Category Archives: Politics

Rockwood School District Publishes Student Health Records Online

It seems that the Rockwood School District in St Louis Missouri just can’t take a break. continues to make poor, unconstitutional decisions.

First, in an effort to receive vouchers from the state, schools implemented a “Run for Recess” requiring students run laps around the track before participating in what was left of their 15 minute recess. Next, it was discovered that the district  fingerprints all students without parental consent. Then came the state audit which unveiled what we already knew: the district was funneling millions of dollars to school board president Steve Smith (who later resigned, but not before throwing Superintendent Bruce Borchers under the bus. Borchers will not return to RSD).

The fingerprinting scandal broke when a mother noticed that someone else was eating off of her child’s account. Upon inquiry, she was told that “someone else’s fingerprint must be similar to your son’s”. Huh? Fingerprint. The district refused to comment on the issue, but later published an *opt-out* document for parents to restrict the child from being fingerprinted…but there is no indication anywhere on their website which informs parents of the standard practice. In other words, if the parent is not aware of the fingerprinting of their child, they would have no way of knowing to click on the opt-out link. This also gives the district the opportunity to implement this measure, though unconstitutional, and without parental consent of a minor, by default.

fingerprint opt out (2)

Now it has been discovered that the Rockwood School District has taken upon itself to actually publish student health records online. These records can be found on the district’s “Infinite Campus” site which is a database for all things and anything the district wants on record. Personal information. Information that goes directly into the Longitudinal Database as part of Common Core Standards. You can find all you need and more on the Longitudinal Database, as well as Common Core at Missouri Education Watchdog.

health record (4)

This database, though on a secure webpage, still jeopardizes student privacy rights. Personal information of a minor can not be shared or published without parental consent. RSD was approached on this issue, to which they (per their M.O.) remained silent and refused any comment regarding these publications. This database, of course, may be subject to sale, where another entity would have full access to this information. Worse, this database may also be seized by the federal government as part of  Common Core integration.  It seems that as long as the parents don’t know what is going on, RSD will continue to institute whatever practices they desire, despite the law.

Posted by Jen

 

A Declaration of Reascendance

A Declaration of Reascendance
In 1776, our Founding Fathers faced a crisis of tyranny in their own government, and lacking our good fortune of having them in their past, they found themselves left with no other option, than to issue the Declaration of Independence, which of course began with:

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.”

Fortunately for us however, because of their actions, and their later efforts almost two decades later, which resulted in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, we no longer need to dissolve the political bands which connect us with one another, we only need to reassert them.

First and foremost, we should reassert that:

  • –We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
  • –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

And amend the next phrase to:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter ***or to abolish*** it, ***and to institute new Government, laying*** reaffirming its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

That is the job of our legislators to perform, and to see to it that it is held to. But even more than that, it is our responsibility as citizens to see to it that our representatives are reminded of their responsibilities and of our awareness of that.

Through the creation of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution, and further acts of Congress, we have an agency of the government, the Internal Revenue Service, which has been acting in rebellion to both the Constitution, the laws of the land and its own charter, abusing its power, intimidating the people of our land, and doing so while operating directly under the supervision and oversight of the Commerce Dept, the Justice Dept and the President of the United States of America.

As such, it has become self-evident that neither of these entities can any longer be trusted with managing or investigating that which they have already so completely lost control of.

As our representatives in Congress, We The People insist and demand that you, our Senators and Representatives, shall see to it that there be:

  1. an immediate halt to normal operations of this IRS
  2. an immediate hiring freeze
  3. an immediate investigation by an independent prosecutor
  4. an immediate halt to any plans that this agency be given oversight of any area of our healthcare system

For when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, (H/T Dana Loesch’s “Defund the IRS” and Jim Hoft “Now is the time to Speak Out“):

IRS, Labor Department Audit Businessman on Obama’s Enemies List

Document: IRS ordered conservative educational group to turn over a list of high school and college students it trained

IRS Faces Class Action Suit For Theft Of Health Care Records

IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo

IRS to Tea Party Group: “Provide Details of Your Planned Event With NEWT GINGRICH”

IRS Asked For Facebook Posts, Thoughts

POLL: Most Want IRS Officials Fired or Jailed

Top Obama Official Illegally Revealed Conservative Group’s Tax Status in 2010

Obama Campaign Attacked Romney With Leaked IRS Documents

Pro-Israel Z Street Group: IRS Told Us We Might Be Funding Terrorism

Democrat Senators Demand IRS Scrutinize Tea Party Groups

Though it is our right, because we have you, our Senators and Representatives, representing us in government, we do not need to do as our Founders did, and throw off our Government, we only need to re-apprise you of your duty to institute reliable Guards upon it for our present and future security.

–And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Find your representative here.
Find your senator here.
Contact:
John Boehner
Eric Cantor
Mitch McConnell

On Twitter: #DefundIRS

Signed,

We The People of the United States of America

(Blogodidact – GGI – The Bell News)

God, Guns, and Liberty Conference Tonight

February 26, 2013

Posted By Jen

Perhaps like many other Americans, you just grew up with guns. Learning how to shoot and to hunt — the thought of doing anything evil with a firearm never entered your mind. With the constant bombardment by the liberal media, you may think they have a point, in order to prevent tragedies such as the Sandy Hook massacre.

Pastor Reg Kelly examines the Holy Scriptures for an answer to this debate at the God, Guns, and Liberty Conference, scheduled for February 26 th at 7PM at Bethel Church 1233 American Legion Dr. Festus, MO. There is no fee for this Conference.  No registration is required.

The entire conference will also be aired live online.

Attention Christians, this is a Culture War!

February 25, 2013

Posted By Jen

WIBC_Garrison_Loesch_Breitbart3-150x150So, angry callers swamped the phone lines of The Dana Show this afternoon wanting to excoriate the popular Christian talk-show host for wanting to engage in culture.

Dana live-tweeted the Oscars last night while watching the glamorization of ego event…and some on the Christian right were infuriated at her for wanting to engage in culture. These people argue that by any engagement in modern-day culture, one is promoting and contributing to the leftist Hollywood agenda.

Seriously? Seriously. I’ve got some news for you. Christianity is under attack here in America, in case you haven’t noticed. This is a cultural war we are in the midst of. Politics is downstream of culture. Until we reign in the culture, there is little that anyone will be able to do regarding violence, abortion issues, domestic issues, marital issues, abuse issues…shall I go on? First, we must recapture and inject pure biblical principles back into our society. What happened to honesty, humility, compassion, responsibility, purity, and respect? Until we obtain these, the rest is moot. The only way to achieve this is to engage in the culture that promotes the antithesis of Godliness.

And just a reminder: Without cultural engagement, we would never have had Elvis, Johnny Cash, Bob Hope, Ronald Reagan, Charles Schultz, CS Lewis, or, of course, the show Growing Pains! Could you imagine?

Christ calls us to engage, specifically, in Matt 28 16-20. I wouldn’t argue with that. Just sayin.

Introducing, The Federal Healthcare Registry

So, this is how it has all played out: We now have the planks in place for a National Healthcare Registry, enwrapped within President Obama’s announced 23 Executive Actions yesterday. A National Health Registry system via *gun control legislation*…who’da thunk it?

Is that so far-fetched? It isn’t. In fact, I will argue, it has been the plan all along. Of course, his Obamacare plan was not to go into effect until his second term. He held his cards…waiting. He waited for the beginning of his second term as POTUS to implement part two of his socialist plan to ensnare Americans into a much larger, much more intrusive, completely freedomless scenario.

Obama knew there was no way he could never, ever, sell a National Healthcare Registry to the people at face value. He knew that there had to be a knee-jerk reaction to a highly emotionally charged scenario first. He knew that this needed to be carefully calculated into his pre-inaugural schedule. What better way to gloss what is going on.

My comments aside (which, by the way do not include any assumption to suggest that Sandy Hook was some sort of conspiracy), take a deep look at the abusive and invasive (non)wording of Obama’s 23 planks…then decide for yourself is this truly is not the implementation needed for a National Healthcare Registry System under the guise of *safety* or *the greater good*.

I kid you not, last month I went to the doctor for an annual wellness visit. This visit, by the Grace of God, was covered by my husband’s corporate insurance. Upon making the appointment, I was told that I was required to register my medical history online into Digichart. I refused. Upon showing up at my appointment, I was told the doctor would not see me unless I registered online via an in-office laptop. Digichart is a device in which to set up an EHR, or Electronic Health Record. Long and short, it is a medical information gathering system in digital format that is integrated across the medical spectrum to include a full and comprehensive record in one place…to be shared universally. An absolute invasion of privacy, regardless of HIPAA laws, and without accountability or consequence.

Unintended consequences

Per empirical research can lead to both intended and unintended consequences:

A 2008 Sentinel Event Alert from the U.S. Joint Commission, the organization that accredit American hospitals to provide healthcare services, states that “As health information technology (HIT) and ‘converging technologies’—the interrelationship between medical devices and HIT—are increasingly adopted by health care organizations, users must be mindful of the safety risks and preventable adverse events that these implementations can create or perpetuate. Technology-related adverse events can be associated with all components of a comprehensive technology system and may involve errors of either commission or omission. These unintended adverse events typically stem from human-machine interfaces or organization/system design.” The Joint Commission cites as an example the United States Pharmacopeia MEDMARX database where of 176,409 medication error records for 2006, approximately 25 percent (43,372) involved some aspect of computer technology as at least one cause of the error.

The National Health Service (NHS) in the UK reports specific examples of potential and actual EHR-caused unintended consequences in their 2009 document on the management of clinical risk relating to the deployment and use of health software.

In a Feb. 2010 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) memorandum, FDA notes EHR unintended consequences include EHR-related medical errors due to (1) errors of commission (EOC), (2) errors of omission or transmission (EOT), (3) errors in data analysis (EDA), and (4) incompatibility between multi-vendor software applications or systems (ISMA) and cites examples. In the memo FDA also notes the “absence of mandatory reporting enforcement of H-IT safety issues limits the numbers of medical device reports (MDRs) and impedes a more comprehensive understanding of the actual problems and implications.”

A 2010 Board Position Paper by the American Medical Informatics Association (AMIA) contains recommendations on EHR-related patient safety, transparency, ethics education for purchasers and users, adoption of best practices, and re-examination of regulation of electronic health applications. Beyond concrete issues such as conflicts of interest and privacy concerns, questions have been raised about the ways in which the physician-patient relationship would be affected by an electronic intermediary.

Privacy and confidentiality

In the United States in 2011 there were 380 major data breaches involving 500 or more patients’ records listed on the website kept by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights. So far, from the first wall postings in September 2009 through the latest on December 8, 2012, there have been 18,059,831 “individuals affected,” and even that massive number is an undercount of the breach problem. The civil rights office has not released the records of tens of thousands of breaches it has received under a federal reporting mandate on breaches affecting fewer than 500 patients per incident.

Governance, privacy and legal issues

Privacy concerns

In the United States, Great Britain, and Germany, the concept of a national centralized server model of healthcare data has been poorly received. Issues of privacy and security in such a model have been of concern.

Privacy concerns in healthcare apply to both paper and electronic records. According to the Los Angeles Times, roughly 150 people (from doctors and nurses to technicians and billing clerks) have access to at least part of a patient’s records during a hospitalization, and 600,000 payers, providers and other entities that handle providers’ billing data have some access also. Recent revelations of “secure” data breaches at centralized data repositories, in banking and other financial institutions, in the retail industry, and from government databases, have caused concern about storing electronic medical records in a central location. Records that are exchanged over the Internet are subject to the same security concerns as any other type of data transaction over the Internet.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) was passed in the US in 1996 to establish rules for access, authentications, storage and auditing, and transmittal of electronic medical records. This standard made restrictions for electronic records more stringent than those for paper records. However, there are concerns as to the adequacy of these standards.

Threats to health care information can be categorized under three headings:
-Human threats, such as employees or hackers

-Natural and environmental threats, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and fires.

-Technology failures, such as a system crashing

Wait! What? What about governmental intrusion? Most States already do background checks…so what in the world would be so far-reaching as to open familial documents to search for hereditary traits? This is so encouraging…let’s continue:

Within the private sector, many companies are moving forward in the development, establishment and implementation of medical record banks and health information exchange. By law, companies are required to follow all HIPAA standards and adopt the same information-handling practices that have been in effect for the federal government for years. This includes two ideas, standardized formatting of data electronically exchanged and federalization of security and privacy practices among the private sector.

Did you catch that? right at the end there. . .FEDERALIZATION. Yep, sure took a long time to get there. Of course, the whole point is to bury that part by exhaustively dry mumbo-jumbo.

Private companies have promised to have “stringent privacy policies and procedures.” If protection and security are not part of the systems developed, people will not trust the technology nor will they participate in it. So, the private sector know the importance of privacy and the security of the systems and continue to advance well ahead of the federal government with electronic health records.

Pinky-swear? Really? Our privacy is contingent upon the spit-handshake between a private corporation and the federal government…who could, incidentally that could be bought out at any time…including by the government.

Now, if you are still unsure yourself on this, with the above information in mind, read through Obama’s 23 Executive “Actions”, and decide for yourself:

 

The following is a list, provided by the White House, of executive actions President Obama plans to take to address gun violence.

1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.

4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.

11. Nominate an ATF director.

12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.

13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.

14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.

22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.

It’s okay. It’s a lot to chew on…take your time…

For the record, I refused to submit my private information in digital form. I informed the secretary that I was concerned that there was no guarantee that the company collecting the information would not be sold out, therefore, selling my personal, private health information. SHe looked at me as though I had three heads, then responded with “The Doctor will see you now”.

When acting ‘on principle’ is unprincipled behavior – part 1 of 2

When acting ‘on principle’ is unprincipled behavior (Cross posted from Blogodidact)

When I hear people proudly proclaiming t

hat they are going to make a ‘principled choice’, that they are going to ‘vote my conscience’ or ‘stand my ground!’ by either not voting or voting for a 3rd party this election, I take notice.

I even Rant.

Especially when I hear mirror images claiming the same ground, I want to get clear on what it is that we’re talking about. And not just out of curiosity or for argument’s sake but because if they are being principled or behaving conscientiously in doing what I am not doing – then what am I doing?

If I don’t agree, and have no basis but inclination for my position… then that’s some scary thin ice to be standing on. That’s disturbing. And it should be disturbing. Matters of principle and conscience should be taken seriously, and when people you respect come to opposite conclusions from yours, it’s well worth reconsidering the issues and your reasons for them. Why? Because ‘The Good Life‘ depends upon how you live your life, and if how you are living your life has little to do with being (properly) principled and conscientious… what kind of life can you be living? Isn’t that Reason enough?Are there more important issues to your life as a whole, than living it thoroughly and well?

And if on reconsidering them, you find you still disagree? A decent respect for the opinions of others requires that you declare the reasons for your disagreement.

In this case, I only wish that I could chalk up the disagreement to disagreement alone, but for all the claims being made on the basis of principle and conscience, as I’m looking at their positions – and I have listened and reexamined them – I am not seeing actual principles being upheld – I see only the appearance of them… not the substance; a preference, not a principle.

Of course I grant the grounds for personal choice and disagreement as to what is best, but these particular claims, are claimed to be being made on the basis of principle and conscience, and that exceeds the reach of personal preference, or the deference of friendship.

And for one friend (who, BTW, has donated countless hours of his own time, effort & money defending our Rights in court) who thought my rant couldn’t possibly apply to him:

“… are you suggesting that, me being a principled libertarian who has never voted for candidates based on their political party, I would not be acting on principle by continuing to vote only for those I believe to be the best candidates?”

, I’ve got to answer that if by ‘best candidate’ you mean, here and now, after the primaries, in the general election, if you are voting for who you think the best individual candidate is, who most reflects your views and convictions, as the primary purpose for giving them your vote; without regard to the purpose of the office and without regard to the dynamics of the race, without regard to the immediate and long term consequences of one the most likely winners winning, etc, then I regretfully must say – yes, then it applies to you as well, and perhaps it even applies to you most of all.

Despite what ‘common sense’ might tell you, voting for who the best individual candidate is, is not the purpose of an election. To vote for A candidate, without taking into consideration the dynamics of the race itself, the realistic chances of your ‘ best candidate’ to either win or affect the overall race, and the consequences of the election going to one or the other of the most likely winners, and what effects the likely winner might have in that office, then you have divorced your principles from the purpose they are principally supposed to serve – how the nation will be served by the person who is elected – rendering your actions, unprincipled.

First, keep in mind that Principles are an aid for thinking, not a substitute for it, and it is an ever present temptation to cast what is the more pleasing choice, for the short term, as an appealing escape from the more difficult consideration of the long term deeper and more important issues, especially when it is so easy to name such actions as ‘being Principled’. But you can’t delegate your conscience to a single issue, and while I hope all will reconsider their positions, I strongly suggest you begin by looking beyond your positions to what principles are, and what they are for.

What are you talking about?
Continue reading

The Curious Case of the Unquestionable Senator Claire McCaskill – Media? Can’t you find your words?

(Cross posted from Blogodidact) I’m just a little curious about why those who are paid to be curious, are showing so little signs of being, even the least bit, curious. Those of you who saw the MO Senate Debate last week… saw Claire McCaskill wearing her usual calm, cool & collected, poised and color coordinated self, the very picture of the moderate professional.

And then… Dana Loesch asked about a whistle blower from her husband’s company, and POOF! Moderate Claire vanished in a puff of ire, and nasty, spitting mad Claire appeared in her place.

What I’m curious about, is what about that story, of her husband cutting deals in the Senate dining room, what about that made little miss moderate Claire McCaskill become so unhinged?

Why did her campaign squelch the story when the New York Times considered running it? Why did her campaign try and silence the Daily Caller from running it?

But even more curious, is why are there no journalists in Missouri even looking into this story?

Well, almost none, the Southeast Missourian did run one story:

“Conservatives calling out McCaskill for suit against husband”

Which is just fine, they don’t have to support the story… but… as journalists, isn’t it their job to investigate and report the story, so that their readers and listeners are aware and informed?

Why have no other NEWS Media outlets but this one, looked into the story?

Isn’t curiosity… their job? Continue reading

Two-Faced Claire! McCaskill sells out Missourian Union members for Texas friend$

(Cross posted from Blogodidact)
Hey Claire, riddle me this: On the one hand you claim that cheap cialis online

-senate-control-not-important/” target=”_blank”>controlling the Senate isn’t all that important

Text Your Ex Back. Studying With Ex Boyfriend I Want My Ex Boyfriend Back I Want My Girlfriend Backhow to get your ex boyfriend back

(and yet you are currently in, and running again for … the senate…right?), and on the other hand, your Democrat party’s control of the senate has given your husband’s business $40 million or so in Obama stimulus dollars.

Huh?

How does that work out? It’s almost like your Right side doesn’t know what your Leftist side is doing?

Let’s look again… on the Right: “Control of Senate: ‘No biggee’

And on the Leftist: Claire’s husband snaps up $40 million in big Obama stimulus bucks.

That just doesn’t balance out, does it?

Oh, but wait, then… it also looks like the Leftward hand doesn’t know what the behind the back knife-holding hand is doing either… why else would mostly Democrat leaning Flight Attendant union members protest Claire McCaskill’s campaign office with chants of:

“Represent Missouri not Texas!” and “Texas has 3 Senators, Missouri only 1!”?

 

It seems as if the extremely Two Faced Claire betrayed her Missouri constituents for her old college friends and donor$ from… Texas.

Stacy E. Washington filed a post from today, from the site outside Claire’s St. Louis office, where a hundred or so Flight Attendants were demonstrating just how very displeased they are with being flown around on AirClaire:

“According to the two [American Airlines] flight attendants I spoke with this morning, Claire has sold them down the river for campaign donations and as a direct favor to her old college roommate, Ann Loew, who is, you guessed it: the APFA Executive appointee!”

Are you Joking? That’s extremely Two-Faced, even for you Claire!

 

 

Why so serious?

Missouri: You are the Show-Me state… how much more do you need to see?
Vote McCaskill out of office before she helps you some more!