The Demographic Winter

Yesterday I had a conversation with two young mothers who desired large families, but felt sheepish about it. It's not the thing to do, anymore. I shared a few facts about the world's population trends with them and they were utterly amazed. I am amazed how folks are still making life decisions based on the media scare tactics of a generation ago. Last night, I read a wonderful speech that Don Feder presented in Riga, Latvia that explained the current situation very succinctly. Here is his assessment of Russia's approaching demographic winter:

This catastrophe in the making can be most clearly seen in Russia. What
Lenin, Stalin and Hitler failed to accomplish, the Russian people are doing
to themselves. You might call it auto-genocide.

In Russia, the fertility rate is 1.17 (down from 2.4 in 1990, a decline
of over 50%). Russia is losing three-quarters of a million people a year.
Its current population of 145 million is expected to be reduced by a third
by 2050. In Russia today, almost as many children are aborted as are born
alive (1.5 million to 1.6 million).

The Russian people occupy 17 million sq. km, the largest land mass on
earth. By comparison, the United States has 9.6 million sq. km. and a
population of 303 million -- in other words, a little less than half of
Russia's land mass and more than twice its population.

Where will the Russia of 2050 find the soldiers to guard its frontiers?
Where will it find the workers to operate its factories and mines, to grow
its crops and run its hospitals and schools?

Read the whole thing. If you still believe what you were taught in school about overpopulation, you'll be shocked.

Of course, the Word of God explained this long ago:

In a multitude of people is a king’s honor,

But in the lack of people is the downfall of a prince.

H/T Teresa Wirtz

The Feeling is Mutual

I couldn't believe that Barack Obama slipped up on Meet the Press and actually said it:

I do not believe being gay or lesbian is a choice, and so I disagree with
Reverend McClurkin, but understand, Tim, part of what I hope to offer as
president is the ability to reach to people that I don't agree with, and the evangelical community is one where the Democratic Party, I
think, we have generally seen as hostile, we haven't been reaching out to them,
and I think that if we're going to make significant progress on critical issues
that we face, whether it's education, or health care, or energy, or our foreign
policy in this country, we've got to be able to get beyond our comfort
zones and just talk to people we don't like (pause) or just talk to
people we like, or people that we agree with on every single issue. [emphasis
mine]

So... when he says "we" in this context, I think he's pretty clearly speaking of the Democrat Party and according to Mr. Obama, they just don't like evangelical Christians. I hope you folks who vote Democratic because Granddaddy did will listen when they say it themselves. The Democratic Party is not your friend.

H/T Rush - Thanks!

Taxpayers Win!

I am delighted to report that the taxpayers of Johnston County (and the rest of North Carolina, too) have refused to offer the wino another drink: In Johnston County, voters defeated the real estate transfer tax referendum by 84-16 percent and the sales tax by a four to one margin. It has long been my policy to vote no to all tax referendums until I see some evidence that government at that level is using the money they do have wisely. Hasn't happened yet.

"A Legislative Solution"

I was disgusted but not surprised to hear today that Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi would like to see "a legislative solution" to talk radio. What? That's right, they would like to see government control of privately funded speech because they don't like the content of it. Folks, that's not a solution, that's censorship and it's expressly forbidden by the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of
the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances.

That is precisely what is meant by "no law" "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;" ladies!

The liberals have been confused about censorship for a long time, though. If people tried to persuade a store not to carry an obscense book or a school not to require the children to read an inappropriate book, they screamed censorship. Friends, choosing not to sell something your customers disapprove of is not censorship. Not requiring something is not censorship.

Censorship is government control of speech and publication --- and that's what they are calling for now. Because, in the liberal mentality, if the poor dumb citizenry won't choose to believe or do what you want them to, then use the force of law. There's another name for that: tyranny.