Do You Think This has Become A Religion ?

He who believes in nothing will believe anything,
Al Gore you have created hysteria and grief that is uncontrolled and it has made you rich, enjoy your cash, it will be your reward. How long before this is Bush's fault?

The Egyptian


Baby Survives 3 Days With Shot in Chest After Parents Commit Global Warming Suicide

Monday, March 1, 2010, 5:59 AM

Jim Hoft

A seven-month old baby girl survived a shot to the chest after her parents shot themselves and their two-year-old in a global warming murder-suicide pact.

This is the last public photo of Francisco Lotero before he shot himself, his wife and two-year-old son in response to fears about global warming. (El Litoral)

The New York Post reported:

A seven-month-old girl miraculously survived alone for three days after one of her parents shot her in the chest – apparently as part of a bizarre murder-suicide pact blamed on global warming.

The baby was discovered with a bullet casing in her chest and covered with blood by police in the Argentinean city of Goya, near the bodies of her parents and 2-year-old brother, the Latin American Herald reported Saturday.

Police broke into the home after neighbors complained of a stench coming from the house. The boy was found with a gunshot wound in his back, while his parents died from gunshot wounds to the chest.

The parents, 56-year-old Francisco Lotero and 23-year-old Miriam Coletti, are believed to have been spurred by their fears about global climate change, London’s Telegraph reported.

A letter was found on a table expressing the couple’s anger at the government for not responding to the environmental crisis.

Doctors said the baby’s condition has been improving every day, the Herald Tribune reported.

Someone should sue Al Gore. He played on their fears and now a whole family is dead.

Its Not Nice To Mess With Mother Nature

In the Old Testament the first born of man or animal was offered to the Lord , man to be in service to the Lord, animals in sacrifice, makes on wonder, are we ticking off someone whom we shouldn't. Some claim nature, but what is nature and who ordered it, we are playing with fire and getting burned. See my two previous posts

The Egyptian

http://germanegyptian.blogspot.com/2010/02/natural-woman-my-ass-what-crock.html
http://germanegyptian.blogspot.com/2010/02/figures.html


Tuesday, Dec. 18, 2007

Study Links Abortion and Preemies

By Laura Blue

Abortions increase the risk of low birth weight in future pregnancies by a factor of three, and of premature birth by a factor of two, according to the largest U.S. study of its kind. The study is hardly perfect; the data is more than 40 years old and doesn't distinguish between medical abortions and "spontaneous abortions," better known as miscarriages. Yet the report, published today in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (JECH), shows one of the strongest links yet between miscarriage or abortion on premature birth and low birth weight — major risk factors for infant death or sickness.

What makes report significant is the size and detail of data. Some previous, smaller studies on abortion and future birth weight have suffered because researchers were unable to untangle the effects of abortion from, say, the effects of being poor (which also happens to increase a woman's odds of having an abortion). But the researchers behind the JECH study, which evaluated just over 45,000 single-child live births from 1959 to 1966, were able to adjust for an impressive array of confounding variables, including race, age, weight, height, marital status, occupation, the number of prenatal visits, the number of previous children, smoking and drinking habits, drug habits, infant gender and both parents' education levels.

That kind of rigor makes the new findings particularly important. The study not only found a link between abortion or miscarriage and low birth weight, but it also found that the risk appears to increase with every subsequent miscarriage or abortion. The accruing risk, says co-author Tilahun Adera at Virginia Commonwealth University, suggests that termination of pregnancy is a true cause of low birth weight and preterm birth rather than a variable associated with such conditions. "It's not just an association," he says. "The risk of premature birth increases with the increasing number of abortions."

Women who had had one, two or three prior abortions or miscarriages were three, five and nine times more likely, respectively, to have a low-birth-weight child, the data showed. Though it's still not clear why that's so, doctors theorize that the cervix may be weakened by miscarriage or abortion, increasing the risk of preterm birth later on. Or, it could be that uterine adhesions or infections from the terminated pregnancy slow the growth of the fetus in subsequent pregnancies.

Recent major studies from Australia and Canada have also concluded that miscarriages and induced abortions raise the odds of premature birth and low birth weight — but only modestly. (Those studies were able to distinguish women who had miscarried from women who had intentionally ended their pregnancies.) Many other studies have found no clear link at all. Perhaps that's because different study populations, taken from all over the world, involve different risk factors for premature birth; or it may be simply that the sample sizes in some studies were too small to pick up relatively small differences between women who had had abortions and those who had not.

The big question, however, is how well data from the 1960s really represents American women today. Back in the '60s, induced abortions were illegal in the U.S. It's possible that some women in the study had abortions but denied it — even to their doctors — or claimed to have miscarried. That makes the data harder to interpret. Illegal abortion techniques of the day, moreover, were no doubt cruder than abortion procedures today, and they may have caused more permanent damage to the reproductive system.

Indeed, the public-health implications of the JECH study may be more suitable for developing countries, says Adera — places where abortion is still illegal, and where prenatal care may be similar to what was offered in the U.S. half a century ago. Still, he says, all over the world, "Women need to be informed about these risks."

Defend marriage

The Other McCain is a protestant with a passel of kids and a saintly wife for putting up with him. But seriously why do we not hear this kind of thing from pulpit in the Catholic Church these days? Does it really take an evangelical to say it, Has the church become so secular that it no longer wants to tell the truth. Why is the church short of priests and sisters today? We are losing the high ground on birth control and marriage that's why, too much of Bernadine's seamless garment happy clappy crap, and CINOs such as the Kennedys and Pisslousy, look at all the Cinos in Washington, it's a damn disgrace

The Egyptian

‘Forbidding to Marry’

If you put something out with the trash . . . it’s not really yours anymore; you’ve relinquished your claim to it. And that’s exactly what we’ve done with marriage. We might as well let gays have it. We’re not using it. . . .

And for my fellow Christian conservatives: we haven’t got a moral leg to stand on. Our divorce rate is identical to the national average.

Well, to repeat the punchline of an old joke, “What do you mean, ‘we,’ Kemosabe?” As of next Monday, I will have been married to the same woman for 20 years. My lovely and long-suffering wife deserves almost all the credit for that achievement, of course, but I have at least been present for the occasion.

Most of what you have written about the marriage crisis is, of course, right on target, especially when you say that Christian churches “fail to create a culture of marriage in our youth and twenty-somethings.” But, as with your statistical generalization about the failure of “we,” I fear that you are missing the trees for the forest on this issue. What has happened, it seems to me, is that everybody’s sitting around moaning about “society” and “the culture,” rather than seeking to intervene directly and personally to make a difference in the lives of those closest to them.

For me, being pro-marriage, pro-family and pro-life is more than a political position. My wife and I have six kids ranging from age 5 to 19, and you can imagine how challenging this has been on a journalist’s pay. (Never mind a blogger’s pay.) But as my late father advised me long ago, “Son, if you wait to have kids until you can afford to have kids, you’ll never have kids.”

‘TWO AND TIE ‘EM’
Christians believe that marriage is an institution ordained by God, and every marriage is thus blessed. However, in ordaining marriage, God commanded man to “be fruitful and multiply.” This commandment has never been repealed or amended, no matter what any Malthusian population-control fanatic tries to tell you. One trend that has undermined marriage has been the rise of the Contraceptive Culture, which celebrates sterility as the norm and views fertility as a pathology requiring medical prevention.

How many Christians have embraced this false — dare I say, evil — worldview? How many young Christian married couples use contraception because “we can’t afford children now”? And how many married Christian couples have unwittingly subscribed to the Zero Population Growth ideal of exactly two children per couple? Did you know that surgical sterilization (tubal ligation) is the No. 1 form of birth control for American women? It’s the “two and tie ‘em” mentality: Have exactly two children, then get yourself surgically sterilized.

My wife and I encountered this mentality with our second pregnancy (our twin sons, who are now 16). During a prenatal examination, the obstetrician told my wife, “If you want me to perform a tubal at the time of delivery, it will be cheaper than if you want me to do it later, because the insurance will only have to pay for one hospitalization.” My wife came home in tears: “Am I an unfit mother? Why would he even suggest such a thing?” But millions of women across America not only accept such suggestions, they actively seek sterilization, viewing it as a liberation from the menace of pregnancy.

In this, many “Christian conservatives” seem entirely comfortable with being “conformed to this world,” slavishly following the secular trend. What one confronts is an attitude I call “middle classism”: The belief that the object of life is to accrue the symbols of middle-class status (college education, office job, new cars, home in the suburbs, vacation travel) and to ensure that one’s children accumulate the same symbols.

A SHOCKING CHOICE
Life without these symbols is deemed unworthy — “underprivileged” — and many parents who consider themselves Christian conservatives strongly caution their children against early marriage and early parenthood, since these are perceived as obstacles to obtaining middle-classness. If a 19-year-old returns from her freshman year at college to announce that she is a lesbian, her Christian conservative parents may not approve, but they will still love and cherish their child. Let the same 19-year-old announce that she’s marrying her boyfriend and dropping out of school to start a family, and this would drive her Christian conservative parents to the verge of suicidal grief: “You’re ruining your life!”

What is the result of this attitude? I wrote about it a decade ago:

Fact: In 1960, the median age at first marriage for U.S. women was 20. Today, it´s 25. For men, the median age at first marriage has gone from 22 in 1960 to 27 today. Yet researchers report that the average young American today first has sexual intercourse at age 17 or 18.
Judging from these statistics, then, most young people in this country will be “sexually active” . . . for eight to 10 years before marrying. If that is true, what future can there be for the politics of “family values”? . . .
If young Americans are less likely to marry than Americans of a generation ago, they are also less likely to become parents.
Overall, U.S. fertility rates have declined by 43.6 percent since 1960 and like the marriage trends this decline is most pronounced among the young. The birth rate for women aged 20-24 decreased 56.5 percent between 1960 and 2000, according to the Census Bureau. For all the outcry over America´s “teen pregnancy crisis,” the teen birth rate is now 34.7 percent lower than it was in the final year of the Eisenhower administration.

This trend away from marriage and parenthood has not been opposed or condemned by Christian leaders, who are afraid to offend their congregations. Many evangelical Christians like to talk about “stepping out on faith,” even while they live an existence carefully calculated toward attainment of upwardly-mobile middle-classness. Thus, at noon on Sunday, they get into one of their 2.4 cars and drive home from their suburban mega-church to their cul-de-sac development, to their 4BR/5BA house with 1.7 children. And then they wonder why they don’t feel particularly “spiritual.”

Too many people who consider themselves Christian conservatives are disobedient to God’s commandments, yet idolatrously reverent toward the conventions of a middle-class lifestyle. Their true religion is the Theology of Niceness: Get a nice job so you can live in a nice neighborhood with nice schools for your nice children who will wear nice clothes when you drive them in your nice car to play with their nice friends. Everything all neat and tidy, you see? Hard for the Duggars and their 18 children to live nice like that. Yet they work hard and have faith in God, and somehow they don’t all starve to death.

Thou shalt go to college is the first commandment of middle-classness, and the lifestyle idolators don’t consider how this inflexible attitude contributes to the flourishing of adolescent fornication. It’s very good to tell young teens that they should save sex for marriage, but . . . well, how soon can they get married?

“Oh, you’ll have to go to college, start a career and become financially stable first.” And the 13- or 14-year-old does the math and thinks, “Twenty-five? 26? 27? You’re freaking kidding me! That’s like a zillion years in the future! I’ll be practically 30 by that time!” The prospect of an (honestly) white wedding being dangled off in the distant future has a profoundly demoralizing effect on kids. As a result, every church youth leader can tell you stories about the 17-year-old girl who got pregnant after her boyfriend convinced her that “it’s not wrong if we really love each other.” (It’s the oldest line in the book, girls.)

THE DEATH OF ROMANCE
This is why pop songs no longer feature promises of “endless love” and “always and forever.” In 1971, the protagonist of the Temptations’ hit “Just My Imagination” saw a beautiful girl walk past and dreamed:

Soon we’ll be married
And raise a family.
In a cozy little home out in the country
With two children, maybe three.

If such visions of wedded bliss occupy no part of the youthful imagination today, why not? Perhaps because children are indoctrinated to believe that marriage is strictly for grown-ups — heaven forbid an 18-year-old boy should get a job, marry his high-school sweetheart, and start their life together in a tiny little basement apartment. What about college? What about your career? What about the upwardly-mobile ambitions of middle-classness?

If this status idolatry isn’t anti-marriage, what is it? I’m reminded of the fourth chapter of Timothy:

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry . . .

Myself, I try to actively encourage marriage for young people. I’m a relentless matchmaker, and as soon as I see young folks pairing up as boyfriend and girlfriend, I start asking, “When’s the wedding?” (And once they’re married, “When’s the baby due?”) Instead of sitting around waiting for somebody’s legislative agenda, I’m “pro-family” in the most direct, personal way possible.

If young Christian conservatives want to be “pro-family,” then, they need to be getting married and having babies. And what a youth rebellion that would be, huh? “No, mother, I’ve decided against law school. As a matter of fact, Jennifer and I went to the courthouse and got married last Saturday and . . .” Strange to say that the most shocking thing a young person can do in 2009 is to get married. They can change the world one “I do” at a time.

UPDATE: Is this a harmonic convergence or what? While I was writing this, it appears that Laura was updating her post to link my American Spectator column, “Marriage: A Hill to Die On.”

UPDATE II:In the comments at my blog, father-of-five Larry says:

I cannot count the number of times we have been unintentionally insulted by well meaning, self-identified Christians, asking if we know what causes that (pregnancy) . . .

To which I always answer, “Yes, and we’re very good at it.” That shuts ‘em up quick.

In the comments here, meanwhile, Feel of Shadows calls our attention to an article in First Things outlining the role of the decline of the family in the economic crisis:

America’s population has risen from 200 million to 300 million since 1970, while the total number of two-parent families with children is the same today as it was when Richard Nixon took office, at 25 million. In 1973, the United States had 36 million housing units with three or more bedrooms, not many more than the number of two-parent families with children—which means that the supply of family homes was roughly in line with the number of families. By 2005, the number of housing units with three or more bedrooms had doubled to 72 million, though America had the same number of two-parent families with children.
The number of two-parent families with children, the kind of household that requires and can afford a large home, has remained essentially stagnant since 1963, according to the Census Bureau. Between 1963 and 2005, to be sure, the total number of what the Census Bureau categorizes as families grew from 47 million to 77 million. But most of the increase is due to families without children, including what are sometimes rather strangely called “one-person families.”
In place of traditional two-parent families with children, America has seen enormous growth in one-parent families and childless families. The number of one-parent families with children has tripled. Dependent children formed half the U.S. population in 1960, and they add up to only 30 percent today. The dependent elderly doubled as a proportion of the population, from 15 percent in 1960 to 30 percent today.

BTW, we should not neglect to mention that, in myriad ways, government policies have incentivized the decline of the traditional family. Beginning in the 1960s, federal money paid for “family planning” services, numerous welfare programs that fostered unwed motherhood, and policies that tended to destroy the kinds of neighborhoods where young families once got their start.

figures

had this lying around for a while, just cleaning up and found it in the files. It kind of makes sense doesn't it

Thje Egyptian

Federal Study Confirms Contraception-Breast Cancer Link

Share

Posted by Tim Drake

Ten years ago, Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, authored the book Breast Cancer: Its Link to Abortion and the Birth Control Pill, which established the connection between the birth control pill and breast cancer.

Now, a federal study confirms that data.

The study shows a strong connection between the use of oral contraceptives and a particularly aggressive form of breast cancer with a high mortality rate, known as “triple-negative” breast cancer (TNBC). The study also found that the connection was highest among women who began using oral contraceptives while they were teenagers.

The 2009 Jessica Dolle study of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center appeared in the April 2009 issue of the cancer epidemiology journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.

The research showed that women who start using oral contraceptives before the age of 18 multiply their risk of TNBC by 3.7 times. Recent users of oral contraceptives within the last one to five years multiply their risk by 4.2 times.

Furthermore, the study is noteworthy because it contained an admission of the link between abortion and breast cancer by National Cancer Institute (NCI) researcher Louise Brinton, who had previously influenced the agency to deny an abortion-breast cancer link.

The study showed a 40% risk increase for women who have had abortions, and one of the study’s tables listed abortion as a “known and suspected risk factor.”

Dr. Joel Brind, professor of biology and endocrinology and deputy chair for biology at Baruch College, City University of New York, described both findings a “bombshell.” Brind provided an analysis of the study.

Although the data’s been available for nine months, observers wonder why the mainstream media and cancer groups have been silent.

“Although the study was published nine months ago, the NCI, the American Cancer Society, Susan G. Komen for the Cure and other cancer-fundraising businesses have made no efforts to reduce breast-cancer rates by issuing nationwide warnings to women,” said Karen Malec, president of the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer. “Obviously, more women will die of breast cancer if the NCI fails in its duty to warn about the risks of oral contraceptives and abortion and if government funds are used to pay for both as a part of any health-care bill.”

This is amaizing, God works in mysterious ways

ELEPHANTS ATTACK IN ORISSA EXACTLY AFTER ONE YEAR OF PERSECUTIONS
[ Fr. Sunil De Silva - 09.12.2009 ]

In July 2008 a severe persecution of Christians broke out in the Indian state of Orissa. A 22 year old nun was burnt to death when angry mobs burnt down an orphanage in Khuntpali village in Barhgarh district, another nun was gang raped in Kandhamal, mobs attacked churches, torched vehicles, houses of Christians destroyed, and Fr. Thomas Chellen, director of the pastoral center that was destroyed with a bomb, had a narrow escape after a Hindu mob nearly set him on fire. The end result saw more than 500 Christians murdered, and thousands of others injured and homeless after their houses were reduced to ashes. Recently a strange and dramatic event took place in Orissa, which has many people talking and wondering.

In recent months, herds of wild elephants have begun to storm villages that are home to some of the worst persecutors of Christians during the troubles. In one village, where in August a year ago the Christians had to run for their lives while their homes were being destroyed by rioters, a herd of elephants emerged from the surrounding jungle exactly one year later, in July 2009, at the same time of the day of the attack.

These elephants first attacked a rock crusher machine owned by a key leader of the persecution movement. They then went on to destroy his house and farms.

Hundreds of villagers have been forced to take shelter in camps in the Indian state of Orissa after repeated attacks by a herd of elephants.

Seven people have been killed and several others injured in attacks by a herd of 12-13 elephants over the past few weeks in Kandhamal district.

Over 2,500 people living in 45 villages have been affected by the attacks, district chief Krishen Kumar said.

It is, however, unclear why this herd of elephants migrated from the Lakheri sanctuary in a neighbouring district. He said the herd had travelled some 300km into Kandhamal, and even entered a town in the district. Wildlife officials were camping at the site of the attacks and trying to find out why the elephants had come out of their sanctuary. The villagers say elephants attack their areas in herds, causing heavy destruction.

Gaining momentum, they rampaged through other non-Christian homes, demolishing gardens and singling out the home of persecutors, leaving Christian homes untouched.

These strange attacks have spread, and according to a report, the elephants have already destroyed more than 700 houses in 30 villages, and killed five people. Nobody in this area has seen or even imagined the unique appearance of a herd of wild elephants such as this. The elephants are not ordinary elephants; they appear to be on a mission.

Typically, smaller elephants enter a village first, appearing to survey the community. They then rejoin the larger herd, and larger elephant soon follow and get the job done.

The ministry partner in India stated “We think that it might have something to do with the avenging the blood of martyrs. In fact the fear of God has fallen on the local people, who have labeled these elephants “Christian elephants.”

With little help coming from the administration, the villagers have taken to road blockades. "The elephants have destroyed crops and selected houses. But officials too express helplessness. "There is no permanent habitat of elephants in Sundargarh. They come from Bihar, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand where their habitats have shrunk. But is not clear how and why these elephants reached Orissa.

Proper Nuns or A Good Habit to Keep

Now those are real Sisters, the ones that taught me for the first 3 grades in public school, that lived in a convent and led us in prayer, not the happy clappy polyester nightmares of today that live in condos and priest less rectories "because no one lives where they work anymore". Sad to witness the decline of such a good order, instead of looking like nuns they now look like little old ladies that are soon to the nursing home, cute frocks, ear rings and pearls, lets not forget the tiny cross on their blouse to tell the world that "I am a religious" may they learn from the Dominicans and reclain their heritage before it's too late.

I'm not holding my breath.

The Egyptian

Pioneer Group

1957: “Pioneer group of Sisters of the Precious Blood who will be the first members of their religious congregation to engage in missionary work in Chile, South America, received a blessing from Archbishop Karl J. Alter before embarking on their new career last week. Left to right are Sister Mary Geneva, Sister Mary Ignatius, Sister Mary John, Archbishop Alter, Mother Mary Aquinas, Superior General of the congregation, who is accompanying the missionary sisters to Chile and will return to the U.S. after they take up residence there; and Sister Mary Amelia. In Chile, the sisters will teach in St. Gaspar's School, which is attached to Santo Domingo Parish, the Vicariate of the Precious Blood Fathers who have been serving in South America for several years.” (The Catholic Telegraph-Register, January 4, 1957)

eewwww thats bad

For your viewing enjoyment I give you the ineffable blog Bad Vestments the pictures are bad enough but the commentary is a scream, you'll have to go there to read the commentary

The Egyptian

some recent pictures

JOHNSON'S GRAND UNIFIED THEORY OF INAPPROPRIATE LITURGICAL CLOTHING

FLOWER POWER

ORRIS?

KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI GOES TO THE RENAISSANCE FESTIVAL!!

Nice Picture

More from the Catholic Telegraph
Grandfather of a friend of mine, he was very talented with his hands and it seems to carry on through the next several generations.

The Egyptian

P.S. Isn't it nice to at least SEE a picture of a Sister in a habit instead of a polyester nightmare, the Sisters used to mean so much and now they have made themselves disappear into irrelevance
E

Statue Donated

1963: “Statue of St. Joseph the Worker, carved from wood by Frank Dahlinghaus of St. Joseph's parish, Egypt, has been donated to the Sisters of the Precious Blood at the new Maria Stein Retreat House. With the statue here are Mother Mary Nathalia of the retreat house and Dahlinghaus. The sculptor, who owns and operates a poultry farm at Minster, Route 1, describes himself as a "whittler." Besides the contemporary-style statue of St. Joseph, he has carved several other statues and a wide variety of intricate objects. One of these is a wooden bird perched inside a wooden cage, all carved from a single block. In making the statue of St. Joseph, Dahlinghaus included a carpenter's box containing a variety of carved small wooden tools. (The Catholic Telegraph, August 9, 1963)

Carthagena, St Charles Seminary

Joyfully picked from the The Catholic Telegraph Photography Project,
This is what I mean, this chapel was beautiful but the "wreckovation" turn it into a cold sterile empty hall with no beauty whatsoever. ( personally I think it is butt ugly) Wonder if there are any photos of it in color, the art work must have been incredible. Fr Troust was a great artist and the idea of his work being destroyed just angers me.

The Egyptian

click on pictures to enlarge

Jubilee at Carthagena

1961: “The seeds of religious vocations, nurtured at St. Charles’ Seminary, Carthagena, have produced more than 700 priests over the past 100 years. This month, as the Precious Blood Fathers’ major seminary observes its centenary, it can point to its ‘graduates’ at work in 21 states and in South America. To meet the demands of a growing religious society, St. Charles’ Seminary recently completed a construction program.

“Before and after pictures show the chapel as it was before its renovation, above, and after its renovation. The ornate decorations in [the top] picture were the work of a seminary rector, Father Paulinus Trost, a talented painter. He drew his own image on a mural depicting Purgatory on the sanctuary walls. The renovated chapel [below] stresses the theme, "Blood of Jesus—Center of Earthly and Heavenly Liturgy." The figure of Christ dominates the mosaic behind the altar, which emphasizes the theme of the Precious Blood in the life of the Mystical Body. The chapel also has an imposing stained glass window honoring the Assumption. The new organ, placed in the sanctuary, contains 1,600 pipes, arranged in a series, from 16 feet high down to the size of a pencil.” (See The Catholic Telegraph-Register, October 6, 1961)

says it all

We have all known this person, now he's in the White House

Don't Save This Drowning Man

I feel as if I know the President. Like I have met him before.

Some years back I worked with a man who I will call Drew. Drew was the epitome of the Peter principle. Promoted to a level of gross incompetence, in this case a Vice President in a large international firm, Drew was in way over his head. Drew was tall and extroverted to the Nth degree giving him the illusion of command and competence. He spoke real fast and had command of litany of buzzwords that could make your head spin. I suppose this is part of what helped him make it to his position.

I remember when I first met him (he had recently been promoted) he wanted me to get something done for him quickly that had been ignored by him and his staff for some time. Drew was already in way over his head and he knew it and his tail was on the line and he needed me to help him save it. But rather that asking me to do help him out in a pinch and acknowledging the lateness of his request he decided to threaten me while dropping the fact that he was a vice president at least five times in a three minute conversation. When I told him I had my own problems he decided to go above my head. Unfortunately for Drew, the CFO of the company at that time was patient and listened to facts. He chastised Drew for his tardiness and threatening behavior and asked me to see what I could do to help.

That is the way it is with charismatic demagogues particularly when they are in way over their heads. They live in perpetual fear of being found out and they constantly feel the need to double down when they are already out of chips.

So it is with the President. I write this on the eve of the President's speech to congress attempting to save his reputation and his troubled healthcare reform. The President, in over his head and too clever by half, tried to force this health care bill down our throats quickly and by using Congress as cover insulate himself from any criticism. That manifestly did not work. The public outcry against the liberal wishlist of ideas is like nothing that has been seen in this country in recent memory. But rather than reassess his approach and his plans, all indications are that the President intends to double down and force a vote - public option and all. If he does he may succeed in destroying his own party.

Back to Drew for a moment. His general incompetence at last made manifest, Drew was given notice that his contract would not be extended and they allowed him to work for a few months before showing him the door. But Drew, so fearful of admitting his own shortcomings spent those final months tirelessly trying to ruin the reputations of all with whom he was associated. Blaming anyone and everyone else for his own failures. Eventually, they asked Drew not to come to work anymore.

This is the way it works folks. Like the drowning man, the exposed charismatic demagogue will take all around him down with him rather than ever admit he cannot swim. The Democrats in Congress should be wary of trying to save this drowning man lest they be dragged to the bottom as well.

liberal sacrimentals

This combined with the high amount of hormones in our water, (where do you think all that goes after our bodies digest it, pee, and water treatment does not remove it), but the pill is the holy grail of liberals, so get used to more

Did you know the World Health Organization ranks The Pill as a Group I carcinogen?

by intern Anne Marie

Perhaps the best-kept secret of modern medicine is the link between oral contraceptives and increased breast cancer risk.

While combined oral contraceptives, better known as The Pill, rank as Group I carcinogens according to a 2005 report released by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an arm of the World Health Organization, doctors continue to routinely prescribe the pill for a variety of conditions, ranging from acne to birth control (American Cancer Society, 2008)....

Combined oral contraceptives are composed of estrogen and progesterone or progestin, a synthetic form of progesterone. Estrogen and progesterone are female sex hormones; estrogen thickens the lining of the uterus, and progesterone/progestin prepares the endometrium for implantation of the egg. (National Cancer Institute, 2006).

The reasoning behind a combination of estrogen and progesterone/progestin is that estrogen given on its own increases the risk of uterine cancer. Taking a combination of the 2 confers protection from uterine cancer but increases breast cancer risk.

In short, the science behind the increased breast cancer risk stems from 2 primary mechanisms. In both instances, progesterone/progestin becomes a double-edged sword, as it confers protection from increased uterine cancer risk but "gives permission" for estrogen to negatively affect breast DNA.

First, the combination of estrogen plus progesterone/progestin functions as a genotoxin, meaning it directly damages DNA in the breast. Several estrogen metabolites, or breakdown products, including 4-hydroxy-catechol-estrogen quinine, have been proven to function in this manner (Lanfranchi, 2007).

Second, estrogen functions as a mitogen, or cancer promoter, and estrogen promotes cancer in 2 ways. As seen in the graph, it stimulates an explosion of rapid proliferation of cells in breast lobules, causing a greater likelihood of mutations with the increased rate of division.

Additionally, estrogen promotes speedier development of any already-cancerous cells in the breast (Lanfranchi, 2007).

Why doesn't the American public know about the increased risk? Why is the teenage girl on the pill for acne unaware of the health risks involved? Women deserve better.