Alina Sarag was seen by more than five doctors at four different hospitals but medics failed to detect the curable disease.

Her distraught parents even called her GP more than 50 times about their daughter’s ailing condition over a four-and-a-half month period before her death on January 6 last year.

An inquest heard that her GP, Dr Sharad Shripadrao Pandit, accused her parents of “mollycoddling” her.
Shockingly, he even claimed her symptoms were brought on because she was ‘lovesick’.

{snip}

Mr Sarag also claimed Dr Pandit refused to test his daughter for TB.

He told the inquest: “He said, ‘We don’t need these tests, we are not going to get them done either.’

{snip}

Mr Sarag – who is also being treated for TB – told the inquest his daughter vomited up to 10 times a day and had to be carried to bed “like an old woman with weak legs”.

He added that he made more than 50 phone calls to the GP’s surgery in Birmingham but Dr Pandit failed to return his calls.

Mr Sarag said: “There was mass neglect. The medical profession, as soon as they mess up they hide.”

Alina first contracted TB in 2009 after a girl at her school was diagnosed with the illness.

She was prescribed a course of antibiotics at Birmingham Chest Clinic but medical staff never followed up her treatment.

Alina was struck down again in July 2010 after returning from a trip to Pakistan with her family.

The inquest heard a simple phlegm test would have shown Alina was suffering from TB but this was never carried out.

Instead, doctors shrugged off her family’s concerns and told them Alina was suffering from a chest infection despite being classed as a “high risk” patient.

Alina’s weight plummeted and at one point she was so ill she could only tolerate baby food.

After doctors at Heartland and City hospitals did not detect TB, Alina was admitted to Sandwell Hospital where she stayed for five days.

TB was picked up but no phlegm test was carried out and a chest X-ray was thought to have found a chest infection.

She later saw a clinical psychologist at Birmingham Children’s Hospital but was in too much pain to complete the assessment.

On January 6, 2011 Alina was rushed to hospital after suffering breathing difficulties and she died of a cardiac arrest.

Following her death, Alina, who attended Golden Hillock School in Sparkhill, Birmingham, a clinical review revealed doctors missed repeated opportunities to diagnose her condition.

First off, let me just say that I don’t care if a woman breastfeeds or bottle feeds her baby. Breastfeeding has plenty of benefits. But not every woman can do it. And what I really can’t comprehend is why the act of breastfeeding seems to turn some women into raging exhibitionists. I mean, it’s not like their babies are going to drop dead if they go in a private room, or use some kind of cover. It’s as if they’re seeing “Look at me! I’m holier than thou!” As I see it, this kind of attitude is typical among many of today’s women who seem to want special attention for doing something women have been doing for thousands of years. So what I have to say about all this is, if you want to breastfeed, go ahead. But just cover up, and stop getting in peoples faces! I don’t want to see your breasts.

And speaking of breasts, these militant internet nursers go on and on about how the breast is only for feeding babies, and that there’s nothing sexual about them, etc.

Wrong!

If there’s nothing sexual about the female breast, then why are they all over men’s porno magazines (among other private parts)? Is it just a “social construct” invented by patriarchal male societies to make men be attracted to the female breast? (Pardon the left wing jargon.)

NO!!!!

Contrary to what feminists would have everyone believe, straight men are made that way. Men and women are *not* the same.

Anyway, Rush Limbaugh has his own improved version of the Time magazine cover which I don’t think goes far enough:

Actually, I think a more appropriate picture of Barack and Michelle Obama each sucking on one of Lady Liberty’s breasts.

Via Snopes

In July 1996, the 14-year-old daughter of Robert Gay, a partner at Bain Capital, disappeared in New York City. She had attended a “rave” party and gotten high on ecstasy. Three days later, her distraught father had not been able to find her.

When he learned of this, as CEO of Bain Capital, Romney took immediate action. He closed down the entire firm and asked all 30 partners and employees to fly to New York on a chartered airplane to help find Gay’s daughter.

Romney set up a command center at the LaGuardia Marriott and hired a private detective firm to assist with the search. He established a toll-free number for tips, coordinating the effort with the NYPD, and went through his Rolodex and called everyone Bain did business with in New York, and asked them to help find his friend’s missing daughter.

Romney’s accountants at Price Waterhouse Cooper put up posters on Street poles, while cashiers at a pharmacy owned by Bain put fliers in the bag of every shopper. Romney and the other Bain employees scoured every part of New York and talked with everyone they could: prostitutes, drug addicts, anyone.

That day, their hunt made the evening news, which featured photos of the girl and the Bain employees searching for her.

As a result, a teenaged boy phoned in, asked if there was a reward, and then hung up abruptly.

The NYPD traced the call to a home in New Jersey, where they found the girl in the basement, shivering and experiencing withdrawal symptoms from a massive ecstasy dose. Doctors later said the girl might not have survived another day.

Romney’s former partner credits Mitt Romney with saving his daughter’s life, saying it was the most amazing thing, and he’d never forget for the rest of his life.

Now I’ve never heard Romney mention this incident, which leads me to believe that he didn’t do what he did for attention, but only to help his colleague.

The Marine Corps, the most male of the armed services, is taking its first steps toward integrating women into war-fighting units, starting with its infantry officer school at Quantico, Va., and ground combat battalions that had once been closed to women.

The moves — announced by Gen. James F. Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, in a message sent to all Marines on Monday night — are intended largely to study how women perform in formerly male-only units, and reflect new Pentagon rules released in February allowing women to serve closer to the front line.

The new Pentagon policy continues the ban on women serving as infantrymen, Special Operations commandos and in other direct-combat positions. But it has opened the door to thousands of new jobs for women, who represent about 15 percent of the force.

This smacks of military affirmative action to me. So what about the differences in upper body strength between men and women? This one former Marine infantry officer doesn’t see it as a big deal:

Greg Jacob, a former Marine infantry officer who is policy director for Service Women’s Action Network, an advocacy group, said he was concerned that the corps might try to use data from the physical tests to prove that women are not strong enough to be infantrymen.

But he also praised some of the new measures, saying that putting women into more front-line jobs would help advance their careers. “It puts women in a position where they are more likely to be in an expeditionary or combat role, which in the future will be looked at when it comes time for assignments and promotions,” he said.

In other words, it’s all about equality of outcomes. With this rationale, the fact that Marines have always been male, is just plain sexist, never mind the strength required in a combat zone. So even it means dropping standards, that’s just too bad (snort!) After all, these women have their careers to think of.

But don’t just take it from me. Here’s what one man on a military forum had to say:

I spent 5 years in support units. Here are some observations I think are relevant to this matter:
1. I saw exactly two females complete forced marches carrying all their gear. I recall a handful completing marches if someone else carried their ruck, weapon, K-pot, LBE, etc. AND had a crew of Soldiers verbally encouraging them. The vast majority of females I saw on forced marches fell out and went on sick call around the 2-4 mile mark.
2. I can’t recall ever seeing a female successfully operate a crew served weapon off of a weapon range. In short order they collapse and go on sick call if they had to do anything more involved than pull a trigger.
3. During my stint, I observed a number of enlisted females holding MOSs which involved manipulation of heavy gear (vehicle mechanics, fuel handlers, etc). With rare exceptions they were ineffective as they couldn’t deal with heavy objects. After a couple rounds of sick call they would get shunted into light and/or administrative work.
4. I don’t recall seeing a female willing or able to drive a vehicle larger than a HMMWV.

5. Very VERY few females I observed could deal with lack of bathing facilities for an extended period without suffering from a massive drop in morale.
6. No female I met was able to march with gear, operate a crew served weapon in a field environment, drive large vehicles, go without a shower for a couple days AND perform adequately in a MOS requiring some level of strength.

7. In due time most female Soldiers I worked with would maneuver themselves into traditional WAC jobs such as clerk/typists, admin assistants, etc. Ironic, huh?

I think we all can agree this is it. If the Marines will let females into grunt officer training, they will have to graduate them in adequate numbers whether qualified or not. From this the rest of USMC combat arms and Army combat arms will open too. I suspect we will see just what I saw in Army support units. You’ll have a handful of female grunts unable to perform. They will manipulate their way into “cush” jobs in company orderly rooms, battalion and higher staffs, etc. Despite this the handful who stay will advance despite not developing professionally. And everyone is just going to have to suck it up.

(Reuters) – The Justice Department sued the city of Jacksonville, Florida, on Monday, claiming its use of written tests to determine promotions in the city’s fire department discriminates against African-Americans.

The lawsuit followed a more than two-year investigation examining Jacksonville’s record of promoting African-Americans for the ranks of lieutenant, captain, district chief and engineer dating back to 2004.

It came after a separate lawsuit filed last year by two dozen Jacksonville firefighters challenging the city’s promotional process. In the lawsuit, the firefighters alleged union officials unfairly shared exam questions with white workers but not with black workers ahead of the test.

{snip}

The complaint said use of the tests “has resulted in a disparate impact upon black candidates” because African-Americans pass the examinations at significantly lower rates than white candidates.

The Justice Department said black employees who do pass the tests rarely are promoted since their scores are generally lower than white workers.

“At best, these tests measure only a slice of what is necessary to be a supervisor, but they stand in the way of qualified African-Americans advancing in the fire department,” the statement said.

On a related note, The Village Voice recently obtained two FDNY entrance exams. As you can see for yourselves, the questions are pretty basic. So if an applicant can’t even get these right, what business does he have being a firefighter? Is this person’s self esteem more important than the lives of property of people he would be protecting? I don’t think so.

Now I just want to say a few things about these feminists who attack stay at home mothers.

First off, I thought feminists were supposed to be “pro-choice.” Silly me! I see that only applies to whether or not women should abort their babies (and you know how much feminists LOOOVE discretionary abortions). Otherwise, they believe all women should dump the few kids they have into government funded day care while they work 80 hour weeks in pursuit of the corner office. And when these kids get older, these feminists want them in public schools, no matter how dumbed down and unsafe those places are. In fact, the only women feminists believe should not be working are the welfare broodmares such as this woman, and more recently, this woman.

And speaking of welfare, check out what one commenter on the New York Times website had to say in a follow up article about stay at home mothers:

I wish a single stay-at-home welfare mom would write in and say how important it is that she stay home and raise her children and how she cooks and cleans and looks after their well-being. Would everyone agree that this is a noble pursuit and would we hear how much better it is that they do so? The fact is that there are many, many single moms, whether by choice or through death, divorce, or otherwise, for who this conversation is ridiculous.

Anyway, after Ms. Rosen was thrown under the bus by Obama and his minions, she’s finally apologized. She said the following to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer:

UPDATE: Hilary Rosen appeared on CNN Thursday and explained her comments further. “If I had a do over what I would be saying is that Mitt Romney should not be on the campaign trail saying to women that my wife tells me how it is for women out there because people of wealth sometimes take for granted some of the niceties that they have in life, and the Romneys are people of wealth.”

Wolf Blitzer asked her what she would say to Ann Romney. Turning to the camera, Rosen said, “Mrs. Romney, I applaud your decision to stay home and raise what are obviously five wonderful boys. This is not about stay-at-home moms versus working moms.”

Continued Rosen, “I think your husband needs to stand up for women’s economic struggles and so far we have not seen how he’s going to do that on the campaign trail. It hasn’t come out of his mouth and maybe it will at some point, but this is a distraction that his campaign is forcing on the American people to avoid his record on the issues.”

“I didn’t hear an apology,” said Blitzer.

Rosen responded that she had sent out an apology earlier. “Well, I assume that Mrs. Romney saw my apology this afternoon, but if not, I apologize. Working moms, stay-at-home moms, they’re both extremely hard jobs. I know, I’ve shared them both, and I’m sorry if that offended you.”

Speaking for myself, if I ever had children, I would ideally want to stay home with them. I wouldn’t want them in some government run daycare center. However, given how the American middle class is taxed relentlessly, and given how our manufacturing jobs have nearly all gone overseas, and how illegals are now taking jobs once done by Americans, staying at home is not always possible for many women. THAT is what I think Romney should be focusing on when it comes to women.

Some salons call it “Boyzilians.” Others call it a He-Wax.

The below-the-belt treatment — which, just like the women’s version, removes either some or all pubic hair — is becoming increasingly popular, and not just among competitive swimmers or underwear models. “What we’re finding is, it’s everybody,” said Mike Indursky, the president of the Bliss chain of spas, which offers a men’s Brazilian called the Ultimate He-Wax for $125. “It’s the gay community, it’s the straight community, it’s very conservative guys, it’s very liberal guys. All different age groups are coming in. It’s much, much bigger than we ever thought.”

Since Bliss introduced men’s waxing services in February 2011, Mr. Indursky added, their popularity is on track to double by the end of this year with Brazilians as the most frequently booked service.

Men’s bikini waxing accounts for around 70 percent of the weekly business at Face to Face, a discreet salon in the Flatiron district of Manhattan with a predominantly male clientele founded eight years ago by Enrique Ramirez. “When I started, I was like, ‘Nobody’s going to come in and get this done,’ and it’s just kept growing and growing,” Mr. Ramirez said. “In the past two years, it’s been crazy.”

The salon offers a full Brazilian called South of the Border for $70, along with partial treatments. Also on its menu is something called “pejazzling,” in which crystals in patterns like stars and dolphins are affixed on newly defuzzed skin.

Seems like some men have too much time on their hands.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday, obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, a family member of George Zimmerman asked the nation’s top law enforcement officer why he has chosen to not arrest members of the New Black Panther Party for their rhetoric — some of which may fit the federal government’s definition of a hate crime — throughout the Trayvon Martin case.

The family member believes the reason Holder hasn’t made those arrests is because he, like the members of the New Black Panther Party, is black.

“I am writing you to ask you why, when the law of the land is crystal clear, is your office not arresting the New Black Panthers for hate crimes?” the family member wrote to Holder.

“The Zimmerman family is in hiding because of the threats that have been made against us, yet the DOJ has maintained an eerie silence on this matter. These threats are very public. If you haven’t been paying attention just do a Google search and you will find plenty. Since when can a group of people in the United States put a bounty on someone’s head, circulate Wanted posters publicly, and still be walking the streets?”

This time, Obama threatened them over Obamacare.

(Reuters) – President Barack Obama took an opening shot at conservative justices on the Supreme Court on Monday, warning that a rejection of his sweeping healthcare law would be an act of “judicial activism” that Republicans say they abhor.

{snip}

“Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said at a news conference with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.

{snip}

“And I’d just remind conservative commentators that, for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law,” Obama said. First off, this law was not duly constituted and passed. It was shoved down everyone’s throats, and politicians were bribed to vote yes.

“Well, this is a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step,” he said.

Liberals love to gush about how smart Obama is, and how he was a law professor.

Baloney!

Our POTUS is conveniently ignoring the fact that we have the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government, for the purpose of balancing each other out, so that one branch doesn’t get too much power. Let him check Articles I, II and III of the constitution.

Also, why isn’t it judicial activism when liberal judges routinely strike down democratically passed laws states pass against illegal immigration or gay marriage?

Anyway, in response to Mr. Obama’s threat, a federal appeals court called his bluff. Now Obama’s press secretary has kind of backed down.