Mitt Romney and Ted Kennedy's mandatory insurance scheme imposed upon the citizens of Massachusetts is not a conservative idea.

It’s yet another unfunded mandate that places everyone at the mercy of insurance companies who will exploit the captive market. And don't think they will  lower their premiums under any circumstances. They have already proven that, when they did not lower their premiums after tort reform ostensibly lowered their exposure to liability.

It is indeed ironic that the states hate it when the feds impose unfunded mandates on state government; yet they don’t mind a bit  imposing them on their own citizens.

Anyone who thinks Romney the flip flopper has changed his spots is naive.

This mandatory health insurance policy that he and Ted Kennedy, his  fellow Massachusetts liberal, conspired together to force upon the people of Massachusetts and now wish to enforce upon the whole nation is antithetical to "free" markets.

A mandatory/compulsory market is antithetical to freedom and is not "free "at all.

Reading Star Parker's recent multi-focused piece on Michael Vick, dog fighting, and of all things unrelated, (abortion???), it occurred to me that she perhaps unintentionally raised another very important question:

Are our priorities warped or skewed if we spend more of our time and efforts speaking out and working on less important public issues than abortion?

Star Parker seems to think so.

Instead of simply denouncing Michael Vick's cruel and illegal dogfighting activites, she devotes the overwhelming majority of her latest column to castigating the controversial and very unpopular animal rights organization (PETA) for being hypocritical on the abortion issue-presumably because they, )like the cancer society) are apparently more worried about t
their own issues than they are about abortions.

Never mind that the abortion issue is totally beyond the stated mission and purpose for which PETA  (and many other) organizations was even created. Ms Parker apparently also fails to realize that like any organization not concerened with the abortion issue, PETA probably has pro-life as well as pro-choice people on their membership rolls.

The problem then with Star Parker and many others who conflate the unrelated issues of animal rights and abortion, is that this cadre of true believers, possessed of the zeal of abolitionist John Brown, apparently believe that any person or organization who voices concerns over any other issue deemed to be of less importance than abortion, has a warped sense of  priorities, and hence is morally befuddled. 

Taking Ms Parker's "skewed priorities" grievance a step further, it would also follow that anyone who even volunteers their spare time at the public library, or coaching  little league baseball also has warped priorities because they are obviously more  concerned with books or baseball than saving babies. Otherwise,  they be expending their and energy working instead to oppose abortion.  

I hope I am wrong, but it also appears from reading her column that Ms Parker actually considers dog fighting and animal cruelty to be a fairly trivial issue and therefore she considers Mr. Vick's punishment to be disproportionate. But, instead of directly addressing that issue she instead launches an anti-PETA diatribe ostensibly to minimize Mr. Vick's illegal dog-fighting activity.  

It's even more  sad to however, to see that Parker is more offended by PETA'S ill considered PR statements than she is with the hip hop dogfighting "culture" that is destroying a generation of young African American men, and preventing them from assimilating into mainstream society and prospering as good citizens.  Whose priorities are really out of whack here?

As for the PETA  red-herring, its also worth noting that criticism of Mr. Vick's dog-fighting activities have come from people in all walks of life and varying political and religious backgrounds who have no connection or sympathy with PETA which represents less that one one hundred  thousandth of the US population. 

Regardless of how much one disagrees with PETA,  PETA's unrealistic goals, demands and foolish position statements are not a viable defense to Mr. Vick's crimes-which go far beyond mere foolish words and philosophy to overt acts of wanton cruelty and law breaking. 

 In any event, no person or organization should be saddled with a moral obligation to put aside their own priorities to address the admittedly more important concerns of the pro-life movement-or risk being be labeled as "hypocrites".  |

Ms Parker seems to forget that God created each of us with unique gifts, and personalities which will inevitably guide us into different trades, occupations, ministries and concerns.
 
.