The article The War Against Girls in last Saturday’s Wall Street Journal reviews Mara Hvistendahl’s book “Unnatural Selection”, where the title of this post comes from. As a strong anti-abortion advocate and even stronger pro-adoption supporter, the reality of folks around the world using technology to kill their own unborn daughters to have a larger percentage of sons is abhorrent. Another terror brought about by the ‘elite’ among us.

But oddly enough, Ms. Hvistendahl notes, it is usually a country’s rich, not its poor, who lead the way in choosing against girls. “Sex selection typically starts with the urban, well-educated stratum of society,” she writes. “Elites are the first to gain access to a new technology, whether MRI scanners, smart phones—or ultrasound machines.” The behavior of elites then filters down until it becomes part of the broader culture. Even more unexpectedly, the decision to abort baby girls is usually made by women—either by the mother or, sometimes, the mother-in-law.

Bad things happen when there aren’t enough women to tame and civilize the men in a society.

Ms. Hvistendahl argues that such imbalances are portents of Very Bad Things to come. “Historically, societies in which men substantially outnumber women are not nice places to live,” she writes. “Often they are unstable. Sometimes they are violent.” As examples she notes that high sex ratios were at play as far back as the fourth century B.C. in Athens—a particularly bloody time in Greek history—and during China’s Taiping Rebellion in the mid-19th century. (Both eras featured widespread female infanticide.) She also notes that the dearth of women along the frontier in the American West probably had a lot to do with its being wild. In 1870, for instance, the sex ratio west of the Mississippi was 125 to 100. In California it was 166 to 100. In Nevada it was 320. In western Kansas, it was 768.

The article wraps up with some conclusions that I heartily agree with:

Despite the author’s intentions, “Unnatural Selection” might be one of the most consequential books ever written in the campaign against abortion. It is aimed, like a heat-seeking missile, against the entire intellectual framework of “choice.” For if “choice” is the moral imperative guiding abortion, then there is no way to take a stand against “gendercide.” Aborting a baby because she is a girl is no different from aborting a baby because she has Down syndrome or because the mother’s “mental health” requires it. Choice is choice. One Indian abortionist tells Ms. Hvistendahl: “I have patients who come and say ‘I want to abort because if this baby is born it will be a Gemini, but I want a Libra.’ ”

This is where choice leads. This is where choice has already led. Ms. Hvistendahl may wish the matter otherwise, but there are only two alternatives: Restrict abortion or accept the slaughter of millions of baby girls and the calamities that are likely to come with it.

It’s time to overturn Roe v. Wade, and “educate” our girls and young women that an unwanted pregnancy can become a very special gift through the selflessness of giving that child up for adoption. One can only hope that we are not so totally gone over to narcissism for this to eventually come to pass.

Sphere It

I haven’t been following this “Gunwalker” thing at all, but an Instapundit link this AM to Bob Owens’ piece at Pajamas Media is a pretty thorough wrap up of what just may be the Obama administration’s scandal of scandals.

This operation could not have taken place without the cooperation of the Department of Homeland Security — DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano should bear responsibility for her agency’s actions. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has apparently lied to Congress about when he knew of Gunwalker, and considering the scope of the operation it is implausible that he was not involved in its implementation.

It is only reasonable to believe that knowledge of this operation did not stop with cabinet-level officials. If the directors of so many executive branch agencies were involved in this scandal, as it appears they might have been, it is plausible that knowledge of this scheme — perhaps the origination? — came directly from the White House.

One might ask what our laws demand of officials complicit in a plot that used the power of U.S. law enforcement agencies to pressure gun shops into selling weapons to narco-terrorists. If this is indeed the case, impeachment and resignations are just the beginning of the process of seeking justice. Those who authorized this operation and facilitated what was essentially a gunrunning operation to achieve what appears to be a political goal may very well be guilty of a number of felonies — and wanted for extradition to face justice in Mexican courts as well.

Under Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution, any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them aid and comfort is guilty of the act of treason. Gunwalker supplied narco-terrorists on our southern border with thousands of firearms.

All of this to foist onto the American public, with the help of the mainstream media of course, what is called “the 90% lie“, ”the administration’s false accusation that 90 percent of the guns used in cartel crime could be traced to U.S. gun shops.” It was an all-out effort to cause a public outcry against the 2nd Amendment and to increase demands for ever more stringent gun control laws.

Seeing how this administration’s Justice Department has conducted itself over the last 2-1/2 years there’s little hope that anyone at Holder’s level or above will face scrutiny, unless the House and Senate’s efforts to collect documents and hold hearings bear fruit.

Odd as it seems, CBS News has been on this for months:

CBS News has learned that House and Senate investigators have descended upon Arizona for their probe into the so-called “Gunwalker” scandal. They’re gathering interviews from witnesses, including ATF insiders and area gun shop owners. Sources tell CBS News the congressional investigators are frustrated by what they view as across-the-board stonewalling by government agencies which have refused to provide information in the investigation. Government officials have said they won’t provide information while their own investigations are ongoing.

More CBS links here:

Sharyl Attkisson’s original “gunwalking” report
ATF agent cooperates in gunwalking investigation
ATF gunwalking: Who knew, and how high up?
Agent: I was ordered to let U.S. guns into Mexico
ATF gunwalking scandal: Second agent speaks out

Getting back to the opening of Bob Owen’s piece, funny how the “little things” can bring down an entire administration:

Major scandals don’t always have the most dramatic beginnings. Andrew Johnson was impeached for replacing the sitting secretary of war; Richard Nixon’s collapse started with a breaking and entering. Bill Clinton’s infamy was guaranteed for quibbling over the definition of a common verb.

It now appears that high-ranking officials in the Obama administration may be writing the end of their careers and risking a life behind bars by arguing about the technical definition of “walking” firearms.

Here’s hoping . . .

Sphere It

[In June of 2005 I wrote this post about my dad for Father's Day, and re-posted it a few years later . . . it's no less pertinent today -- so, please enjoy!]

---

There are only a few things that I wouldn’t give up to be able to sit at that table again and talk with that farsighted, hairy guy, among them my mortal soul, but almost everything else would be in play.

That’s MY DAD! All 190-some-odd pounds of rough hewn, sunburned, 100% human male. Sometimes I wonder what he really thought of his 125-pound, pink-skinned, soft-handed son who couldn’t chop wood for poop, whose pigs got loose and got run over on the highway, who was deathly afraid of snakes and who refused to go to medical school because he wanted to be “an artist”. But, no matter what, as long as I gave whatever I was doing a 100% effort, he was with me in support. That was his way. I actually thought it was a little weird, at the time.

Now that I am getting to know him as he was at 25, I see that he made his own way in life, against tremendous odds, and without much, if any, help. He was just trying to save me from having to learn a lot of life’s lessons the hard way. Unfortunately, there is only one way to learn life’s lessons, and that is to live through them, and pay attention! Many of my generation still have not learned that one. God help us, if things don’t change, it looks as if we’ll be known as the “Gimme gimmes” all the way to the grave.

I loved this man. We never had a major falling out — although he was never fond of my mid-back-length hair in the 70s — so we never had to have one of those later-in-life reunions. When my son’s mother left me in California and returned with him to northeastern Oklahoma, Dad stepped up and did what he could to provide some Baker male influence for the boy. They loved each other so very much. I was proud, but also a bit jealous at being out-of-the-loop.

Sometime in the late 80s, he started interacting with everyone a bit less than usual, and minor chores like sharpening the lawnmower blade, or fixing a rusty door hinge became huge tasks that were too confusing for him. By the early 90s, he had forgotten who I was, although he was more than content to sit and have pleasant conversation with this stranger from California, wherever that was. In late April, 1995, he left us for a better place. Mom waited around until January, ’03 before deciding it was time to finally join him.

Lover, warrior, husband, father, grandfather, church deacon, Sunday school teacher, pharmacist, business owner, friend –

Most definitely a member of “The Greatest Generation”.

Happy Father’s Day, Dad . . . I miss you. (db)

Sphere It

Over at Ace of Spades HQs there is an interesting take of what Sarah HAS to do . . . first!

John Ziegler: Palin Can’t Win And It Would Be Harmful To Even Try

Palin skeptics like me have long maintained the order of things should be thus:

Step 1. Palin demonstrates an ability to change opinions about her, and gain general credibility as a commander in chief.

Step 2. If an only if Step 1 is successfully fulfilled, we proceed to nominate her for our candidate for President of the United States of America.

Palin’s strongest fans have a different conception of the order of things:

Step 1. We nominate Palin as our candidate for President of the Untied States of America.

Step 2. Now that we’ve given Palin our own “credibility,” we see if she can leverage that into changing perceptions about her and gaining her own credibility to administer the highest office in the world.

Do Palin’s fans understand the order of things I’ve suggested is a relatively low-risk play, while their preferred order is extraordinarily high-risk, as we would, if we followed their advice, go into the general election without knowing if it’s actually possible for Palin to persuade any of the 64% who have already declared they will not support her under any circumstances?

Here’s my grief and here’s my beef: There is no reason that my suggested Step one could not, or should not, be the actual first step.

Ace is NOT a Palin devotee, and as such brings to the discussion clear analysis of the situation the Palinistas are not capable of. I actually like Palin a lot, but I do agree with Ace — if she doesn’t PROVE that she has the gravitas necessary to win, by changing minds and perceptions of her BEFORE the primaries, then she should not run in 2012, and we would be foolish to have her as our nominee. The stakes are too high.

Accordingly, Romney HAS to get out from under the crushing weight of his Massachusetts’ health care program that at least one of his competitors is now calling “Obamneycare”! Allahpundit over at Hot Air thinks this next GOP debate might be worth a watch:

Via the Corner, I can’t shake the strange feeling that (a) we might hear him use this coinage again on the trail a time or two, starting tomorrow night in New Hampshire, and (b) the expected gang-up on Romney at the CNN debate is going to be way fiercer — and more entertaining — than anyone expected.

Just one question: Will it work?

If Romney can’t change the narrative over to the failing economy and jobs creation he won’t get the nomination either. He also needs to learn to CONNECT. A cerebral candidate will not win this election, would that it could be so — we are now media-trained to be emotionally manipulated and anyone that wants the Presidency has to be able to do that. Would be nice if they could deliver the goods after being elected!

Maybe we can avoid a repeat of this?

Sphere It

More lying by the eco-hysterics — this time “Gasland” documentary creator leaving out some “inconvenient truths”, like reports from 1936 and 1976 stating that there was worrisome amounts of methane in the aquifer before any Fracking by the gas industry.

Over at Not Evil, Just Wrong we get the skinny:

Josh Fox has responded to valid journalistic questions about his documentary Gasland by stifling the freedom of the press.

I travelled [sic] to Chicago for a Q&A where Fox admitted hiding facts from his documentary that contradicted his scaremongering about drilling for natural gas.

And Fox’s response when we posted the video on YouTube – he got his lawyers to have YouTube pull it down.

That’s right – he has tried to use lawyers to silence journalist from asking difficult questions and putting his answers to those questions on the Internet.

Yup — can’t win with the truth, so they win with trial lawyers . . . same ol’, same ‘ol . . . like the Talking Head’s song, “Same as it ever was.”

Sphere It