This has to be the dumbest and coldest study performed since the Nazis experimented on Jews in concentration camps:

A leading medical journal reports that having an abortion may be less damaging to a woman’s mental health than having a baby.

Of course, the damage to the young human being who was killed in the abortion is tragically lethal. Why not have a study where murdering people who bother you is less stressful than having to tolerate them? Is stealing less work than working for a living?

There are times where tough decisions have to be made to let a life go because the future is truly worse than death. But when we get to the point where it is more important to relieve some stress than protect and sacrifice 20 years of your life to bring a new human being into this world, it is clear the left has hit rock bottom.

You know, the Nazis did not think Jews were worthy of being cherished human beings either. That is no exaggeration at all. And it matters not if it is 1 life or 1 million. It is evil to destroy a life for personal convenience.

There are days where I shudder to think how close America is to disaster, especially when I get too close a glimpse at who is steering the ship of state:

According to our tipster, Jarrett was seated at the head table along with several other big-name politicians and a handful of high-ranking military officials. As an officer sporting several stars walked past Jarrett, she signaled for his attention and said, “I’d like another glass of wine.”…

White House economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, who was seated next to Jarret, began “cracking up nervously,” our tipster said, but no one pointed out to Jarrett that the man sporting a chestful of medals was not her waiter.

Oh good lord, tell me this ain’t true. Is “clueless” the most accurate label for neophytes in the White House?

A lot of conservatives hope President Obama will fail at all he does – apparently that makes them feel better about themselves I guess. Nothing like feeling superior when someone else falters.

But unlike Rush Limbaugh, I know Obama’s failures can come at a huge price. This time, when it comes to Egypt, I am more than happy for President Obama to get it right, and get the credit. The only available options are:

• A fledgling Democracy arises as Mubarak steps aside and supports a peaceful transition
• The West bungles this opportunity (as it did in Iran last year) and throws the Egyptian people to the Islamo Fascists

Having a son in the military I of course want the first to be the focus of our efforts. If you support the military then of course you will push for the first to be the goal. You will not let the fear of an election’s outcome make the 2nd option the defacto result. Fear of election outcomes were in play in Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan – all unfounded.

The protests have been peaceful and respectful. No apparent blood lust, little focus on the West. It is Mubarak who needs to go, not Egypt’s future with the West and the new Middle East.

If Egypt can transition peacefully and democratically then President Obama will get the credit and his place in history. His economic plans will still have been a failure and his Obamacare is still going to be rejected. But helping Egypt get through this moment of history would be a major success. Here’s hoping it turns out the best possible way for the Egyptians, the Arab world, the Muslim community, the US military and our President.

The path of failure is too horrible to ponder.

In a not so surprising decision yesterday the Obama administration and 111th Liberal Congress were handed their heads by a federal judge yesterday:

A second federal judge ruled on Monday that it was unconstitutional for Congress to enact a health care law that required Americans to obtain commercial insurance, evening the score at 2 to 2 in the lower courts as conflicting opinions begin their path to the Supreme Court.

But unlike a Virginia judge in December, Judge Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, Fla., concluded that the insurance requirement was so “inextricably bound” to other provisions of the Affordable Care Act that its unconstitutionality required the invalidation of the entire law.

…

The judge declined to immediately enjoin, or suspend, the law pending appeals, a process that could last two years. But he wrote that the federal government should adhere to his declaratory judgment as the functional equivalent of an injunction. That left confusion about how the ruling might be interpreted in the 26 states that are parties to the legal challenge.

I especially liked the comments on Fox’s Special Report last night (can’t recall if it was Kristol or Krauthammer – maybe both). This will not be decided by the courts alone. We will have two years of a holding pattern where the unfairness of corporate and union waivers will be exposed, the true cost of the legislation will be uncovered and the impacts on current health plans will be dissected. America will weigh in on this important and far reaching mess.

During this reality check period, the American people will continue to move away from government-based solution for health care, with all its strings and substandard care and requisite deficit busting costs.

The mood of the country has changed since the great recession hit in 2008. Everyone knows it was liberal government policies that pushed for unsound lending in the housing markets, which in turn caused the entire system to bubble up and then implode back in on itself. Fat cats walked away rich and everyone else lost their life savings.

With the newly cemented realization that liberal foolishness can actually destroy lives on a grand scale, America is far less willing to let government experiment on its civilian like so many guinea pigs. The mood of the country is to cut back government to its minimum. Limit its reach and ability to ‘eff things up. There is no support for expanding liberal madness. The decades of democrat expansion of government really is ending.

Which is why Obamacare will fall sooner or later. It may take 2012 elections to put enough people in place to remove it once and for all. But the liberal over-reach in the last Congress broke the back of America, and the end of big government really is over this time.

Or else elected officials will lose their jobs. As Congressman Jim Moran of VA recently noted, Americans don’t want to be governed. He actually whined that we did not want to be governed by a black man. Jim Moron (as I like to call him) apparently missed the fact that Barack Obama is still in office with rising approval ratings, and it was his very liberal party which was fired by the voters. What Moron missed is the reality America does not like to be governed by incompetent fools which make a mess of things. He never has been a very bright bulb, even in the dim light of congress.

The situation in Egypt is not simple or clear cut. I have hesitated to write about it simply because it is complex, unstable and could result in a regional war if not handled correctly. It opens the future to two warring philosophies that have been roiling the Middle East since 9-11 and America’s efforts to instill peaceful democracies into the region.

America’s knee-jerk preference is, of course, democracy. We believe through freedom of individual rights you gain two very important results:

• Individual, family, local and regional financial success that translates into a productive and educated society that grows instead of stagnates.
• A calming of the human soul that comes from having the basic needs met, some worthy accomplishments under your belt, time to learn and gain some wisdom – all of which negates the urge for violence and hate.

The Middle East has yet to gain this serene balance so many in the West take for granted (and liberals risk through their endless and oppressive government edicts). Hosni Mubarak has been a solid and worthy ally for 3 decades. He has attempted to acclimate his people to the modern world in preparation for a transition from the Arab-Muslim autocracy to democracy. The problem is, Mubarak may have waited too long to see the fruits of his efforts bear fruit. He may have been waiting for that mythical ‘perfect moment’ where there is no risk in ringing in massive societal change.

ON FRIDAY, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians did something that the Obama administration, and many others in Washington, believed they would never do: They rose up against their government, demanding an end to President Hosni Mubarak’s autocracy. They overwhelmed the security forces that Mr. Mubarak deployed in an attempt to crush them; they defied a nighttime curfew even after Army units were deployed. They burned the headquarters of the ruling party in Cairo and in several other cities. By nightfall, it seemed clear that only two events could end their revolution: a massive use of force by the Army or Mr. Mubarak’s yielding of power.

The United States should be using all of its influence – including the more than $1 billion in aid it supplies annually to the Egyptian military – to ensure the latter outcome.

The people of Egypt have reached their tipping point. They want to move on from the 30 years of Mubarak’s rule and who could blame them. The risk is the opening now provided to Islamo Fascists like al Qeda and the Islamic Jihad (which evolved from Egypt). If America does not work to bring about a change to democracy, then the country could devolve into a center of Islamic hate and anger – one aimed at the West. Worse yet, with an educated and productive populace, along with their well trained and armed military, Egypt is a prize the likes of which groups like al Qaeda cannot ignore.

They will try to take advantage of this moment. Which is why the news from DC is so unbelievable and worrisome:

Yet, as so often has happened during the Arab uprising of the past several weeks, the Obama administration on Friday appeared to be behind events.

…

But U.S. statements assumed that the 30-year-long rule of the 82-year-old Mr. Mubarak would continue. After speaking to Mr. Mubarak, President Obama said Friday night that he would continue to work with the Egyptian president; he did not mention elections. Instead, in an apparent attempt to straddle the two sides, the administration suggested that the solution to the crisis would come through “engagement” between the regime and the protesters.

Once again we are painfully aware of the deep inexperience of our young and rash President. His White House is filled with liberal theoreticians with nearly zero real-world experience and contacts. Leading the pack is bumbling VP Biden:

“We’re encouraging the government . . . to try to engage in a discussion as to what the legitimate claims being made are, if they are, and to try to work them out,” Vice President Biden said in a Thursday night interview on PBS, adding that he would not call Mr. Mubarak a dictator and did not think he should step down.

Talk about your vacuous statements. The forces on the ground in Egypt are running full steam ahead and Biden is proposing committees and hearings.

The best way to hand Egypt over to the likes of al Qaeda is to disappoint the masses in terms of the West’s beacon of democracy – America. We cannot afford to align with Mubarak in hopes he stays on. It is a lose-lose strategy:

• Mubarak Stays: The protesters’ dreams are dashed and they blame America for not supporting democracy at a pivotal point in Egypt’s history. They become bitter and conclude democracy is just propaganda told to keep the American Sheeple in their place. They fall into the hands of Islamo Fascism.
• Mubarak is Overthrown: Instead of a peaceful and democratic change of government in Egypt the military and masses over throw the Egyptian government and radical elements name the common enemy of the people America and their puppet Mubarak. The pro democracy elements are purged in the after math and a version of Iran arises on the banks of the Nile.

Either way we lose an important ally and gain a dangerous enemy in the heart of the Middle East. We get the Jimmy Carter version of diplomacy, the worst diplomacy known to humanity since the days of Hitler and Chamberlain.

The window here is very small. The Obama administration must explain to Mubarak it is better to control the unavoidable and coming transition than lose the country to the dark forces of Islamo Fascism. Mubarak can still leave his mark on history and guide his nation to the future.

This was going to happen sooner or later. Mubarak is not immortal. It is just a question of seizing the moment.

I would never own an electric car, maybe a hybrid, but never full electric. They are just not capable of doing what gas powered cars can do, and sometimes that can be dangerous:

Count me among the many thousands of Washington area residents who spent Wednesday night stuck in traffic as a snowstorm sowed chaos all around us. Being car-bound in sub-freezing weather for six hours can make a guy think. I counted my blessings. The situation could have been worse, I realized: My fellow commuters and I could have been trying to make it home in electric cars, like the ones President Obama is constantly promoting, most recently in his State of the Union address.

It is a basic fact of physical science that batteries run down more quickly in cold weather than they do in warm weather, and the batteries employed by vehicles such as the Nissan Leaf or the Chevy Volt are no exception.

The exact loss of power these cars would suffer is a matter of debate, partly because no one has much real-world experience to draw on. But there would be some loss. Running the heater to stay warm, or the car radio to stay informed, would drain the battery further.

It was brutal on Wednesday when the storm hit DC. People were stuck on roadways for up to 12 hours. It reminded me of a storm back in 1987 where gridlocked cars spent all night on the Woodrow Wilson bridge, fighting for survival.

So why would anyone risk their life on some green tech that the government claims will avoid global warming, but kill you when it gets too cold?

Update: The more I think about this the more incoherent it is. Just think about the tax deduction issue and how conservatives typically claim this is the money of the person who earned it and is paying the taxes, not the governments. But here you have supposed ‘conservatives’ claiming you cannot deduct YOUR medical bills from YOUR taxes because these taxes ARE THE GOVERNMENT’S MONEY! This is not taxpayer money funding abortions – it is an individual’s money. My money was not used in these situations.

When social conservatives start acting like liberals – just with a different agenda – it is time to jettison both fringes. – end update

In an era when what people want is less government intrusion, you would think the social conservatives would by themselves a clue. But no. They seem hell bent in making the same mistake liberals did in attempting to use the federal government to force their preferred values and priorities on the rest of us. Case in point, trying to limit what ‘rape’ means because of their extreme pro-life wing:

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to “forcible rape.” This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion.

Given that the bill also would forbid the use of tax benefits to pay for abortions, that 13-year-old’s parents wouldn’t be allowed to use money from a tax-exempt health savings account (HSA) to pay for the procedure. They also wouldn’t be able to deduct the cost of the abortion or the cost of any insurance

First off, I oppose federally funded abortions for convenience and irresponsibility. I also believe in the sanctity of life. But I draw the line when government steps in on family or personal decisions. We can win the abortion issue with education (e.g., showing how legally and scientifically an embryo is a unique human individual and not a bunch of cells from the mother) and support.

But this is NOT a priority. We don’t need bureaucrats determining who is and is not ‘raped’. If a court or statre laws rules it is a rape, then it is a rape. And funding of abortions through insurance is not the business of the government. I don’t want government telling me what to do from the left or the right with my family and their challenges. And they don’t have a right to tell me how to use my medical insurance!

You’d think these bozos would have understood – keep out of our lives. Cut the government, don’t extend its cancerous tentacles.

OK, the title of this post is what I would have used as a screaming headline for this UK article noting that the Himalayan glaciers are not shrinking – but actually growing.

Researchers have discovered that, contrary to popular belief, half of the ice flows in the Karakoram range of the mountains are actually growing rather than shrinking.

The discovery adds a new twist to the row over whether global warming is causing the world’s highest mountain range to lose its ice cover.

It further challenges claims made in a 2007 report by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that the glaciers would be gone by 2035.

Although the head of the panel Dr Rajendra Pachauri later admitted the claim was an error gleaned from unchecked research, he maintained that global warming was melting the glaciers at “a rapid rate”, threatening floods throughout north India.

The new study by scientists at the Universities of California and Potsdam has found that half of the glaciers in the Karakoram range, in the northwestern Himlaya, are in fact advancing and that global warming is not the deciding factor in whether a glacier survives or melts.

The reason this is science discovering that AGW is not based on real science is because the Himalayan glacier claim in the IPCC report was as bogus as the hockey stick graph (used to hide the fact organic proxies cannot discern past global temperatures to any precision). It once again proves the concept of AGW has more evidence disproving it than supporting it. Normal science would have tossed AGW out as speculative garbage years ago.

I just can’t wait to hear what lame excuse is concocted by the Church of Al Gore/IPCC to twist growing Himalayan glaciers into another sign of never-before-seen global warming. Think about it. The Himalayans are near the equator and near massive population densities (China, India, Bangladesh). If the glaciers are growing, how could the Earth be warming? And if it has to do with CO2, why is the mass of humanity nearby not simply melting the Himalayan glaciers with their collective breath?

Update: BTW, this article about the brain washing done by the BBC on AGW is as frightening as enlightening. Once you believe in something with all your heart, not amount of reality can break through the walls of denial.

It took Mother Nature (e.g., Gaia) to finally stop the madness in DC, if only for a day. I myself enjoyed 2 hours watching amateurs try and drive in the slushy snow that came in on Wednesday. I was not sure I was going to make it through the cars which got stuck and then blocked roads.

The worst offenders were those who crept along at a snails pace, too afraid to keep up a reasonable speed. You have to maintain some momentum to get through drifts and ridges and up hills. Typically these were 4-Wheel drives and rookie operators

The other group of disasters were all those fancy real wheel sports cars who would stop on an up hill section before a light. Of course you could not get started on the up hill and the smart thing to do is to wait out the lights at the bottom. Lots of people don’t like the gap, but it is better than 4-5 stuck cars and a long night listening to the car radio.

The real hazard were the weighted down trees. I drive a rag top and refused to stop in front of tall, snow laden pine trees leaning over the road. Must be my survival instinct or something. Tragically, one driver in a truck was killed when a massive tree came down on his truck.

I also feel for all those poor people stuck on the GW Parkway all night. That must have been a nightmare.

By 9:30 PM I was able to get out and drive around, but it was not trivial. Lots and lots of abandoned vehicles to dodge, some main roads looked like they had not seen a plow, trees down.

Sadly, it took this much severe weather to stop the folks in DC from doing more damage. Not sure which is worse?

I am not going to go into the details of his rebuttal, but Paul Ryan hit the nail on the head. He connected to the issues and concerns of the 2010 voters. All about the deficits and business as usual with runaway spending and criminal malfeasance. Excellent.

I would wager Ryan gets higher ratings for his speech than Obama does. It will be historic, when the rebuttal resonates more with the people than the SOTU itself.

Will keep this one and its ‘to do’ list of solutions. We now have a road map!