Live Breathe and Die

Archive for March, 2008

Once again, conservatives are proven right and liberals are wrong, but now its too late to celebrate.  Our courts, our schools and our liberal politicians have created a culture that is destroying us from within, and new evidence of this will make no difference.

The Centers for Disease Control just released a nationwide study revealing the prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases in teen girls (14-19).  The results are startling and disconcerting, but fully expected in light of the liberal mandate for dealing with sex and teens.

The CDC study revealed that 1 in 4 teenage girls in the U.S. has a sexually transmitted disease!  That’s more than 3 million girls nationwide.

What are we to make of this revelation?  We know that conservatives and Christian groups have been making the case for abstinence and abstinence education for several years.  Liberals at every level of government and leaders in the public schools and NEA have resisted such an approach, labeling it as unreasonable and archaic.  Now we see the results, once again, of the liberal approach to managing a society.  It is nothing short of disastrous.

Nearly half of the African-American teen girls in the study had a STD.  This is yet another sign that the liberal, Democratic machine that assumes the black vote, is doing nothing in return to help blacks in America.  The liberal approach means that a large portion of young, black woman are at risk for cervical cancer and infertility.  The Democratic Party has failed blacks in so many ways.  We saw generations of people enslaved in the welfare state before conservatives came to their rescue, seeing them as real people who take pride in earning a living.

Liberal judges are just as at fault for this national epidemic of STD’s in young American woman.  Their efforts to keep parents from being more informed, and striking down attempts to teach abstinence, have resulted in a culture out of control and on the brink of implosion.

The study found that almost half of sexually active girls had one of four STD’s which they identified as most common.  The results of the study not only illustrate the dire consequences of ignoring the role of abstinence education, but also the sad reality of a generation that has turned its back on basic Christian moral precepts.

As we learned with the welfare state, and we are now learning in California with the environmentalist halt to nuclear energy, the liberal approach is having a decidedly negative impact on our society and culture.

This November, millions will go to the polls and vote for a liberal candidate to be our next president.  They will ignore the impact of liberal policy and ignore facts.  Future studies will confirm more ills in our society, and the liberal machine that created them will go unscathed and unquestioned.  America’s worst days are ahead and the policy questions that should be asked, will only be ignored.

As with so many other issues that face Americans every day, the question of dealing with epidemic disease in our teenagers will die on the vine.  The liberals in education, the press and in politics will frame the common sense approach of abstinence education as a radical Christian-right idea and dispense with it.  The numbers of young people with a communicable disease will increase and our health care costs will continue to rise. 

Liberal philosophy is much like communist philosophy; it has been proven wrong, but still it flourishes. 

The radical left in this country has made it their science to rely on bad science.  The latest example is so well documented that it’s pitiful as well as disgusting.

The left in Britain and the U.S. has been on a media supported campaign to ban plastic bags worldwide.  The left claims that 100,000 animals and a million seabirds are killed every year by plastic bags.  They also claim that plastic bags are environmentally unfriendly. On the last point, they should really ask the people who run landfills.

The people who run landfills will tell you that plastic bags take up far less space than paper bags.  Space is crucial to landfills, and plastic bags are welcome as preferable to paper.  They take a lot less trees to produce also.

The real flawed science with the plastic bag issue is what the far left claims about animal and seabird deaths.  On this point, they are completely mistaken and twisting a set of known non-facts to fit their claims. This is a pattern with the left and we have seen it with everything from their claims that the President was involved with 9/11 to dire warnings about global warming.

Can you just picture a seal or dolphin getting tangled up in your typical grocery store plastic bag?  Of course you can’t.  The bag is too small to envelope a large mammal and too open to trap a bird.  This is just part of the flawed thinking that goes into their claims.  Studies on the subject of debris that entangles animals and birds points to discarded fishing gear and fishing line, with no mention of plastic bags.

So how is it that the extreme left and the radical environmentalists can make such unsupported claims?  You have to go back to two studies; one in the eighties and one conducted six years ago.  The first study concluded that fishing nets killed a hundred thousand mammals a year.  The later study misquoted the earlier study and said that the culprit was plastic bags; clearly a mistake. 

The far left in Britain and the U.S. then jump on the later study without questioning it’s accuracy.  The authors of the more recent study finally corrected their mistake a year ago, but the left-wingers ignore the new information.  This is how the left operates

Regions of the U.S. have just been through one of the longest, coldest winters on record.  We have empirical evidence that this is true.  People can go outside and feel the wet snow and experience the brutal cold against their skin.  Does the left want to supply us with any empirical evidence that proves global warming?

This brings me around to a political question: who do you want running our country?  Should we rely on a President who believes in unsupported claims, pseudo-science, rumor and false panic to make decisions that effect us all?  Or should we elect someone who considers real science, empirical evidence and time-tested information to make their decisions?  The difference has a very real impact on every American. Think about the plastic bag.