaging just leads to worse remarks. If these blog comments are typical of society, it breaks my heart to think about what her family could be reading in their grief. I hope they throw away their computers for a year.

      This was an opportunity for the world to leave loving supportive messages to a broken hearted family, like leaving flowers at a wall after a tragedy. Just sending out some positive energy. But it’s become politicized and hateful.

      1. Yes it’s become politicized and hateful in no small part because of people like you and Darren who can’t bear a difference of opinion, but stamp your feet and claim you are RIGHT and everyone else is WRONG. Hate flows from all sides. Nothing that has been said here stops anyone from leaving loving, supportive messages to the family. I know of no one who is sending vitriolic messages to the family. No one has done anything but express their heartfelt opinion, but according to you, only one kind of opinion is valid, all others are hateful and politicized. No hate or politicization can possibly come from people who would like to take choice out of the equation and force women to give birth, no matter the situation or probable consequences. Oh, no, that’s just a “loving and supportive” message. If you had your way no woman could make the choice to give birth. All women would be forced to do so. That is not a choice if it is forced. No one would be able to say she sacrificed for her child. Forced sacrifice is not sacrifice, It is forced concession.

        1. Louise, You be all alone on this. The other lefties here see your toxicity and have rejected you passively, by not coming to your aid. The rotten cheese stands alone.

          1. Nick Spinelli on
            September 11, 2017 at 3:19 PM wrote:

            “Louise, You be all alone on this.”

            Not true, Nick. It’s only true in your mind. She’s most certainly “not alone on this.”

            Take your own “hate”, “vitriol” and “toxicity” — and go “pray” it all away. Good luck with that.

            1. And don’t forget your “anger.” (Do a quick search on all of those terms and see whose name pops up most frequently. Gee, it’s yours, Nick. Just sayin’.)

              1. I have reason to believe Louise, anonymous and a few sockpuppets are all the same, demented, narcissistic personality disorder, lonely, angry, woman. I have an inside source.

                1. I’m not a sockpuppet and I don’t use sockpuppets, so cut the crap, Nick. If you truly have “an inside source” who is providing you with any information about anyone who comments here, then the two of you should be cut loose.

                  Enough is enough. You have an unhealthy obsession with sockpuppets.

                  1. And with deliberately misinterpreting what people write because he can’t think of a rational response. Don’t waste your time with him or any of the bullies on this blog. They’re not worth your time or energy. Anyone with at least half a functioning brain can spot what they’re up to.

                1. Classic Inga/Annie exchange. Talking to herself because no one else will. Spend some time w/ your family. Go to a support group for lonely, angry women. Hillary is running a group in NY. .

                  1. If you believe that I’m “Inga/Annie”, then you’re truly an idiot. Knock it off and stop acting like a bully.

              1. frankly/SWM, They are the same, crazy, lonely, friendless woman! I thought you liberals were supposed to be smart.

                1. There you go again, claiming to know things you can’t possibly know. Apparently you can’t help yourself, Nick. You must have a bad case od OCD. If you think liberals are supposed to be smart, you’re right for once. Liberals are smart. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, but I don’t know about your second chance. You’ve dedinitely missed it.

                  1. I still wonder why an alleged compassionate liberal hates Down’s kids. I prefer Down’s kids to almost all people. Did you have a bad experience w/ a Down’s kid in school?

                    1. You are as wrong anout ny feeling for Down’s kids as you can possibly be. You are apparently soeaking of your own feelings but trying to cover them up, you are doing llousy job of it–almost as lousy as your mindreading abilities.

                    2. I gave my sincere life experience about a friend w/ a Down’s brother and how it changed my life. That was before you crapped all over this thread. Read it. Wait..never mind, you wouldn’t understand, you think Mike should have been aborted, like they do in Iceland.

                    3. Yes, I asked Nick if that’s what he was doing and if that was his position since he was complaining so unceasingly that there weren’t enough people in Iceland with Down’s. Leave it to Nick to twist it into meaning something to support his ignorance. . Not surprising, though. . Thanks fir the research.

                    4. Thanks for proving my point, anonymous/Ken/benson et al. I would love to know the back story on why all you sockpuppets love abortion and hate Down’s kids and kids w/ disabilities. “There aren’t enough of them” SAYS IT ALL! Is it just a socialized medicine cost benefit thing or do disabled people disturb you. like they did Hitler? Louise/anonymous/Benson/Ken et al want Dr. Mengele running HHS.

                2. I have real friends and a wonderful family..Our daughter got engaged last week to a great young man from a wonderful family. Met one friend on a blog years ago. She and I are still friends. Don’t care about making friends on a blog or being a part of your crew. 🙂

                  1. Congrats on your daughter. Knowing your kid is marrying a good person is as good as it gets. May they have a long and happy marriage. I got no beef w/ you frankly/SWM. And I certainly don’t have “a crew.” That’s not an Eyetalian slur is it?

                3. “O” is next to “p” on the keyboard, Nick. She mistyped — and most people would be able to figure it out and not make a federal case out of it. Get a grip.

                4. There was an “anonymous” that was Elaine and another “anonymous” that is a sockpuppet. Elaine left when outed. The other unfortunately remains. Is this so difficult to understand. Over the years there have been many different “anonymous” All have no imagination.

                    1. How does anyone know that Nick Spinelli is his real name? It may be as anonymous as Anonymous, but more devious.

                    2. Louise,

                      You said, “It may be as anonymous as Anonymous, but more devious.”

                      “…more devious”??? Surely you’re not calling me “devious.” : )

                    3. No, more devious than Nick makes you out to be. “Nick Spinelli” is obviously an alias. He doesn’t even admit it’s an alias. You do.

                    4. Louise,

                      I tacked a smile onto the end of my last comment, but it’s not obvious, I see. Anyway — it’s supposed to end with a smile.

              2. Annie/Inga is one of the worst bullies ever..just behind the failed and losers Mike Spindell and Gene Howington. They’re not here anymore and JT needs to once and for all purge this blog of the mutant virus, Inga D!!!

                1. Nick – I thought Annie/Inga had moved on to another blog. Although Louise does have a familiar smell to her. That air of ignorant superiority.

                  1. That’s youself your smelling, Paul. The smell must be extremely strong for you to smell it on yourself, but it’s nothing compared to your ignorance. If ignorance had a smell you woukd have choked to death on it by now.

                    1. Louise – I am willfully ignorant of car mechanics, carpentry, etc. I don’t ever plan to learn about them. However, there are other things I know a lot about.

                      Did you really have to go to a “I’m rubber and your glue” defense. That is so school ground.

                    2. You’re the one who started the playground epithets. I simply responded in kind. You’ll have to look up “epithets.” I mistakenly used a 3 syllable word. I should have known better. Two syllables already defeat you.

                  2. Paul, As Darren pointed out angrily a few days ago, she’s back and doing her 18 sockpuppet crazy schtick. He didn’t call her by name, but we know the history. He’s fed up and I empathize w/ that good man. Why JT let her back, who the hell knows? But, it was a YUUGE mistake.

                  3. Paul is an expert on ignorant superority and what it smells like. It has seeped into every pore of his body, especially what’s left of his brain. He is sure the source is somewhere else because he is so thoroughly steeped in it.

                2. If JT were to purge the list of mutsnt viruses, you and others who would force women (and young girls) to give birth would be the first to go. Be careful what you wish for.

                    1. I can spell perfectly,. I can also touch type very well on an ordinary keyboard. It’s hunting and pecking on an iPad that defeats me. You’ve made plenty of errors yourself, so, presumably in your case it’s because you’ve been drinking, since you accuse me of it. I don’t drink or take mind altering drugs. But you are apparentky an expert in such things.

                    2. Louise/Inga – the nice thing about this blog is that you can claim anything you want, but your constant misspelling is a tip-off.

                    3. I know, anyone can claim anything just as you can claim to bave an IQ over 50. You constsntky misspell, too, so if it means something when I do it, it probably means something worse when you do it,

                    4. Louise/Inga – I have a medical excuse for my poor typing, it appears you have none. And now you keep misspelling the same word. That could mean you just don’t know how to spell it correctly. However, that would be in keeping with your claimed IQ of 50.

                    5. They say opposites attract. I hope you meet someone who is good-looking, intelligent, and cultured.

                    6. As it is with you. I was an editor on top publications, if I didn’t know how to spell I wouldn’t have lasted a day. As i said, it’s typing on an iPad that is my problem. You can believe what you want. You will, anyway, so I’m not concerned. I try not to waste time with morons. I have made enough of an exception with you.

                    7. Louise – did you treat the public this way? Did you cost the newspapers readers because of your interaction with them?

                3. Oh NickS, BE CAREFUL! Have you ever seen those kind of scary movies where some kid at a sleepover says something like “Candy Man” or “Bloody Mary” three times in front of a mirror, at midnight, and then the next day their hacked-up lifeless body is found in the attic, and whatever Demon it was they let loose, then starts in to hacking up everybody else at the sleepover, or frat party, or whatever???

                  Well, I think the same thing happens if you say “Idiot Inga” three times, and God Knows! what will happen if you invoke the name of the other two! We’ll start getting lectures on propaganda, and stories about how they used to go into the ghettos all the time when they were younger and never got mugged, and all those protestations that “No, we aren’t partisan Democrats! We just never voted for a Republican at any time, not even once, over the last 60 years, but “No, we aren’t partisan Democrats! Not us! We’re just reasonable people who believe Institutionalized Racism is behind all the Black Poverty, and not something as mundane as having three or four illegitimate kids while working 25 hours a week at Church’s Fried Chicken” because who says it’s 2017??? It’s not! It’s still the 1950s, and Negroes have to drink out of separate water fountains, and asking for a picture ID at the voting booth is the same sort of thing, because everybody knows those simple Negroes can’t get picture IDs” – – – we’ll start getting that sort of idiocy again, in spades.

                  I am laying my laptop down on the floor, and making a line of salt around it! Do the same to yours, quickly!

                  Squeeky Fromm
                  Girl Reporter

          2. Meanwhile, the opposite even more rotten cheese has plenty of company, like miser has. All that means is conservative fools are more likely to write into blogs than liberals are. Don’t get too excited over this. Stupid is still stupid, no matter how many people agree with stupid.

            1. Not sure I would call some of these posters “conservative”. Their agenda seems more nefarious.

                1. Look it up. You do know how to use the Internet, don’t you?. “Nefarious” has only one meaning. It isn’t that hard to find out if you’ve never heard the word before.

                  1. LOL!! I know what it means, Down’s Hater. The question is what nefarious plot. Everyone but you understood that. Your vapid comment shows you are a lightweight intellectually and in debating, and you aren’t even bright enough to understand that. And, I love the disabled and think they should not be aborted.

                    1. Your own vapid comment shows you are even more of a lightweight intellectually than you accuse me of being, and in debating you aren’t even bright enough to understand basic words like “nefarious”, so you can’t possibly assess anyone else’s intellectual abilities. You say you love the disabled but how many disbled kids (or adults) have you taken in? Empty words about loving the disbled mean nothing. No doubt you love our mentally disabled so-called,president, too, and your seriously disabled self.

                  2. LOL! Louise/anonymous/Ken/Annie/Inga/Benson could whittle down her long winded, rambling comment to her 3rd grade level, “I know you are but what am I.”

                    1. Nick, anonymous is right. There’s no way David B. Benson would ever compose one of Louise’s sentences. He would lobotomize himself with a hatpin well before he got to the period. Likewise, anonymous doesn’t do long-winded rambling comments. That’s my job. As for Ken . . . I don’t see any replies from him on this thread.

                    2. I have no idea who David B. Benson is or whether he would be so unstable as to lobotomize himself over anything. If he would I would prefer not to know anything about him. As to sentences, I would never compose a sentence like the ones you have dropped here, though I wouldn’t lobotomize myself over it. You are not alone in being unable to compose a coherent English sentence. The world is filled with people who can’t do it. You have plenty of company. There are so many barely literate people that it wouldn’t be worth my while to even mention it. If it is of as much concern to you as it seems to be that you are unable to write a coherent sentence, I suggest you take some basic courses in English composition, though there are no guarantees that you would be able to learn to do it. You might have missed the learning window. All,is nipot lost, though. I’m sure you have other talents. One, anyway.

                    3. Louis/Inga – now, you are dropping words out of sentences, plus continuing to misspell. If, as you say you are not drinking and you are not taking drugs, you should see a doctor today, immediately.

                    4. Okay . . . Ken has two posts on this thread. But I don’t see how anyone other than Ken could have written them. It’s easier to pull teeth from crocodiles than to change writing styles.

          1. Taking away the right to choose means taking it away from Lynn DeKlyan as wrll as from all women. Then there would be no reason to compliment her. You can’t rationally compliment a person for her choice when she’s had no choice. Yet that’s what you would do, along with taking away everyone’s right to disagree with your position. Welcome to a totalitarian dictatorship. .

        2. Leave Karen alone. She has nothing to deserve such ire. This conversation should stay focused on the family and their difficult decision at such a trying time. This thread did get terribly, and unfortunately, rancorous.

          You have disparaged the family’s choice, sniffing that there is another motherless child in the world and that the mother is selfish.

          Perhaps you have not sent your comments to them directly, but it is directed at them and it is cruel. Suppose that family reads what you wrote?

          You are rubbing salt in their wounds.

    5. Darren,

      Who are you to tell anyone what to express and not? This blog is here is to express opinions, and I have never seen a rule that says we have to agree with certain viewpoints. You say not to judge. You kidding me? Everyone judges. You are judging the woman and then us who disagree with you. Prof. Turley has his own judgment as indicated in the blog. And besides what is wrong with judging anyways. Everyone is doing all the time, or you might not be aware of your own. Do you respect the first amendment?

    6. The picture of the family did it for me. Her beautiful children are without the guidance of a mother. But I haven’t read every comment so mine might be redundant. I couldn’t make the decision without facts. I wouldn’t leave my children without their mother. But if the prognosis was that current medicine is very successful with this type of cancer I would abort and start cancer treatments. What happpens if something happens to her husband and the children are left with no parent? When children are born parents take on a significant responsibility. Even now they still need their mother. I would do whatever it took to remain and finish my job of parenting.

      1. Fortunately for you and me and millions of other women, we can make that choice as could the woman in question. Some people on this blog, however, would like nothing better than to take that choice away from all of us. If it weren’t for Roe v Wade and a lot of women who fought for reproductive choice, nobody could make a choice including the woman at the center of this discusdion. She and all women would be forced to give birth no matter what their preference might be, and this mother could not be praised for her “choice” because she wouldn’t have had any.. The anti choice people on this blog cannot seem to understand this simple fact. If abortion is outlawed, NOBODY gets to make a choice and NOBODY would deserve praise or condemnation for it. Lynn D. would not have been allowed to choose life for her baby over her own life. She woukd have been forced to do it. Bring forced to continue a pregnancy is not a choice.

        1. Louise – if you actually read Roe v Wade Texas had an exemption for women who life’s were at stake. Had she wanted to abort, she would have been fine in Texas.

          1. It’s good to know there are SOME people even in Texas with a grain of sense. It’s extremely hard ro detect, though. I’ll bet the forced childbirth people fought that exception tooth and nail. Many other jurisdictions have no exceptions for a woman whose life is at stake. They’re absolutely sure women will just fake fatal diseases just to get an abortion–women being so shamelessly underhanded and all. It is a good indication of the rank ignorance of people who are in favor of forced childbirth under all circumstances. But I have to give Texas credit where credit is due. They believe in forced childbirth only for women who are not certifiably facing death from a disease. That’s a start, anyway. Maybe there’s hope for Texas, but I wouldn’t rest on my laurels yet. I’d like to know their position on a 12 year old girl who was raped by a family member. You never know when girls will make up a story like that after they shamelessly tempted a poor helpless guy into sex. She should be forced to give birth to set an example to other 12 year old girls who would tempt other helpless men. Such a thing could get way out of hand if even one girl gets away with it. It will become an epidemic.

  9. This courageous woman had priorities.

    The American birthrate is in a “death spiral.”

    American globalist bosses import the population.

    America is being diluted out of existence.

    In 100 years, there won’t be an American left in America.

    American women have been forced into the workplace and duped in to mortal dereliction.

    Someone has “fundamentally transformed” America.

  10. “Frankly” said it best:

    “…I find it to be an extremely overwhelming tragedy for the mother, the father, the children and the new baby.”

  11. I would again point out how much anger and vitriol this heartwarming post has generated from the left. Very sad.

    1. As a mother I don’t find the story heartwarming. I find it to be an extremely overwhelming tragedy for the mother, the father, the children and the new baby.

      1. SWM, You’re right, heartwarming was a poor choice of words. Heart rending was was what was in my head but it didn’t translate to my fingers, But whatever..whether it be a heartwarming or heart rending post by JT, I don’t get the vitriol. I don’t get my saying I’m praying for people causing so much hate. WTF is wrong w/ the left. I used to be part of the left. It wasn’t hateful.

  12. I do pray to the Good Lord many times a day. Included in those prayers are requests the Good Lord helps me understand those who I disagree w/ and to calm my anger and help me love those people who hate me. That is the truth. And, I know some here don’t have the faith, love, or intellect to understand what I just said. And I just said a prayer that God help them understand that he put us all on this earth TOGETHER to help and love one another. Because this journey on earth is just too difficult to be a solo endeavor.

    1. Nick, I believe I do understand what you’re saying. You have previously refused to speak ill of the dead. Then you were angered either by those whom you thought had spoken ill of the dead or by those whom you thought had turned human tragedy into a contest between opposing political factions. I, too, have difficulty understanding the impulse to contest expressions of condolence for the loss of loved ones the surviving families suffer.

      It now seems that I am embroiled in political controversy for agreeing with our host that Carrie DeKlyen’s sacrifice was heroic, while at the same time attempting to defend a woman’s right to choose. Perhaps that defense of abortion rights does not belong on this thread about Carrie DeKlyen. But I’m convinced that Carrie’s choice must be respected and, if possible, admired, because she was a woman who had a right to choose.

      P. S. You can pray for me any time you like. You know–free speech and all that.

  13. A couple weeks ago there was a “glowing” piece circulating in the MSM about how the socialized medicine country of Iceland has almost “eliminated” Downs Syndrome via selective abortion. Abortion loving leftists gave the report high praise.

    Growing up I had a good friend. He had a brother, Mike, w/ Down’s Syndrome. He would come to all our baseball and football games, cheering loudly. Mike was a Boy Scout and loved by all in his Scout troop. I could go on about Mike but I’ll just sum it up by saying I, and many, are better people by having Mike in our lives. Leftists always accuse others of being “judgemental” one of the cardinal sins in their secular progressive “religion.” Well, they are judgemental, hateful and hypocrites, the other sins they like to accuse others of committing. It has been on full display this thread, now hasn’t it.

    Thanks to those who have had my back. But, I wear the scorn of the leftist sockpuppet here as a badge of honor. She has been rejected by family and has no friends. That’s why she creates “friends” here. Pitiful and sad.

      1. Frankly/SWM, You look at life and other people through a prism that is skewed. You associate w/ almost exclusively liberal Dems. I associate w/ a very diverse group. I have dear friends more liberal than you and more conservative than anyone on this blog. Family, well they run the gamut and their politics means NOTHING to me. Both liberals and conservatives can be loving and mean. But, liberals have pretty much cornered the market in virtue signaling.

        But Frankly/SWM, what are your thoughts on Iceland eliminating Down’s Syndrome via abortion? Don’t give me a link. Don’t give me some vague platitude. What do you THINK about that. Not what you feel, what do you THINK about that. And, a follow-up question, do you think Iceland should be celebrating their accomplishment?

        1. When people vote to cut off services to disabled people they do not support them even if they claim to do so. You need to provide a link to what Iceland has done. I need to read more about it. I am not pro-abortion.

          1. SWM, Hell, just Google it and read all you want. I think I originally read about this last year on BBC. But recently CBS news did a report and that created agita.

            1. Should a pregnant woman be able to decide if she wnts to bring a Down’s baby into the world or should she be forced to give birth whether she wants to or not? Incidentally, it’s very difficult to find adoptive families for Downs’ babies.

              1. The decision to abort a fetus due to it’s medical issues. Abortion is legal in America, so no one can be denied. Doctors have the option of sending her to a doctor who does abortions. It isn’t easy to find doctors who perform them, mostly because you end up with a dead fetus looking like all newborns, but a different color. I would have definitely aborted if a found out her baby has Down’s Syndrome.

          2. frankly:


            “With the rise of prenatal screening tests across Europe and the United States, the number of babies born with Down syndrome has significantly decreased, but few countries have come as close to eradicating Down syndrome births as Iceland.

            Since prenatal screening tests were introduced in Iceland in the early 2000s, the vast majority of women — close to 100 percent — who received a positive test for Down syndrome terminated their pregnancy…

            Olafsdottir responded, “We don’t look at abortion as a murder. We look at it as a thing that we ended. We ended a possible life that may have had a huge complication… preventing suffering for the child and for the family. And I think that is more right than seeing it as a murder — that’s so black and white. Life isn’t black and white. Life is grey.”

            With only 1 – 3 children with Down Syndrome born annually in Iceland, it makes me wonder how the other children accept children who are different…since they won’t often see one.

            1. Are you stumping for more children to be born with Down’s in Iceland? There aren’t enough of them?

              1. Louise is all yours, liberal Dems, SHE’S ALL YOURS! A Down’s hating liberal. Probably hates all disabled children, puts a strain on her beloved government.

              2. Are you saying that babies with Down Syndrome should not be born, but rather selectively aborted? You might not think that you hate disabled children, but if you want them all to die in the womb, it’s not as if you like them.

                Would you make that statement to a mother pregnant with a child with Down Syndrome? Is advocating for the life of Down Children “stumping” for them? And do you think there are “enough of them”? If you replaced “Down Syndrome” with other classifications of humans, would you still feel good about that statement?

                I’m frankly uncomfortable with any conversation where it’s suggested that handicapped people should all die in the womb because there are “enough of them”. That’s Eugenics. Why has that persisted among Progressives long after they stopped exchanging ideas with Nazis and Fascists across the pond?

        1. Rosemary is the sockpuppet[she is using about a dozen] I think Darren would love to eliminate if JT would just let him.

        2. Which party wants to cut social programs and funding? That’s not a hard question to answer.

          1. That’s easy. Democrats. Obamacare severely cut funding to Medicare by $716 billion, spread over 2013 to 2022, including payments to hospitals, nursing homes, and hospice. This would drastically curtail seniors’ access to these providers.

            “The Medicare Trustees project that the lower Medicare payment rates would cause 15 percent of hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and home health agencies to become unprofitable by 2019, and this percentage would reach roughly 25 percent in 2030 and 40 percent by 2050.”

          2. After a very long time thinking and reading some comments I know what I would do. If aborting the child was necessary I would abort and ask for the most intensive treatment for cancer. All children need their parents, where possible, both parents. When your child is born you make every promise possible. The most important is being their mother. The children should not be deserted. Mourn for the unborn, but give your children a life without the agony of losing their mother.

      2. I’m a conservative and wish there were fewer and fewer abortions. There are so many ways to avoid pregnancy that I just don’t understand why women would rather go through an abortion than not getting pregnant? I took a friend to her Dr. for her abortion and back home. She was in terrible shape. So I stayed with her constantly checkng for bleeding. She couldn’t eat anything and threw up after a sip of water. Another friend came to stay the night. Deciding a baby in her womb, with a severe illness that has no cure, be born is agony I’m sure? When the parents die what happens? I wish everybody would get over whatever issue you have about abortion. There are things we’ll never know. Perhaps turn your energy to climate change, another we’ll never know unless science does some incredibly awesome discovery.

    1. Iceland is kidding itself if it thinks it can ever eliminate Downs Syndrome. DS is not an inherited trait that can be wiped out. It spontaneously occurs during cell division in a certain percentage of pregnancies. The same percentage will occur in Iceland this year as it will 10 years from now. All they are doing is preventing any baby with Down Syndrome from surviving the womb.

      This is a persistent leftover from Eugenics, a Progressive idea about genetic hygiene. Disabilities are considered unworthy of life, and those who kept their handicapped children were criticized. It still persists today, especially in socialist leaning countries, that the right thing to do is kill handicapped children before they are born. Gotta purify the species, I suppose.

      Normally, generalities are wrong. But Downs Syndrome children are almost universally extraordinarily sweet. They teach other kids, and adults, the value of life of someone who is not “perfect”. We teach our children never to bully other kids with handicaps, birth marks, or other attributes that are not typical. So why do we simultaneously teach that these same kids should be killed before birth? Why does the hard Left believe that the State holds more power over kids than the parents, and knows what’s best, except for abortion?

      Abortion is definitely a topic fraught with emotion. It’s difficult to talk about all sides, let alone legislate it.

      Apparently, praying for a grieving family, out in the open and without shame will trigger some people as well. Strange. Sorry you’ve caught such grief, Nick.

      1. Karen, Thanks, my friend. Since knowing Mike, I always have a spontaneous smile when I see kids and adults w/ Downs. My daughter had a Down’s classmate from 6 thru12th grade. She feels the same way as you and I.

  14. Hank Stovell is one of the many incarnations of the sockpuppet Darren warned us about a few days ago. New name, same old angry sockpuppet. Consider as you respond to all the angry leftists on this, and other threads, it may be just one or two people.

      1. Karen, Sorry, I forget which thread. I’ll skin through a few and see if I can find it. One of the sockpuppets let her homophobia out when I mentioned Milo. Darren called her on being a hypocrite and using many sockpuppets to ruin this blog. Sound familiar??

        1. Sure does.

          Hey, I sent you pics of a horse for your granddaughter. Did you get them? Let me know if not and I can resend.

  15. Plus, since everybody is talking about “hate”, I came across this poem today from a guy named Spenser, who was an old English poet, who couldn’t spell for sh*t. Which, in case there are some who will whine that what the heck is this doing in the comment section of a legal blog— just read the second link below, for the legal context of the poem. . .

    Anyway, so I bought this 80 year old book of Spenser’s stuff, thinking that maybe somebody had cleaned up the guy’s obvious spelling difficulties. But they didn’t. The book came in yesterday. I flipped it open this morning while I was listening to Sunday Morning Baroque, so I could intensify the baroque-y mood. Anyway this page is what I landed on, which is a really, really good, and intense poem. Which, I found on the web because I would go bonkers trying to type in all his words which would probably gag my word processor’s spell check function. This is just one part of the poem, which you can find the whole thing at the link.

    Daphnaida, an Elegy


    “Hencefoorth I hate whatever Nature made,
    And in her workmanship no pleasure finde,
    For they be all but vaine, and quickly fade
    So soone as on them blowes the northern winde;
    They tarrie not, but flit and fall away,
    Leaving behind them nought but griefe of minde,
    And mocking such as thinke they long will stay.

    “I hate the heaven, because it doth withhould
    Me from my love, and eke my love from me;
    I hate the earth, because it is the mould
    Of fleshly slime and fraile mortalitie;
    I hate the fire, because to nought it flyes;
    I hate the ayre, because sighes of it be;
    I hate the sea, because it teares supplyes.

    “I hate the day, because it lendeth light
    To see all things, and not my love to see;
    I hate the darknesse and the dreary night,
    Because they breed sad balefulnesse in mee;
    I hate all times, because all times doo fly
    So fast away, and may not stayed bee,
    But as a speedie post that passeth by.

    “I hate to speake, my voyce is spent with crying;
    I hate to heare, lowd plaints have duld mine eares;
    I hate to tast, for food withholds my dying;
    I hate to see, mine eyes are dimd with teares;
    I hate to smell, no sweet on earth is left;
    I hate to feele, my flesh is numbd with feares:
    So all my senses from me are bereft.

    “I hate all men, and shun all womankinde;
    The one, because as I they wretched are;
    The other, for because I doo not finde
    My love with them, that wont to be their starre.
    And life I hate, because it will not last;
    And death I hate, because it life doth marre;
    And all I hate that is to come or past.

    “So all the world, and all in it I hate,
    Because it changeth ever to and fro,
    And never standeth in one certaine state,
    But, still unstedfast, round about doth goe
    Like a mill-wheele in midst of miserie,
    Driven with streames of wretchednesse and woe,
    That dying lives, and living still does dye.

    “So doo I live, so doo I daylie die,
    And pine away in selfe-consuming paine!
    Sith she that did my vitall powres supplie,
    And feeble spirits in their force maintaine,
    Is fetcht fro me, why seeke I to prolong
    My wearie daies in dolour and disdalne!
    Weepe, Shepheard! weepe, to make my undersong.

    As far as the legal context, you can go to this link, and read a part of the JSTOR entry:

    I ain’t paying $42.00 for the whole thing, and if anybody has a JSTOR subscription. . .

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

      1. Partially??? Oh no, I have a FULLY finished bunker to go to, courtesy of my Father’s insistence that we be prepared for when SHTF. Of course, I would have to rent a 24 foot UHaul truck to carry all my guitars and books, and cats and shoes to it. My dad has been talking about buying a used 24 foot bob truck for just that reason, because he believes we will have at least a month or two head start on the U.S. collapsing from social causes. That we the whole family can move their stuff to “Rivendale.” Plus, he can go around to grocery stores and top off the supplies that are already there waiting for us.

        Now, if it is a natural disaster, we are just supposed to grab our go bags, load as much into the SUV’s as we can, and boogie to safety. Between me and Penelope, there are two vehicles, and a little trailer thingy, sooo we can grab all the guns, ammo, and food in addition to the cats. And a few guitars and books, too.

        But you know, maybe I need to prioritize my books, so that all the ones I want to grab are in one book case, to make it easier to load in a hurry???

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

          1. Would you believe I have 6 of them, and just ordered another one today? They stretch back to the Generation 1 one, and one is a paperwhite. But Amazon ran an ad today on the Fire HD 8 for $25 off, down to $54.99, or $11.00 per month for 5 months. I mean you just can’t beat that. It is even Alexa capable. The 8 inch one is my favorite size, because it is not too small, and not too big, like the 10.1 inch one.

            The 2017 one has room for a bigger sd thingy, up to 256 gig. I use them for different things. One is pretty much the controller for an Amplifi TT guitar thing, where you app in a band, or a song, and the amp automatically sets up to sound like that. Another is blue-rayed to a speaker. Before a storm, I charge all of them up, and if the power goes out, then I have have all sorts of options of things to do with the lights out.

            Something else that is kewl, is if you have a ROKU TV, or a Fire Stick, is that you can download an Amazon Music app to the TV. That lets you listen to any music you have bought thru Amazon on your TV, which mine is hooked up to a sound bar.

            Today, they had a 25 song Hank Williams mp3 album on for only $3.99, which I bought, and listened to while I was washing dishes and cleaning up the kitchen area. Some CD’s that you buy on Amazon also provide you the MP3 capability, sooo like I bought Neil Youngs greatest hits CD, and it is also on my Kindles and my TV now. Plus, you can get a Kindle App for your PC, too! And then your books are also on your PC, and you can even get free Excalibre software to organize those, and any PDFs, or other books you have.

            I like to review the $5 MP3 albums they offer each month and I try to buy at least one or two each month, so that I will have a slew of music in case SHTF. If you do that, the Big Band music of the 30’s is also good. I got it just to get Sing, Sing, Sing but the other songs on there were also good. Like the one called “The Angels Sing”, which is wrong, because the song is actually Bei Mir Bist Du Schon! What a cool song that is!

            Oh my, I have just been rambling on and on! It must be the coffee! But anyway, I really like Amazon! Except for The Washington Post.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

    1. Squeeky – I don’t wish to be mean, but Edmund Spenser lived at the same time as William Shakespeare. He wrote The Fairie Queen, which should be an epic poem in your book. All the spelling is from that period. BTW, he is a major English poet from that age.

      1. Well, at least Shakespeare could spell! This Spenser guy, though is something else! Yes, The Fairie Queene is in that book, which used to belong to a High School library. Anyway, how I found out about him is, I bought one his books called The Shepheards Calendar, and let me tell you it is a COMPLETE RIPOFF! First, it only has months in it, and no days or weeks whatsoever. Plus, the guy can’t spell for crap, which I should have had a clue from the title, but really, he could have at least sprung for an editor. And instead of what the weather is going to be, like in Poor Richards’ Farmer’s Almanac, this guy has some weird gay stuff going on in August. . . Look at this!

        To chearful Songs can change my chearless Cryes.
        Hence, with the Nightingale will I take part,
        That blessed Bird, that spends her time of sleep
        In Songs and plaintive Pleas, the more t’ augment
        The memory of his Misdeed, that bred her Woe.

        And you that feel no Woe, when as the Sound
        Of these my nightly Cryes ye hear apart,
        Let break your sounder Sleep, and Pity augment.

        O Colin, Colin, the Shepherd’s Joy,
        How I admire each turning of the Verse:
        And Cuddy, fresh Cuddy, the liefest Boy,
        How dolefully his Dole thou didst rehearse!

        Then blow Your Pipes, Shepherds, till yon be at home:
        The Night hieth fast, it’s time to be gone.

        Vicenti gloria victi.

        Vinto non vitto.

        Felice chi puo.

        There I was, wondering if I could plant Turnip Greens in August or not, and he’s going on about blowing some young lad’s pipe, which if it means what I think it means, is a crime in more than one state! Probably not in England, anymore.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. Squeeky – Shakespeare signed his name three times on his will, not once did he spell it the same way and it was never spelled Shakespeare. Shakespeare actually made up words, maybe as many as 5000. And his spelling sucks, since there is not a dictionary for awhile.

          1. I did not believe you, sooo I looked it up. You are right! Shakespeare did invent words! Here is a link to what I found:


            Very interesting! Spenser, on the other hand, I just think the dude can’t spell. He even screwed up his Italian quotes, assuming that “vento non vitto” is even Italian. Just try those words in Google Translate!

            You get “won no meals.” My guess is, he is trying to say, “Wine not food”, sooo I changed “vinto” to “vino”, and that gave me “unleavened wine.” I changed “vinto” to “vento” and got “wind unfit.” I mean Jesus H. Christ on a popsicle stick!, he could certainly do better than that!

            The strange part is, that the more I read him, the more I enter Neetsy-like intwo the abiss of bade speling, whair the stough becums understandabull.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

            1. Squeeky – just remember, when you are reading the poetry, there are no silent letters. 🙂 An annotated copy is always the best. 😉

          2. Spelling in English was not standardized in Shakespeare’s time. Nor was grammar or punctuation. Everybody made up his own rules. Samuel Pepys, born 70-some years after Shakespeare, did little better. He, too made egregious spelling errors but was at least consistent with his own name.

            Wouldn’t you think a person would decide once and for all how his own name should be spelled and be consistent with it?

            1. Louise – two of the signatures are interliniations in the will making changes. There is a doctor who has a book out trying to make the case that Shakespeare’s last signature, which is pretty shaky, is the result of a stoke and that his oldest daughter poisoned him. The stroke part I will buy, but I am not sure about the poisoning.

              Pepys is a fun read. Really enjoyed reading him. Jonson, Fletcher, Marlowe, etc. all spelled as badly or as goodly, since there was no standard.

  16. Karen S. “My parents adopted my older brother as a baby. His mother was a teenager, I believe. She could so easily have ended one of the best people in the entire world. My brother and my mom are very close, and he is so protective of her, and all of us. He’s clever, and very successful. He has a wonderful life, a great wife, and two wonderful kids, all because his birth mom gave him his best chance. I will always hold nothing but love for his birth mom for having him, and giving him to us.”

    It’s very nice to hear a success story, but don’t overlook the many adoptions that don’t work out so well. Some adoptees have been known to kill their adoptove parents. Who knows what feelings of rejection and resentment a child develops at the thought of his mother giving him or her away. She may have done what she thought was best, but it is still an abandonment. Some children take it harder than others and it festers their whole lives.

    1. It’s very nice to hear a success story, but don’t overlook the many adoptions that don’t work out so well.

      Child-rearing in general often ‘don’t work out so well’. This isn’t that difficult, Louise.

  17. This story really hits me.

    Her decision was for love. Losing a child is devastating. There are so many grieving parents out there who wish so fiercely that they could have taken their child’s place. They would give anything for their child to be alive. This mom was actually given that choice. She chose love, and she was so brave and selfless.

    Her family is grieving and are in my thoughts and prayers. I hope that Life recovers soon and is home with her family. I pray for her children, especially her littlest ones who just lost their Mom.

    One of my relatives died of aggressive brain tumors. She had 26 surgeries, I believe. The first surgery damaged the nerves used to reflexively swallow. I flew up to stay with her for a few weeks, and she would grip my hand all night, panicking every time she would choke on her own saliva. Do you have any idea how often you swallow your own saliva? Imagine horribly choking every single time. 24/7. She couldn’t sleep. She had a feeding tube that was problematic on its own. It took a long while, but through a lot of hard work and physical therapy, she was able to learn how to manually swallow.

    26 surgeries. Dura torn and shredded. Shunts. Learning how to rehabilitate one side of her face that fell. All that pain. She’d have good days and bad. Eventually, she was able to swallow well enough that she could carefully eat some foods. She held on for over 2 years. She was even able to take a few trips. The last time I spoke with her shortly before her death, she was worried others and said not a word of complaint about herself. Her mother was destroyed and would absolutely, positively, have traded places with her in an instant.

    I want people to realize the true nature of Carrie DeKlyen’s choice. I don’t know what options she was offered, but I doubt one of them was a complete cure. It was likely that she had the option of chemo to prolong her life, but not save it. I have no idea the quality of life they anticipated she would have. Was she offered 6 months? A year? A year in which she would have grieved the child she gave up to experience a year of chemo and surgeries? As she was making this decision, it was she who would bear the brunt of the consequences, whichever way she chose. And for anyone in that position, it’s she, not us rail birds, who bears the consequences. No one should second guess her. Her family needs support and comfort.

    She chose the most loving, selfless choice, and I honor her.

    1. And may I add that patients join clinical trials when all else fails. This was not a choice between the life of her baby girl and her own cure.

      The choice came down to whether she was willing to kill her own baby to join a clinical trial. She chose to save her baby. Moms are supposed to protect their children, fight grizzly bears for them. She was just diagnosed in April, already pregnant, and was gone by September. God bless her soul, and her family.

      This was one of those philosophical questions – if you were hanging off a cliff, and your baby was hanging off a cliff, and only one of you could survive, which would you choose? Except her choice was even more dire, because her option was really hang off a cliff for a little while longer and then fall, or let her baby have a chance to live a full life.

        1. While Karen may in fact have a very “kind heart”, to say that she has “the kindest heart” is ridiculous.

          Schmoozin’ and “great acting” are two of Nick’s admitted specialties, though:

          Nick Spinelli
          August 19, 2017 at 7:51 AM wrote:

          “Being a PI, as a small businessman, I would have regular contact w/ govt. employees in many departments, not just law. And, if you want to get what you need, you have to schmooze them. And, they are quite schmoozable. But, it too some great acting on my part.”

          1. LOL angry sockpuppet. I know Karen very well. We communicate away from this blog often. I feel no need to schmooze her and I KNOW she knows that. What you think means nothing..nothing at all.

            1. “LOL angry” Nick.

              (It wasn’t really about Karen. You didn’t get it…and I really didn’t expect you to get it.)

          2. Nick schmoozing government employees for private information is illegal. The guy is a two-bit crook.

            1. LOL! Call it in Hank/Ken/David B Benson/Annie/anonymous, et al. Report me to the local authorities. If you had half a brain you would realize the govt. employee would be the one on the hot seat, not me. What a rube!!

          3. anonymous – I have been insulted by this whole conversation. I have the kindest heart. I am a sweetie. Ask anybody. 😉

                1. So does Stuart Smalley.

                  It was a joke. It’s from a scene in the movie The Help. I don’t get your reference to Charles Manson.

        2. Thanks, Nick. You’re a good person. Don’t let any of those obsessive comments against you get to you.

    2. She did not make a sacrifice alone. She imposed it on her other children, her husband and other loved ones. That, to me, was far from selfless. She made a martyr of herself at her family’s expense–and brough another motherles child into the world. Some would say that was a selfish, not a selfless act, especislly to leave six children motherless against their will. They obviously had no choice in the matter but they are left to suffer the consequences.

      1. What are you, some kind of a frigging nut??? The woman was very likely going to die anyway, so it is hardly “martyrdom” to make a choice that will allow your unborn child to live. My goodness, but your thinking processes are all messed up. Those kids were probably going to be motherless in a few years anyway, or less. Glioblastoma is not something that a doctor can guarantee a result for.

        And as far as being “motherless”, the children also have a FATHER in the home, so it isn’t like they are going to be orphans or anything.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

      2. Did you read my earlier comments about the reality of treated brain cancer? And that she most likely was not offered the chance of a cure, but rather a short extra window of life?

        These kids are affected in all scenarios. Option A – they could have had their mother with them for maybe a few months. They would find out she killed their sister to have just a few more months. Option B – they lost their mother maybe a few months earlier than otherwise, and she saved the life of her sister, showing them she loved her kids more than herself.

        Either way, they’ve lost their mother. Her mother only had the choice of how she left, and the message her exit sent, not whether she left at all.

        I understand that the question of abortion is a very emotional one. My own opinion is complicated, and has evolved as I’ve grown older and become a mother myself.

        May I point out that, in reality, all pregnant mothers are forced to give birth at some point. Most states limit abortion in the third trimester, for example. The baby is full term, the mother has to undergo labor as part of the abortion. So at some point, she is not legally allowed to kill her unborn infant. The vast majority of people are united in being unwilling to allow a woman to kill her child while he’s in the birth canal, moments before taking his first breath. That nation was united in its disgust with Dr Kermit Gosnell’s house of horrors.

        So, actually, most people do want to force a woman to give birth against her will if the baby has survived in the womb long enough that they are uncomfortable killing him. Very, very few people would support unlimited abortion, as late in term as the mother wants. We also, as a nation, will not allow infanticide. We prosecute women who give birth only to strangle their infants. At some point, the baby’s right to life does supersede his mother’s right to choose. The very thorny problem is legislating where that line is. A lot of people have not done that thought exercise for when the baby would have a right to live. Is it when it feels pain? Looks human? Can survive outside the womb if delivered on that day? People choose a side without thinking about it.

        So there is actually a lot of common ground between “Pro Life” and “Pro Choice” people. There is a range of belief from those who would not want the day after pill to be legal, to those who support infanticide. This is a tough issue to work through, both personally and legislatively, and it’s nearly impossible to talk about either side without exciting extreme emotion.

        I remember being shocked when I saw this testimony before Congress from a former abortion provider:

        I never thought about abortion, how or when it was performed. I had this vague notion that it was always extremely early. I never thought about fetal development. I remember when I was pregnant, and I joyfully saw my little son in there flipping around, his little heart beating like a hummingbird, at 10 weeks, and I thought with a jolt that people have abortions at that gestation. He’d move when the doctor moved the ultrasound. He was his own person, separate from me but connected, safe but vulnerable, and I was flooded with the most fierce love and protective instinct.

        1. It’s extremely rare for an abortion to be performed in the third trimester by a trained and licensed doctor. . It’s also dangerous to the woman. It is never performed by legitimate doctors for no medical reason or because the woman wants to have an abortion. The fetus is simply delivered early, either vaginally or by cesarean section and it is given all necessary medical care to help it survive. No legitimate doctor would kill a viable fetus in the third trimester and often not in the second. There are few doctors who provide third-trimester procedures. It’s an extreme specialty. When abortion is made illegal, however, back alley abortionists will abort a pregnancy in the third trimester, no questions asked. This is another reason to keep abortion safe. Legal and as rare as possible. There are no controls on back alley abortions. When women are forced into back alley abortions, anything goes. It’s a consequence of making abortions illegal or impossible to obtain. . There are always unintended consequences to legal bans. Why not keep them legal and safe instead of illegal and dangerous? But rabid anti abortionists seldom consider the consequences of making abortions illegal or impossible to obtain legally. They create and support the back alley abortion industry–and they seldom “save” any fetuses. Women will obtain abortions by hook or by crook, legally or illegally.

          1. Women will obtain abortions by hook or by crook, legally or illegally.

            Paedophiles will molest children by hook or by crook, so it’s best to make it legal.

            1. Apparently you don’t see the difference, so it’s easy to see why you take the position you take. You have no clue.and are completely at sea.

  18. I wonder if God thinks it is important that Nick tells a bunch of strangers that he is praying for this family. Does God find such ‘public’ prayers of greater worth than those given in humble privacy?

    1. Hank Stovell – there are some studies that show that the power of prayer work in healing. Don’t knock what you don’t understand.

          1. What hypocrisy. Everyone who writes a comment, including you, asserts they know EXACTLY what is on my mind, on a liberal’s mind, (see Nick’s comment) what is important for God to know, and that every reader knows what a good loving, prayerful kind person Nick is.

            Humility died on this blog a loooong time ago.

            1. “Humility died on this blog a loooong time ago.” -Hank Stovell

              Oh, don’t get him (Nick) goin’… : )

              (It’s a blog, but some people seem to think of it as “home” — or so it would seem.)

              1. anonymous – I spend so much time on here, I do think of it as a 2nd home. I also feel a lot of the blogger are my friends or I treat them that way. No one is my enemy.

            2. Hammerin’ Hank, Ken Doll, Annie, anonymous, et al: Darren called one of your sockpuppets a hypocrite a few days ago regarding you being homophobic. I often speak of prayers on this blog when there is someone suffering. I’ve done it probably 100 times, or more. This is the FIRST time an alt leftist or anyone said ANYTHING derogatory about my prayers.

              1. Our society has decided that privacy isn’t necessary anymore. I think it’s more than necessary, it’s essential. A woman challenged a friend who was pregnant for having a glass of champagne. She was so upset she wanted to leave. Hubby saved the day by going over to the bitch and telling her it was their anniversary and the doctor said a glass is fine. Pregnant women are getting refusals to be served alcohol. I wish I’d been there. I could tell her my mother drank martinis and smoked half a pack a day, unfiltered, while pregnant with me. At 75 I think I could assure her I have no birth defects.

        1. Perhaps you’d like to go lambast all those people publicly sharing their prayers for the family on their GoFundMe page?

      1. I don’t knock prayer. I knock a prayer asking for God’s mercy THROUGH a public blog. That is NOT a prayer. That is a plead for acknowledgement of the person’s goodness.

        1. Yes it’s showing off and claiming to be holier than anyone else. He must think tgod is impressed if he shouts his prayers from the roof tops.

          “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.”
          Matthew 6:6.

          When people hear someone praying, it means nothing but that a person are trying to throw it in their faces. “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.” Proverbs 16:18

        2. Hank Stovell – i am agnostic, but the variety that believes in an Uncaused Cause. Frankly, my God could care less. 😉 BTW, I am sure it doesn’t read this blog.

    2. You wonder, which means you do not know. Given that, what’s the worst that could happen as a result of such a public prayer? That’s right, nothing, other than encouraging people to care for others.

      1. If Nick encouraged people to give money to this family or others in need, that would be encouraging people to care for others. A humble brag prayer is simply a plead for praise for Nick.

        1. If and when Nick does that then it’s still not your place to judge his sincerity. Only God knows what’s truly in his heart.

            1. Make that “most Turley commenters” but — in the main — you’re correct. Thanks for the chuckle.

    3. It can be comforting to grieving people to hear that others care about what happened to them. Offering public support is traditional. Otherwise our Presidents would remain mum on national or international tragedies and only offer their condolences in their thoughts.

      1. Saying it so others can hear means nothing but that he wants to show off and pretend to be holy.. “Hey, look at me, I’m so holy and prayerful. I always say the right things and I say it loud enough so no one can miss my holiness and devoutness.” It’s like someone who brags about how much money he has. Conspicious consumption. Jesus would be so pleased!

        1. This just seems unbelievable to me that anyone would castigate someone who offers their prayers and support for a grieving family who just lost their Mom.

          When Cathy Gifford was shot, were people excoriated who offered their public support and prayers? Of course not. That would come across as unbalanced and callous.

          Public statements of support and prayer are traditional. They’ve been made by everyone all the way up to Presidents and Queens in times of trouble and tragedy. Why anyone would censor such displays of comfort and calls for support is beyond me.

          Do not, I plead, make this family’s suffering any worse by criticizing those who pray for them in public. No one is required to make prayer private. It can be uplifting to others and unify those who want to lend their support to a family in a very difficult time.

          If you are not religious you are always free to say they are in your thoughts, or not say anything at all. It is basic decency not to deliberately hurt a family in grief. Is what you are writing helpful, hurtful, or benign should the family ever read it?

          1. I repeat Matthew’s admonishment. “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.” but what did he know? People who pray openly and make loud public statements know better than Matthew. They want to ahout their holiness and compassion to the world, lest anyone overlook it.

            1. That was not the meaning of Matthew. He was in no way saying that public offers of support and prayer to a grieving family are wrong. He was talking about a completely different scenario of insincerity.

          2. “When Cathy Gifford was shot” (Karen S.)

            Are you confusing Kathie Lee Gifford with Gabby Giffords?

            1. Groan. Yes! I got her name wrong. You got me. Thanks for the correction. That’s all I need is to start a rumor that Kathie Lee Gifford was shot.

              1. “That’s all I need is to start a rumor that Kathie Lee Gifford was shot.” – KS

                Insert smile. (Most of us make these kinds of mistakes from time to time.)

          3. The prayer would have seemed more sincere if had not been couched in a left right political statement.

            1. I’m afraid the source of all the gleichschaltung – all of it – is on the portside. This is the world you’ve brought into being Live with it, sister.

        2. Oh this is sooo rich! YOU, and other Liberals are complaining about “virtue signalling”??? OH, I am just ROTFLMAO!!! Teeny weeny black pot meet MASSIVE BLACK CAULDRON full of irony. . .

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

  19. God bless this woman and I pray for her family. Thanks to JT for posting it. That the leftists here are so angry and cynical about this simple post tells you from where the vast majority of the vitriol and hate in our culture emanates. I pray for the Good Lord to ease their angry souls.

    1. Thank god. We’ve got the ever humble Nick praying for the family. No doubt that will get them over this ‘rough patch’.

    2. Agreed. I believe those vast majority are that way because their public persona is in direct conflict with their conscience. They cannot reconcile that they are the root of their own misery. So when you post a thoughtful prayer for the family, of course they must exorcise their conscience by attacking you.

    3. Nick wrote: “That the leftists here are so angry and cynical about this simple post tells you from where the vast majority of the vitriol and hate in our culture emanates.”

      Nick is projecting. Again.

    4. To NickS, below:

      Amen! You are right. The Left is just chugging full of hate. I think maybe it is because to a Liberal Leftist Democrat, persons B-Z are always responsible for the problems faced by Person (victim) A. Person A, if a member of an appropriate victim group, is NEVER responsible for their own state in life. For example, some single black chick with four illegitimate children is poor, and it will never be her fault for having four kids that she couldn’t afford, but instead White Privilege, or Institutionalized Racism. This mindset is a natural set up for scapegoating (just like with the Nazis and Jews back prior to World War II) and thus, a lot of hatred. I have posted this before, but it is by a guy who quit being a Leftist, and his number one reason out of ten, was all the hate they had:

      1) Hate.

      If hate were the only reason, I’d stop being a leftist for this reason alone.

      Almost twenty years ago, when I could not conceive of ever being anything but a leftist, I joined a left-wing online discussion forum.

      Before that I’d had twenty years of face-to-face participation in leftist politics: marching, organizing, socializing.

      In this online forum, suddenly my only contact with others was the words those others typed onto a screen. That limited and focused means of contact revealed something.

      If you took all the words typed into the forum every day and arranged them according to what part of speech they were, you’d quickly notice that nouns expressing the emotions of anger, aggression, and disgust, and verbs speaking of destruction, punishing, and wreaking vengeance, outnumbered any other class of words.

      One topic thread was entitled “What do you view as disgusting about modern America?” The thread was begun in 2002. Almost eight thousand posts later, the thread was still going strong in June, 2014.

      Those posting messages in this left-wing forum publicly announced that they did what they did every day, from voting to attending a rally to planning a life, because they wanted to destroy something, and because they hated someone, rather than because they wanted to build something, or because they loved someone. You went to an anti-war rally because you hated Bush, not because you loved peace. Thus, when Obama bombed, you didn’t hold any anti-war rally, because you didn’t hate Obama.

      I experienced powerful cognitive dissonance when I recognized the hate. The rightest of my right-wing acquaintances — I had no right-wing friends — expressed nothing like this. My right-wing acquaintances talked about loving: God, their family, their community. I’m not saying that the right-wingers I knew were better people; I don’t know that they were. I’m speaking here, merely, about language.


      Recently, I was trying to explain this aspect of why I stopped being a leftist to a left-wing friend, Julie. She replied, “No, I’m not an unpleasant person. I try to be nice to everybody.”

      “Julie,” I said, “You are an active member of the Occupy Movement. You could spend your days teaching children to read, or visiting the elderly in nursing homes, or organizing cleanup crews in a garbage-strewn slum. You don’t. You spend your time protestingand trying to destroy something — capitalism.”

      “Yes, but I’m very nice about it,” she insisted. “I always protest with a smile.”

      Pete is now a Facebook friend and his feed overflows with the anger that I’m sure he assesses as righteous. He protests against homophobic Christians, American imperialists, and Monsanto. I don’t know if Pete ever donates to an organization he believes in, or a person suffering from a disease, or if he ever says comforting things to afflicted intimates. I know he hates.

      I do have right-wing friends now and they do get angry and they do express that anger. But when I encounter unhinged, stratospheric vituperation, when I encounter detailed revenge fantasies in scatological and sadistic language, I know I’ve stumbled upon a left-wing website.

      Given that the left prides itself on being the liberator of women, homosexuals, and on being “sex positive,” one of the weirder and most obvious aspects of left-wing hate is how often, and how virulently, it is expressed in terms that are misogynist, homophobic, and in the distinctive anti-sex voice of a sexually frustrated high-school misfit. Haters are aware enough of how uncool it would be to use a slur like “fag,” so they sprinkle their discourse with terms indicating anal rape like “butt hurt.” Leftists taunt right-wingers as “tea baggers.” The implication is that the target of their slur is either a woman or a gay man being orally penetrated by a man, and is, therefore, inferior, and despicable.


      A high-profile example of leftist invective was delivered by MSNBC’s Martin Bashir in late 2013. Bashir said, on air and in a rehearsed performance, not as part of a moment’s loss of control, something so vile about Sarah Palin that I won’t repeat it here. Extreme as it is, Bashir’s comment is fairly representative of a good percentage of what I read on left-wing websites.

      I could say as much about a truly frightening phenomenon, left-wing anti-Semitism, but I’ll leave the topic to others better qualified. I can say that when I first encountered it, at a PLO fundraising party in Marin County, I felt as if I had time-traveled to pre-war Berlin.

      I needed to leave the left, I realized, when I decided that I wanted to spend time with people building, cultivating, and establishing, something that they loved.

      There’s a lot more at the link.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. I have a friend of 50 years who doesn’t want to hear anything about politics. She is, of course, a Democrat, but a Truman, Carter and “praise God for Obama” Democrat. I’m sure she voted for Hillary. We live in CA, so her presidential vote was of no consequence. A healthy chunk of CA votes weren’t legal. (Here the dead vote, the living vote multiple times, and ghosts who never existed at all are proud voters. The Democrats keep saying Hillary was the winner of the popular vote. True, but how many were legal?

        When Iraq had their first election, they had every voter stick a finger in a purple dye. The dye wears off in a couple days. How does a third world country guarantee, as best it could, a one-person,
        one-vote? I recommend we do that in 2018.

        1. If there is illegal voting going on anywhere, it’s just as likely that a Republican vote was cast illegally as a Democratic one. You claim there was illegal voting going on but your claim is as empty as your head. No one has shown that illegal voting was happenong beyond an honest error or two. But there is ironclad evidence that Trump and his henchment colluded with the Russians to swing the election–and it worked. Republicans are as underhanded as it’s possible to be, and Trump Republicans are the worst if all. Slimey snakes, every last one of them.

          1. it’s just as likely that a Republican vote was cast illegally as a Democratic one.

            Democratic politicos and dippy rank-and-file Democrats are not fussing about ‘voter suppression’ because they’re anxious about Republican vote fraud.

          2. “ironclad evidence that Trump and his henchment [sic] colluded…..Russians to swing….election–and it worked.” Hillary Clinton’s recent victomology screed is not ironclad proof. Substantive information is requisite.

            1. President Trump was not in my original comment. I was born in CA, grew up there, and was active in Republican Women. I attended a Sacramento luncheon where the speaker talked to us about some bills they were lobbying for (yes, a lobbyist, the harlot). The first bill was about cleaning up the voter registrations. All they wanted to do was compare the Social Security death logs. The Democrats were adamant the registrations were accurate and needed no auditing! Would ethical, honest public servants want that? Guess not. Other states do this and they don’t find many. But CA has millions who live and die here.

              1. Sandy, I thought my response was to Louise’s comment, not to yours. Sorry if you thought I was responding to you, or if I screwed it up by hitting wrong reply button. Sometimes these really long comment strings get hard to navigate. When I lived in CA, I used to belong to a Democratic club, and based on my observations I cannot dispute what you are saying. As I’ve stated before on another blog post here, I left the Dem party in 2010.

                1. I’ve met via internet many Democrats saying the same thing. They left the party. Are you able to support President Trump in his attempts to keep his promises? Because leaving the party usually is more the party left you. I’ve never seen a man work so hard, 3:30AM he starts! He’s on the phone a lot which confuses congress because they have no idea what he’s doing. Watching Pelosi and Schumer with their snarky smiles, my hope is there is a surprised.

                  1. Sandy, I voted for Trump in order to burn DeeCee down, and because of a deep hatred for Hillary Clinton. I respect many things about Mr. Trump, but I knew he would have trouble because of a lack of knowledge regarding getting the appropriate wheels greased. He didn’t have a team around him who knew how to get things done in Washington. I have no problem with the President’s work ethic, but wish he would take fewer trips out of DC, and wish he would stop tweeting so much. I think he meant what he said during the campaign about moving the country forward in a positive direction. What is amazing to me is the number of people who want him to fail or be impeached or wish bad things on him and his family. This shocks me because if our President fails, the country will falter. I don’t understand why anyone would want that.

                2. I suspect that when you did that the average IQ level of the Democratic Party shot up several points.

                  1. With a nod to the great Robert Duvall, I love the smell of ad hominems in the morning.

            2. There is zero evidence of Trump having any contact with Russians. Senator Feinstein, after whatever committee she was on, said she saw nothing to indicate any contact between Russia and Trump’s campaign. Unfortunately, Mueller will keep this thing going as long as he can. One of the lawyers he hired has resigned, why? The requisite substantive information isn’t public, if it exists at all. Meanwhile we, the beleaguered taxpaper has Mueller, his large staff, and a Grand Jury to,pay.

              1. Don’t his son and son-in-law count as part of his campaign? I heard that Donald Trump was at Trump Tower when the meeting with the Russian lawyer took place. I can’t imagine he didn’t “drop in” to such a meeting at such a time. It was in his home, as big and ostentatious as it was, it was where he lived. Presumably Donald, Junior and Jared spoke to each other about the campaign, occasionally.They were running his campaign, after all, and they are supposedly close family! Talk about uncommunicative families! Family therapists would have a field day with this bunch.

          3. Louise – it was just reported that NH which has instant registration, registered 6000 people with out-of-state drivers licenses. Very few of those have gotten NH licenses. So, NH has some 5500, at least, fraudulent voters.

            1. And every one of them is a Democrat, right? Republicans would NEVER engage in voter fraud, would they? The would never use Russian influence to sway an election, either, right?

              1. When making calls the night before an election (Dole) we had a list of responses to frequently asked questions. Specifically, what to say if a voter implied voting for his dead mother. I was told this by a man and then he said I’m kidding. Good because voting for your mother is breaking the law.and he said “why have the Democrats done it for years and we don’t?” My responsibility was beause we’re better than they are! The tragedy is having so many who know.

                1. So you, Sandra Hemming, know for a fact that no Republican in the history of the US ever voted for a dead person. Presumably you have documented evidence and aren’t making this up as you go along? (A bad habit of Republicans.)

            1. Squeaky, ostriches bury their head into sand to hide. How anyone figured that out I have no idea. We have a few here. Their belief is their belief,so leave them to it.

              1. You are right. Either:

                1. They are hopelessly stupid.
                2. They are hopelessly partisan.
                3. They are hopelessly oppositional and passive-aggressive.
                4. They are really conservatives who are playing dumb to screw with people.
                5. Somebody is paying them to say this.
                6. They are various combinations of the above.

                Squeeky Fromm
                Girl Reporter

              2. Ostriches don’t bury their heads in the sand. If you didn’t have yours in the sand up,to your shoulders you would know that.

            2. How many votes were involved in these cases and how many were likely Democratic votes and how many were likely Republican votes? And how many fraudulent Trump cotes were cast because of Russian interference with the election? If you are going to collect instances of voter fraud, liik to both Repub,ican abd Democratic votes. I have never heard of a foreign country swaying an election as the Russians did with Trump. It’s no wonder they were willing to do it. They knew where their bread was buttered with a dolt in the White House. Putin is head and shoulders above Trump in the underhanded intellect department. If anyone knows a chump when they see one, it’s the Russians.

      2. Posted to the wrong comment, earlier:

        Squeeks, the “prepper”, emerges from her partially-finished bunker…

      3. Squeek, Thanks for the link. As I said up thread, I was a liberal when I was young. There was anger, sure..particularly about Vietnam and Nixon. But not this free floating hate and rage about everything. Do we need to add Prozac too organic vegetables and fruit?

    5. The vitriol against public support of the family is very troubling. I don’t know what’s happened to people.

      On another note, I sent you horse pics for your granddaughter. Hope she enjoys them.

      1. Karen, I didn’t get the pix? Are you using your same email account? I emailed you earlier today and it didn’t bounce back.

    6. Professor Turley didn’t mention at what point in her pregnancy she was. Was her daughter’s fetus too young to be removed from the Uterus? Babies are born prematurely and our natal abilities so advanced, I only ask because dying so quickly after the birth made me wonder. The children’s father has a big job ahead.

      Alternately, she had other children who now have no mother. I’m glad that kind of decision has never been resented to me

      1. The doctors kept her going until 24 weeks because typically babies born at 22-23 weeks do not survive, and having her carry to 24 weeks gives the infant more time in utero for organ development. Nevertheless, odds are high that this baby girl will have severe developmental delays, runs a high risk for CP, breathing difficulties, and other medical issues that may require lifetime care. The link below is an example of a similar situation in England, only the mother lived.

          1. There are terrible stories of cases like this where the survivor is blamed for the death of the mother. I hope that doesn’t happen.

        1. When the decision was made about the daughter what was the Mother’s prognosis? And none of my business, I’m just curious because I am about most things.

          1. According to an article I read (or maybe it was the GoFundMe page started by the sister) she found out she was pregnant after she was diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme (which is always fatal and typically within 15 months). Glioblastoma is most often treated with surgery, radiation and adjuvant chemo, the woman declined chemo, and perhaps radiation also, but she reportedly had at least one surgery. Doctors wanted to keep her alive to 28 weeks, but that obviously didn’t happen.


Comments are closed.

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: