Under President Bush North Korea threatened to launch missiles and build nuclear weapons, but they were never this cocky.  Under President Bush we had North Korea agree to:

North Korea had stopped reprocessing fuel rods as part of an international deal. In 2007, it agreed to disable the Yongbyon reactor in exchange for aid and demolished a cooling tower at the complex.

Under President Obama – a huge critic of the Iraq war:

 North Korea launched a tirade Wednesday against world powers threatening to punish it for conducting its second nuclear test, saying it is not afraid of sanctions and calling South Korea's decision to join an operation to prevent the spread of weapons a declaration of war.

The North also has reportedly restarted its weapons-grade nuclear plant. It staged a rally in its capital, Pyongyang, on Tuesday to celebrate the test.

The isolated communist regime said through its official news agency that it would respond with military action if South Korea tries to stop or search any of its ships as part of the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative.

"Those who provoke (North Korea) once will not be able to escape its unimaginable and merciless punishment," the North's official news agency said.

The North has about 8,000 spent fuel rods which, if reprocessed, could allow it to harvest 13 to 18 pounds (six to eight kilograms) of plutonium — enough to make at least one nuclear bomb, experts said. North Korea is believed to have enough plutonium for at least a half dozen atomic bombs.

Further ratcheting up tensions, North Korea has test-fired five short-range missiles over the past two days, South Korean officials confirmed.

North Korea suggested that more missile tests could be planned, telling ships to stay away from waters off its west coast through Wednesday, according to South Korea's coast guard.

Oi Vey!  So, what is the international response?  The same group of people that said Saddam Hussein shouldn’t have been forcefully removed:

In New York, the U.N. Security Council is discussing a resolution that could include new sanctions.

Oops, they must have missed this statement:

North Korea launched a tirade Wednesday against world powers threatening to punish it for conducting its second nuclear test, saying it is not afraid of sanctions…..     

So, what does North Korea think about the U.S. now:

A North Korean newspaper, Minju Joson, said in a commentary Wednesday that Pyongyang does not fear repercussions.

"It is a laughable delusion for the United States to think that it can get us to kneel with sanctions," it said. "We've been living under U.S. sanctions for decades, but have firmly safeguarded our ideology and system while moving our achievements forward. The U.S. sanctions policy toward North Korea is like striking a rock with a rotten egg." You see, you show weakness, and our enemy’s push and push and push.  Remember what happened with Libya after we got into Bagdad so quickly.  They agreed to stop all WMD programs and agreed to pay $3 billion in compensation to the families of Pan Am flight 103 and UTA Flight 772.

Show strength, we are a safe world.  Show weakness and this happens.  President Obama is in a long list of world leaders that have been elected recently and have shown weakness so North Korea, among other countries, is no longer afraid of us.  Our leaders have the people believing that we can resolve problems with crazy dictators without force. 

These dictators don’t care about what happens to their people.  Look at what Hussein did – how many mass graves and video tapes of extreme torture were found.  Kim Jong Il has already shown disrespect for his people who are on average 2 inches shorter than the average South Korean.  This is called severe growth retardation and it happens when a group of people are malnourished for extended periods of time.  In 1948 – before Korea split in two, North and South Koreans were the same size. 

While we are all worried about not being too mean to people that are trying to kill all of us, other countries are taking advantage of our weakness and are encouraging war.

W. Bradford Wilcox wrote an excellent article in the Wall Street Journal that was published on May 22 in the opinion’s section:

According to a recent report from the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. — after witnessing a 14-year decline in teenage childbearing from 1991 to 2005 — saw the number rise from 2005 to 2007. In 2007, the latest year for which data are available, about 450,000 adolescents gave birth.

Now, lets also take into account that teenaged abortions (aged 19 and younger) are almost 20% of all abortions in the US according to the CDC.  Back to the article:

"Let’s hope this sobering news on teen births serves as a wake-up call to policymakers, parents and practitioners," said Sarah Brown, CEO of The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, "that all our efforts to convince young people to delay pregnancy and parenthood need to be more intense, more creative and based more on what we know works."

Earth to Ms. Brown – The teenaged pregnancy numbers were much, much lower when sex wasn’t sold to them in high schools and condoms weren’t dished out like candy.  We must also address the fact that more high school are legally helping the teenagers get contraception without their parents knowledge now a days.  Do you think that could be it?  Hello?  Anyone in there?

Last week, the CDC reported that about 40% of American children were born out of wedlock in 2007 (1.7 million children born out of wedlock)…… Moreover, the vast majority of these babies — 60%, to be precise — were born not to teenagers but to women in their 20s (only 23% of nonmarital births were to teens). Furthermore, the CDC reports that nonmarital childbearing has been rising much faster among adults than among teenagers.

You mean, the more “education” we are getting on “family planning” at a younger age, the worse the rate of out of wedlock children are born?  Does it really take an Einstein to put two and two together on this one?

Stephanie Coontz, the director of research at the Council on Contemporary Families….."policymakers and researchers need to discard one-size-fits-all generalizations about the causes, consequences, risks and benefits of different family forms.”

Silvia Henriquez, the executive director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health….”(resist temptation to) "present single motherhood as a problem in itself."

(T)he arguments put forward by Ms. Coontz, Ms. Henriquez and other academics and advocates do not have science on their side. For instance, Sara McLanahan at Princeton University and her colleagues have found that boys who are raised by single mothers are twice as likely to end up in prison by age 32, that girls who are born outside of marriage are three times as likely to have a teenage pregnancy, and that teens born outside of marriage are about twice as likely to drop out of high school, compared with their peers who are raised in intact, married families.

Exactly how do these statistics fit into the idea that single parenting is perfectly fine and morally acceptable?  One way to know if something is bad for us as a society is to look at its failures and successes.  I see far more failures here.  Unfortunately it is our children that are paying the highest price to our selfishness. 

It is true that most of the recent growth in nonmarital childbearing has been driven by births to cohabiting couples. But cohabiting couples are notoriously unstable, in large part because their relationships are not anchored by the legal, social and moral commitments associated with marriage. One study by Pamela Smock at the University of Michigan and Wendy Manning at Bowling Green State University found that 50% of children born to cohabiting parents saw their parents part by age 5, compared with only 15% of children born to married parents.

And as both parents and scholars know, such instability is hard on young children. Not surprisingly, a growing body of research on cohabitation and child well-being indicates that kids who spend time in cohabiting unions are significantly more likely to experience emotional problems, school failure and physical and sexual abuse than children in intact, married homes…..

There is a wonderful scene in the TV show Dharma and Gregg that was on TV about 10 years ago (has it been that long?)  Fast set up – Dharma is raised by a cohabitating couple who do not break up.  There are a few episodes concerning this and the parents begin to wonder if they should get married after 20 something odd years together.  Dharma pushes for them to do it.  When her mother asks why it is so important she tells them that her life was completely unstable.  She was told by her parents that they were together because the “wanted” to be together, not because some piece of paper said they “had” to be together.  Dharma said it was horrible for her to wake up every morning wondering if today was the today her parents would no longer “want” to be together.  This got me thinking about how unstable these relationships are to our children.  There is no real commitment of any kind that the children can see.

So what is driving the upward spike in nonmarital childbearing? Some groups, such as the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, have been focusing on contraceptive failures among young adults. It is true that most nonmarital pregnancies are unintended. But the percentage of unmarried, sexually active women who have been using contraception has increased significantly over the past four decades, according to a study by the National Center for Health Statistics.

Anyone here surprised?  The higher the contraception use, the higher the unintended pregnancies.  Doesn’t really fit into the Planned Parenthood slogan does it?

Other reasons the author notes for this rise in unwed parents is the fact that people are postponing marriage, but not sex or cohabitation.  Another example is that the meaning of marriage has changed from the “foundation” of adulthood to a mere capstone that a person has arrived financially, professionally and emotionally. 

Basically instead of thinking of marriage as an “us” we are thinking of marriage as a “me with someone else”.  A very selfish way to look at life.  We are not the center of our own lives, sorry to break that news to you.

It is so sad that we are still refusing to see what is causing this when it is practically screaming in our faces.  An identity of only “me” causes problems but an identity of a “community” doesn’t.  They called the 1980’s the “me” generation and look what has happened because we didn’t change the “me” to a “we”. 

****1st picture – Time Magazine cover in 1985

****2nd picture – People magazine cover in 1999

****3rd picture – OK magazine cover in 2007

Do you think we will ever learn?

Let’s all catch up on the anti-life culture we now live in.

A Minnesota judge has ruled a 13-year-old boy with Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a highly treatable form of cancer, must seek medical treatment over his parents’ objections.

Rodenberg (the judge) ruled there is a "compelling state interest sufficient to override the minor’s genuine opposition."

A court-appointed attorney for Daniel, Philip Elbert, called the decision unfortunate.

"I feel it’s a blow to families," he said Friday. "It marginalizes the decisions that parents face every day in regard to their children’s medical care. It really affirms the role that big government is better at making our decisions for us."

Daniel stopped chemotherapy in February after a single treatment. He and his parents opted instead for "alternative medicines" based on their religious beliefs. Child protection workers accused Daniel’s parents of medical neglect; but in court, his mother insisted the boy wouldn’t submit to chemotherapy for religious reasons and she said she wouldn’t comply if the court orders it.

Daniel’s parents have been supporting what they say is their son’s decision to instead treat the disease with nutritional supplements and other alternative treatments favored by the Nemenhah Band. The Missouri-based religious group believes in natural healing methods advocated by some American Indians.

The courts say that 13 year olds are old enough to decide to have sex with as many partners as they want.  They are old enough to get contraceptions so they never have to deal with the consequences of all that sex (look away from the STD & STI’s increasing numbers…look away!) They are old enough to have abortions (wait, what happened to all the contraception) all without their parents knowledge because they are mature enought to handle it.  But they are not old enough to decide what kind of treatment they will receive if they get sick.

Well, I guess that kid should listen to the courts considering the courts are constantly telling our kids how wrong their parents are anyway.

But what about all the “Terry Schiavo’s” of this world?  Oh wait, their parents are all wrong too.  Unless that want to kill their kids, than everyone should listen to the parents.  Oh wait, unless the parents don’t want what society says is what the kid needs, then the parents are wrong again.  No, wait…..Anyone else getting dizzy?

So much for “its my body I can do what I want” mantra.  I guess that only applies to sex and the consequences of sex. 

So what do you think?  Die or be forced to live?  Exactly why do the states get involved in these things anyway?

Who knew that the Robin Hood in Shrek came the closest to Obama’s version of Robbin’ Hood:

Ta, da, da, da, da, da, whoo 
I steal from the rich and give to the needy
He takes a wee percentage, but I’m not greedy I rescue pretty damsels, man, I’m good
What a guy, ha-ha, Monsieur Hood
Break it down

From the AP:

The billions in transportation stimulus dollars that President Barack Obama promoted as a way to create jobs shortchange counties that need the work the most, an Associated Press analysis has found…..

One result among many: Elk County, Pa., isn’t receiving any road money despite its 13.8 percent unemployment rate. Yet the military and college community of Riley County, Kan., with 3.4 percent unemployment, will benefit from about $56 million to build a highway, improve an intersection and restore a historic farmhouse…..

The very promise that Obama made, to spend money quickly and create jobs, is locking out many struggling communities needing those jobs.

Imagine that.  When the bill isn’t read and done too quickly, it just doesn’t work the way it is supposed to.  Even a grade school child could have told the politicians that!

The money goes to projects ready to start. But many struggling communities don’t have projects waiting. They couldn’t afford the millions of dollars for preparation and plans that often is required.

"It’s not fair," said Martin Schuller, the borough manager in the Elk County seat of Ridgway, who commiserates about the inequity in highway aid with colleagues in nearby towns. "It’s a joke because we’re not going to get it, because we don’t have any projects ready to go."……

To put simply, the counties that can’t afford to fix their roads right now and can’t afford to do anything about it, are not getting any of the money because they couldn’t afford to fix their roads.  Hopefully someone will be able to follow the logic on that one.

_High-unemployment counties, those in the top quarter of jobless rates, are allotted about 16 percent of the money, compared with about 20 percent for areas least affected by joblessness.

_In low-unemployment counties nationwide, those in the bottom quarter of jobless rates, the federal government is spending about $89 a person compared with $59 a person in the worst-hit areas.

_In counties with the largest populations, the government is spending about $69 a person in areas with the lowest unemployment and $40 a person in places with the greatest job need.

_Counties with the highest unemployment are most likely to have been passed over completely in the early spending…….

"The problem comes from the fact that the bill was not written right in the first place," said Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn. "And the bill not addressing where the money is needed to go, but just addressing, ‘Let’s get this money out of here as quickly as we can.’"

Isn’t that what happened to the bank bailouts?  Can anyone in D.C. actually add 1 + 1 correctly?

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood defended the transportation stimulus plan Monday. Even if needy areas don’t see transportation projects this year, workers can still apply for jobs elsewhere, he said…..

There ya have it.  The intelligence of someone who has no clue what it is like to live on Ramen noodles and frozen pea’s for a week.  Someone who has never had to wait for the bus, and who has no clue that city buses don’t go outside the city.  (That is if the county can even afford buses!)  Someone who has never had to work 7 days a week just to make ends meet.  Exactly how do these people find the time to travel elsewhere to get a better and more stable job?  And how do the people who are getting a pittance from unemployment supposed to be able to afford the gas to go?  And even if they get a job by traveling elsewhere, how are they supposed to afford to move! 

Also, Congress required states to use some of the highway money for projects in economically distressed areas, but didn’t impose sanctions if they didn’t. States can lose money, however, if they don’t spend fast enough…..

Yet residents of Perry County, Tenn., will have to wait. County Mayor John Carroll said he’s disappointed his community, which suffers from 25.4 percent unemployment, won’t receive a dime any time soon for its road needs.

"It’s pretty easy to draw a connection between the high unemployment rate and the lack of any four-lane highways," he said.

Federal auditors acknowledge they can’t yet track the transportation money that is leaving Washington and there is no single list of the thousands of projects planned in each state…….

For now, laid-off workers in Elk County, Pa., question why they’ve missed out, while money flows to more prosperous places.

"Why are they helping them?" asked Wendy Cameron, 50, of Saint Marys, Pa., who lost her job in a metal factory last year. She doesn’t have health insurance and would gladly take road work. "They’re not in need. We are.

"What are these people going to do? Is everybody going to go on welfare? I’ve never been on welfare. I don’t want to be on welfare."

The two cities that Obama promoted this stimulus plan to and said the plan would help them - Elkhart, IN and Peoria, IL - are going to receive money.  The struggling cities that Obama didn’t go to will not be receiving help.  In other words, the counties that cannot afford to host the president, can’t get the money.  Elkhart’s unemployment is at 18.8% but Peoria hasn’t even hit two digits yet with a rate of 9.4%.  Go here to find the unemployment rates in the country.

So, exactly how is this socialism supposed to work again?  Take from the rich and only give to the poor that have enough money to already have projects started?  I just don’t think that is what Robin Hood would have done.  All Obama’s plan is doing is Robbin’ the Hood.

So, now that we know all about Planned Parenthood's current situation regarding what kind of services they actually provided in 2007, let's go a bit deeper.  The oldest annual report I can find for PP shows the 2002 numbers so I compared those numbers to the 2007 numbers.  Very interesting!

Between 2002 and 2007 they increased their number of services by 59% and increased their clients by 10%.  In 5 years they provided 4,043,747 more services but only gained 263,357 clients.  That's a lot of repeat customers!

So, how did they do in 2002 compared to 2007 when it comes to services they provided. 

**PAP tests decreased by 18%
Breast exams/Breast care decreased by 20%
Prenatal clients decreased by 31% (that one was already pretty low to begin with!)

Um...is it just me, or aren't those all the services that they claim they always do and the reason why they are open?  The 3 very reasons why we are told we should give them our tax dollars because of how they help the lower class with preventive health care.  So, what increased the most:

STI testing and treatment increased by 139%
Emergency contraception increased by 125%
HIV testing increased by 97%
Reversible contraception & Pregnancy tests both increased by 9%

The miniscule numbers I discussed in my last article looked like they increased or decreased significantly however an increase or decrease of miniscule is still miniscule.  Ex:  Adoption referrals was up 60% from 2002 however that is only 2,949 more referrals.  Not much considering we are talking about over 10 million services were provided in 2007.

First of all if breast exams/care decreased 20% in just 5 years why is the Komen Foundation donating money to them?  Also, if they are all about 'choice' why are they not offering choices to their clients?  Prenatal care decreasing 31% in 5 years is telling me that they are not  helping the people who choose to have their baby (not to mention that the prenatal care is one of the miniscule services).  Their adoption referrals are so tiny my basic calculator cannot even calculate the percentage right!  Exactly what choices are they giving women in crisis pregnancies?  Abortion or go somewhere else is what they are saying.

It really is pathetic that they received $350 million from tax payers considering I can't really figure out where they are actually "helping" low income people unless they want contraception or STD/STI testing.  There is a heck of alot more to preventative healthcare than that.

Also, with HPV increasing every year, why are there PAP's decreasing?  They are sure in a hurry to force the HPV vaccine on people, but they aren't providing the appopriate testing to save women's lives. 

I have said how pathetic this is, right?

Planned Parenthood doesn't understand the meaning of the truth.  I wish they did because the idea of helping low income women get their PAP Smears and breast exams is such a good thing.  If only that is what they did.  However, their 2007 - 2008 Annual Report shows something completely different. 

In 2007 they did:

PAP tests - 968,682 = 9% of services
Breast exams/breast care - 851,232 = 8% of services
HIV testing - 368,473 = 3% of services
Prenatal clients - 10,914 = um...calculator doesn't do miniscule
Midlife clients - 12,783 = what did I say about miniscule
Infertility clients - 318 = yes, you read that right
Adoption referrals - 4,912 = remember, they are all about choice
Colonoscopy/LEEP/Cryotherapy procedures - 0.5% = I combined them together so I could get a stat for ya!

We hear it all the time.  That Planned Parenthood is more than just abortion.  We "know" that because abortion is just 3% of their services.  Well, using that logic they aren't about PAP tests, breast care, other cancer treatment/detection, prenatal, midlife, infertility, and adoption referrals either.  Aren't all those services that we hear is what they are all about?  Obviously, they aren't.

So what are they really all about?  Well, let's see: 

Reversible contraception - 2,463,201 = 23% of services
Emergency contraception - 1,423,650 = 13% of services
STI testing and treatment - 2,994,749 = 27% of services
Pregnancy test - 1,183,325 = 11% of services

Hmmm....so they are pretty much about contraception and STI testing.  Is anyone else understanding why they push so hard for "comprehensive" sex education?  If we start living non-free-love lifestyles they will go out of business as they are not equipped to deal with anything outside of promiscuity. 

So, how have they done through the years?  That is going to be the next article.  If is very interesting what has changed, and what hasn't.

According to the White House website:

Providing a high-quality education for all children is critical to America’s economic future. Our nation’s economic competitiveness and the path to the American Dream depend on providing every child with an education that will enable them to succeed in a global economy that is predicated on knowledge and innovation. President Obama is committed to providing every child access to a complete and competitive education, from cradle through career.

Obama doesn’t believe that for people living in his own backyard.  He believes in choice, but only if the choice involves killing unborn children.  When it comes to choice for schools - that ain't happening.

Go here to see an interview Gretchen from Fox and Friends did this morning with a single mother who will not longer be able to use vouchers for children so they can get a better education than what the public system offers.

I first taled about this on March 4.  The bill was signed.  Washington D.C. will stop the school voucher program at the end of this school year.

He’s all for good education for the rich, but he is stopping the poor from obtaining what his own daughters have.

Pathetic.

Sky news reports:

Officials in China have reportedly been told to puff their way through four and a half million cigarettes a year.

And if they (Hubei province) fail to smoke their way through 230,000 packs of locally-produced cigarettes, the officials could face fines.

You may be asking yourself, why?  Well, it is to help boost the economy.  The article  states that there are 350 million smokers in China.  I guess 350 million just isn’t enough so now the Chinese government must force more people to smoke, or get the smokers to smoke more.

However, they are trying to get the doctors to stop smoking.  I guess they figure that they need their doctors alive to treat all the people who will be getting lung cancer, emphysema etc.  The article also says that around a million die every year from smoke related diseases.

This is the kind of things that happen in countries where the government controls the people.  

I thought I would begin this blog with my thoughts on a liberal ideaology.

Unwanted.  That is such a horrible word when it is used to describe another human being isn’t it? 

According to Websters dictionary the definition of the word unwanted is:  Not wanted, not needed, and not desired.

 Which human beings have been considered unwanted?  The Homeless (Not wanted). The elderly (not needed).  The sick, dying and retarded (not desired). 

What happens when a group of people try to get rid of these unwanted people?  Protests.  Speeches.  Politicians write legislation. They become protected. 

They become protected because it turns out they were really wanted.  There actually was someone in this world who wanted those people, wanted to care for them, wanted to see them fulfill their full potential and to be a part of the wanted society.  They wanted to help lives become something that is worth living.  They were indeed wanted, needed and desired.

What about the unwanted unborn child?  The term “unwanted child” is untrue.  Just as the homeless, elderly, sick, dying and retarted are wanted, the child is wanted.

However, in todays way of thinking we can put value on the life of a person.  Who decides the value of an unborn child?  The Mother.  It is the Mother who gets to say if a human being is wanted to live, deserving to live and desired to live.  One person.  The fate of a human being’s life is based solely on a woman’s opinion on who is worthy of life.  Even convicted criminals get a jury of 12.  But not a person who didn’t ask to be inside a Mother’s womb.  That person is just a victim of the Natural Process of life.  The child is a victim - There was no crime committed.  No trial for proof of innocence.  No one need know that the person was even there and denied their fundamental right to life.

How sad.

Can you think of how horrible it would be to die because one person said you were unworthy to live and unwanted?

The so-called feminists should hold their heads in shame for placing value of worth on an innocent child by using the phrase “unwanted child” in most of their slogans.  It is the pregnancy that is unwanted.  The Child is wanted by someone.