The Freedom Bulletin

Take a moment to remember the victims of 9/11. I hope America stays a strong and free nation and that our leaders realize that our liberty is what makes America great. Sacrificing liberty in the name of security would truly be letting the terrorists win.

The Boston Herald’s crime journalism has always been sensationalized, but they might have just hit a new low.

I just came across this story mentioning Neil Entwistle, who was convicted last year of killing his wife Rachel and baby Lillian and whose trial I attended. The Herald’s Joe Dwinell interviewed Rachel’s parents about a “Run for the Roses” event that they have planned to help a center for abused children.

But of course, since this is the Herald, the article has to mention sex at every possible opportunity. The first sentence of the article reads:

Rachel Entwistle’s father still hears her voice “clear as a bell” every day as the horrific slaying of his daughter and her baby at the hands of her sex-depraved husband Neil haunts him without mercy.

And the second paragraph of this other article reads as follows:

The 60-mile Run for the Roses trek is being held in memory of Rachel, 27, and her baby girl, Lillian Rose, 9 months, who were murdered by sex-obsessed dad and husband Neil Entwistle.

Okay, I know that Neil is a convicted murderer and standing up for convicted murderers is not going to make me very popular, but come on! The Herald does not have a right to spread whatever lies it wants about someone just because they have been convicted of a crime.

There is no evidence that Neil was “sex-depraved” (whatever the heck that means) or any more interested in sex than the average person. Yes, he might have visited an adult dating site a couple of times, but that probably isn’t uncommon. Was he a pedophile? No. Did he rape anyone? No. In fact, there is absolutely no evidence suggesting that he had sex with anyone other than his wife. The Herald’s “journalism” makes the facts sound much different than they are.

As you can probably tell, it annoys me when the media tries to make every story about sex, and when they disregard the constitutional rights of the accused. In the Entwistle case, the Herald has done both of these things numerous times. Neil Entwistle was not really obsessed with sex, but the Herald, on the other hand, seems highly obsessed with sex.

It’s really unfortunate that Bostonians are stuck with this trashy rag and the liberal-leaning Globe as our only two papers. If he didn’t have other legal problems to worry about, Neil should sue the Herald for libel.

P.S. In his blog, Dwinell writes that Neil’s parents ”came over for last summer’s trial to rub more salt into the wounds.” Right. I’m sure that’s exactly what they were thinking: “Let’s come over because it will make Rachel’s parents feel bad.” I know it’s hard to believe, but maybe they came to the trial to support their son.

Joe Kennedy, the nephew of Ted Kennedy, just announced that he will not be running for his uncle’s old Senate seat. Some of the Democrats who are or may be running include:

• Attorney General Martha Coakley (officially running)
• Rep. Stephen Lynch (took out nomination papers)
• Rep. Michael Capuano
• Rep. John Tierney
• Rep. Ed Markey
• Former Rep. Martin Meehan
• Vicki Kennedy ???

The race that I really care about, of course, is the Republican one. State Senator Scott Brown is considering the possibility of running, but has not officially announced yet. I am a big fan of him, and he seems to be really popular with his constituents despite being a conservative in the predominantly liberal land of Massachusetts. He has been elected to the State Senate 4 times and before that served 3 terms in the State House of Representatives.

And then there is Curt Schilling. He has said that his chances of running are slim, but I think it would be absolutely awesome if he did. Although he is not officially a Republican, he basically is one in terms of political views, and because of his bloody sock heroics, he actually has a good chance of winning.

In addition to Scott and Curt, U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan might run, too. Former Lt. Governor Kerry Healey won’t, however. I can’t say yet who my favorite candidate is,since I don’t even know who’s running yet, but I am hoping for a Republican primary. It would be interesting to watch Curt on the campaign trail and see how he does in speeches and debates.

Update: Christy Mihos might be running for the Senate now instead of governor. Capuano has pulled nomination papers, and Meehan is out.

The Massachusetts state legislature is considering a bill that would give the government the power to quarantine people in the unlikely scenario that the governor declares a public health emergency. Some of the powers the bill would give to local public health authorities include the following:

• “to decontaminate or cause to be deconatminated, or to destroy any material”
• “to restrict or prohibit assemblages of persons”
• “an officer authorized to serve criminal process may arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has violated an order for isolation or quarantine”
• “to decontaminate or cause to be deconatminated any individual”
• “to perform physical examinations, tests, and specimen collection necessary to diagnose a disease or condition and ascertain whether an individual presents a risk to public health. If an individual is unable or unwilling to submit to decontamination or procedures necessary for diagnosis, the decontamination or diagnosis procedures may proceed only pursuant to the order of the superior court. During the time necessary to obtain such court order, such individual may be isolated or quarantined…”
• “An individual who is unable or unwilling to submit to vaccination or treatment shall not be required to submit to such procedures but may be isolated or quarantined…”
• “When the commissioner or a local public health authority within its jurisdiction reasonably believes that a person may have been exposed to a disease or condition that poses a threat to the public health…the commissioner or the local public health authority may detain the person for as long as may be reasonably necessary for the commissioner or the local public health authority, to convey information to the person regarding the disease or condition and to obtain contact information, including but not limited to the person’s residence and employment addresses, date of birth, and telephone numbers.”

I think this bill is yet another example of the government putting the greater good above individual rights. The amount of things people are allowed to do is gradually shrinking, and our liberties are slowly disappearing. The government should not, under any circumstances, be able to force people to undergo any medical procedures or examinations. The part about arresting people without a warrant doesn’t sound so great, either.