Women who have an abor­tion are more likely to suf­fer sub­se­quent poor men­tal health, accord­ing to a new survey.

The Uni­ver­sity of Otago study found women who had an abor­tion faced a 30 per cent increase in the risk of devel­op­ing com­mon men­tal health prob­lems such as depres­sion and anxiety.

Well duh!

Of course there is a link, you have to have men­tal health issues any­way in order get an abor­tion in the first instance. That is how we effec­tively have abor­tion on demand even when the law pro­hibits it.

The grounds for abor­tion are:

• Seri­ous dan­ger to life
• Seri­ous dan­ger to phys­i­cal health
• Seri­ous dan­ger to men­tal health
• Any form of incest or sex­ual rela­tions with a guardian
• Men­tal subnormality
• Fetal abnor­mal­ity (added in the July 1978 amendment)

In the lat­est sta­tis­tics for abor­tion that show the Kiwi women mur­dered over 18,000 chil­dren, 98–99 per­cent of all abor­tions are per­formed because of seri­ous dan­ger to the men­tal health of the woman.

Got that, our chil­dren are being killed because of dan­ger of men­tal health of the woman. End of story, there is no sec­ond fac­tor, the num­bers are unequiv­o­cal, fort you have to have a dan­ger to your men­tal health before you have the abor­tion, it then stands to rea­son that wwomen who have an abor­tion then have a 30% increased risk fac­tor for fur­ther men­tal health issues. Of the 18,380 abor­tions per­formed last year, 18196 of them were to women who sup­pos­edly faced seri­ous dan­ger to their men­tal health. That is a whole lot of crazy peo­ple roam­ing around out there.

Of course that is noth­ing com­pared to the 100% fatal­ity sta­tis­tics for the babies that were aborted, but no one asked their opinion.

While I am talk­ing about abor­tion, how come sup­port­ers of abor­tion worry about the num­bers hav­ing abor­tions? I don’t get it, I thought it was about a wom­ans right to choose, surely that isn’t a bad thing?

We have cam­paigns to stop peo­ple smok­ing. Why? Because it is BAD. We have cam­paigns to stop peo­ple tak­ing drugs. Why? Because they are BAD……now we are going to have a camoaign to reduce the  num­bers of abor­tions which wwe have already estab­lished was about a woman choos­ing, so how can that be bad? Surely we’d like the num­bers to go up?

Unless of course abor­tion really is bad…..I guess now there are stud­ies show­ing that you have 30% increased like­li­hood of men­tal ill­ness that’d be a start to telling us abor­tion is bad. Of course we have already estab­lished that you have to be in dan­ger of being men­tal any­way to get an abortion.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Vis­count Mon­ck­ton has done the unthink­able, he has chal­lenged the great, the only, the won­drous, Obama and his woolly think­ing on Cli­mate Change.

Obama said;

“Few chal­lenges fac­ing Amer­ica and the world are more urgent than com­bat­ing cli­mate change. The sci­ence is beyond dis­pute and the facts are clear. Sea lev­els are ris­ing. Coast­lines are shrink­ing. We’ve seen record drought, spread­ing famine, and storms that are grow­ing stronger with each pass­ing hur­ri­cane sea­son. Cli­mate change and our depen­dence on for­eign oil, if left unad­dressed, will con­tinue to weaken our econ­omy and threaten our national security.”

Vis­count Mon­ck­ton retorts with facts;

Few chal­lenges fac­ing Amer­ica and the world are less urgent than com­bat­ing the non-problem of “global warm­ing”. On all mea­sures, there has been no increase in global mean sur­face tem­per­a­tures since 1995; and, accord­ing to the Uni­ver­sity of Alabama at Huntsville, near-surface tem­per­a­tures in 2008 will be lower than in 1980, 28 years ago, the first com­plete year of satel­lite obser­va­tions. On all mea­sures, global tem­per­a­tures have been falling for seven full years since late 2001. The January-to-January fall in tem­per­a­tures between 2007 and 2008 was the great­est since global tem­per­a­ture records were first com­piled in 1880, 128 years ago. The rate of new Arc­tic sea-ice for­ma­tion in mid-October 2008 was among the fastest since satel­lite records began almost 30 years ago. There has been no decline what­so­ever in the total global extent of sea ice since satel­lite records began. New records for the extent of northern-hemisphere snow cover were observed by the satel­lites in the win­ter of 2001 and again in 2007. This year, many ski resorts are open­ing early as Arc­tic weather strikes. Many tem­per­a­ture sta­tions in the north­ern hemi­sphere recorded record low tem­per­a­tures in October/November 2008.

So Obama got it wrong, in fact so spec­tac­u­larly wrong it beg­gars belief. One won­ders when the rest of the “believ­ers” are going to wake up the the real facts not the man­u­fac­tur­ered pseudo-science of the IPCC. Yet these tossers all say that the sci­ence is set­tled, that there is con­sen­sus, this most demon­stra­bly is false as Vis­count Mon­ck­ton points outs;

Obama is not cor­rect to say, “The sci­ence is not in dis­pute.” Across all dis­ci­plines, some 31,000 sci­en­tists approached by the Ore­gon Insti­tute of Sci­ence and Med­i­cine in 2007/8 signed a dec­la­ra­tion to the effect that “global warm­ing” is not a global cri­sis and that humankind has very lit­tle influ­ence over the cli­mate. A sur­vey of cli­ma­tol­o­gists and sci­en­tists in related fields by Van Storch (2005/6) estab­lished that a con­sid­er­able pro­por­tion of respon­dents did not believe the alarmist notions dis­sem­i­nated by Al Gore or the UN climate-change panel. The office of Sen­a­tor James Inhofe main­tains a list of more than 500 sci­en­tists in cli­mate and related fields who have made pub­lic state­ments ques­tion­ing at least one aspect of what has falsely been pre­sented as a sci­en­tific “consensus”.

In any event, as the late Michael Crich­ton used to say, “If it’s con­sen­sus, it isn’t sci­ence: if it’s sci­ence, it isn’t con­sen­sus.” Sci­ence is not done by con­sen­sus: and, even if it were, the evi­dence is that a very con­sid­er­able body of sci­en­tists both within and beyond cli­ma­tol­ogy have grave doubts about the notion of a sig­nif­i­cant and dam­ag­ing human influ­ence on the climate.

Vis­count Mon­ck­ton goes on to destroy any shred of cred­i­bil­ity Obama has on this issue, line by line and detail by detail. Warmists and other co-religionists would do well to edu­cate them­selves. Of course, for dar­ing to dif­fer in opin­ion from the Great Obama he will now be vil­i­fied. Be that as it may, the truth is the truth and facts are facts.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

DPF has enthu­si­as­ti­cally blogged about the excit­ing vote split­ting sta­tis­tics, he even said they were “great fun”.

Ahem…great fun is any­thing but sta­tis­tics, even get­ting the clap from a hooker would be great fun when com­pared to statistics.

On the other hand though, the vote split­ting stats show where the trai­tors are;

1. ACT – 72.6% voted for the National can­di­date, 4.9% Labour cand, 16.4% ACT cand
2. National – 85.5% National, 3.5% Labour, 4.2% ACT

ACT has 4.9% of their sup­port­ers as trai­tors and National 3.5%. These are the vot­ers that “pre­tend” to sup­port you and at the same time vote pinko. I can’t be both­ered com­ment­ing on the pinko par­ties, who cares about them anyway?

If this was Zim­babwe we would at least be able to find out who they were so as to send them off for a spot of re-education.

Pop­u­lar­ity: unranked [?]

Niel­son, Tay­lor & Clark: Govt should go with emis­sions trad­ing scheme – The new Government’s deci­sion to put the emis­sions trad­ing scheme on hold pend­ing a review came as a bolt from the blue. Stake­hold­ers had been led to expect that there would be some changes to the ETS but the pro­posal to pass leg­is­la­tion… [NZ Her­ald Pol­i­tics]

Labour’s stooges are carp­ing on end­lessly about the Emmis­sions Trad­ing Scheme and the mora­to­rium that has been placed on it by National until a select com­mit­tee can review the science.

these folk are in “result denial” and they still think they are rel­e­vant. Sadly for them their access to patsy min­is­ters has been cut off and that is the real rea­son they are act­ing like a buch of head­less chooks.

As a pub­lic ser­vice peo­ple should direct them to this web­site so they can digest, slowly, the clearly unpalat­able news of the demise of the cor­rupt and crooked Labour First government.

While we are at it we should sim­i­larly point Jeanette to the same page. She seems to think Kiwi’s care more than about 7% about the envi­ron­ment. Her post on Frog Blog is noth­ing more than a rant and cry.

Pop­u­lar­ity: unranked [?]

Almost there folks, with con­tri­bu­tions of a $100.00 each from Aaron Gilmore and Craig Foss I am creep­ing toward the top 50 and cur­rently sit­ting at 63.

I chal­lenge all other National and Act MP’s to bet­ter their dona­tions espe­cially the ones I inter­viewed for the Blog­Mo­bile. Don’t let Cac­tus Kate and David Far­rar show you up.

Let’s show Movem­ber some real Tory Char­ity. Donate here, and think of the poor Labour MP’s as they suf­fer under the depres­sion of los­ing the election.

Remem­ber, all dona­tions over $10 are tax deductible.

The money raised by Movem­ber is used to raise aware­ness of men’s health issues and donated to the Can­cer Soci­ety of New Zealand and the Men­tal Health Foun­da­tion of New Zealand. These two char­i­ties will use the money raised to fund research and increase sup­port net­works for those affected with prostate can­cer and expe­ri­enc­ing depres­sion espe­cially those poor Labour MP’s.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Today is the last day of Movember.

Thank you to all my donors. I have made it to the Top 100.

If you would like to help kick me higher then please click the link to donate to my Mo’. I only need $200 to get in the top 50.

Remem­ber, all dona­tions over $10 are tax deductible.

The money raised by Movem­ber is used to raise aware­ness of men’s health issues and donated to the Can­cer Soci­ety of New Zealand and the Men­tal Health Foun­da­tion of New Zealand. These two char­i­ties will use the money raised to fund research and increase sup­port net­works for those affected with prostate can­cer and expe­ri­enc­ing depression.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Mike “Fat Tony” Williams has announced that he will resign from the Pres­i­dency of the Labour Party this week.

He still hasn’t announced his res­ig­na­tion from all the Gov­ern­ment appoint­ments he has recieved as a loyal stooge to Helen Clark.

Some peo­ple may ask why he should resign. The answer of course is sim­ple. He has no integrity. As DPF said;

Williams tried to prove that the Prime Min­is­ter was NZ’s biggest fraud­ster. He per­son­ally drove and man­aged an attempted smear cam­paign. He even blogged about it as Bat­man. He sent copies of doc­u­ments to jour­nal­ists at their home addresses. Hav­ing done all that, how ca he expect to be trusted to gov­ern any crown entity on behalf of the new Government?

That is exactly why he should be sacked if he hasn’t yet resigned.

It is expected that Andrew Lit­tle will replace “Fat Tony” as pres­i­dent of the Labour mak­ing a mock­ery of the con­tention that the EPMU has noth­ing at all to do with the admin­is­tra­tion of the Labour Party. Andrew Lit­tle is ada­ment that he can remain as the boss of teh EPMU at the same time.

I think it may well be time for some reform of the Union indus­try and a clar­i­fi­ca­tion in law as to who/what can be a mem­ber of a polit­i­cal party.

I would change the law so that only nat­ural per­sons can be a mem­ber or affli­ate or any other weasel word used to describe an asso­ci­a­tion of a polit­i­cal party.

Then I would estab­lish a Unions Com­mis­sion in order to mon­i­tor unions. They would be charged with reg­is­tra­tion of unions and ensur­ing that they are fis­cally pru­dent with mem­bers funds, trans­par­ently demo­c­ra­tic and act­ing at all times in the fidu­ciary and other inter­ests of their mem­bers and only their members.

If it was good enough to reg­u­late the Real Estate indus­try then it should be good enough to reg­u­late the Union Indus­try. My first appoint­ments to the com­mis­sion would be Matt McCarten and Laila Harre.

Pop­u­lar­ity: unranked [?]

Bill Ral­ston : Play­ing the fool with our money – Mes­sage to John Key and his new Gov­ern­ment: No pres­sure. Well, just a global finan­cial mar­ket col­lapse, a deep­en­ing reces­sion, a grow­ing deficit, a cri­sis meet­ing with many of the world’s top lead­ers, shrink­ing com­mod­ity prices… [NZ Her­ald Pol­i­tics]

Bill Ral­ston suc­cinctly explains the tough times that Bill Eng­lish is hav­ing to grap­ple with in try­ing to lessen the effects of the reces­sion in new Zealand after inher­it­ing a finan­cial mess from the pre­vi­ous Labour Government.

Though it is use­ful to look at this, he really is writ­ing about the par­lous state of TVNZ and their merry-go-round with our money.

It should not take long for Cole­man to won­der why a com­pany that rakes in more than $300 mil­lion a year in rev­enue makes no profit other than the sub­sidy it gets from him.

His next thought will prob­a­bly be to ques­tion how much of the $79 mil­lion fund­ing for the free­view dig­i­tal chan­nels TVNZ 6 and TVNZ 7 is being used to cross-subsidise the main­stream oper­a­tions of TV ONE and TV3.

Indeed, espe­cially when you con­sider that TVNZ 7, I heard, was named that because of the antic­i­pated total audience.

Ral­ston serves up a good warn­ing to the fis­cal fools at TVNZ.

Par­al­lel to the Government’s 100-day plan focus­ing on pri­or­i­ties like the econ­omy and law and order is a second-tier pro­gramme that includes a “reform” of TVNZ and the wider broad­cast­ing indus­try. I sus­pect Cole­man is deter­mined to screw more div­i­dends out of TVNZ, remove gov­ern­ment sub­si­dies from it and make it com­pletely commercial.

Cole­man may also wish to make an exam­ple of a state-owned com­pany that has been play­ing silly bug­gers with tax­payer money.

Heads will roll in one of those peri­odic TVNZ purges.

I’d start with some of the gov­ern­ment stooges on the board.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Iain Dale has a very good post on polit­i­cal blog­ging in the UK. There are many sim­i­lar­i­ties between the UK and NZ in terms of the evo­lu­tion of the polit­i­cal blogosphere.

Espe­cially around read­er­ship, MSM reac­tion to blog­gers and rev­enues from blogging.

Well worth a read, even though it is lengthy.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Andrew Bolt has a short but accu­rate post worty of post­ing in its entirety;

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Mayor Andrew Williams, the cock of Camp­bells Bay, threat­ens to sue Wha­le­oil for call­ing him “mental”.

Mayor Andrew Williams, the cock of Camp­bells Bay calls a North Shore City coun­cil­lor a smar­tarse, and is asked to leave an offi­cial coun­cil com­mit­tee meet­ing as a result.

Truly he is a cock, men­tal and a fool while defin­ing dou­ble stan­dard with his very exis­tence. I guess like most bul­lies, he likes to dish it out, but can’t take it back.

Still wait­ing for the writ, tosser.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Just what every man wants for Christ­mas. A cook­book about testicles.

To quote Boing Boing;

Check out The Tes­ti­cle Cook­book: Cook­ing with Balls by Ser­bian chef, Ljubomir Erovic. This mul­ti­me­dia cook­book tells you how to peel and slice ani­mal tes­ti­cles to make such won­ders as Tes­ti­cle Pizza – just add your own toppings!

Wouldn’t you know *it* tastes like chicken. But *it* works like Viagra!

Here in Kiwi­land you are not a real man until you have eaten Moun­tain Oys­ters. They are espe­cially tasty if har­vested with your on hands and thus very, very fresh.

I’m off to the Aussie Butcher to see if they sell…..uhmmm…..balls.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

This blog post is about man stuff even if it has a review about clothes.

First up, I went shop­ping today, I fuck­ing hate shop­ping at this time of the year. My hyper-vigilance really kicks in and causes me no end of stress.

Nev­er­the­less I had worn out yet another pair of jeans. It is the peren­nial prob­lem when you have big balls, the crotch wears out. Any­way I’m the sort of flla that likes what he likes and I had kindo set­tled on the make and model of jeans that I wear.

Except the fuck­ers at Levi’s have decided that that par­tic­u­lar model isn’t cool any­more and so I can’t buy them any­where. This was a prob­lem until the hot­tie at the jeans store rec­om­mended Mavi Jeans to me.

These things rock, the look great, the feel great and when I asked if they pull chicks like a fast car the girl at the counter looked like a stunned mul­let as she got the death­stare and I got a slap from you know who. She nod­ded slowly as she backed away from the counter.

I had never heard of Mavi jeans before so I made a quick check on the font of all knowl­edge and found out that they are a famous brand of denim jeans founded in 1991, head­quar­tered in Istan­bul, Turkey. Since being intro­duced in the US in 1996, Mavi has become one of the favorite fit­ting denim brands among young women and men. Celebrity fans include Kate Winslet, Juli­ette Lewis, Julia Stiles,Geri Hal­li­well, Annie Lennox, Sug­ababes, Billy Zane, Hillary Duff, and Jason Biggs.

And now Whaleoil!

Now on to shav­ing. As you have wit­nessed from my Movem­ber pho­tos I seem to have no prob­lem grow­ing hair. Bald­ness doesn’t run in the fam­ily. My grand­fa­ther had a full head of hair when he croaked and Dad still has good head of hair as well. I think my brother got the bad genes though. Any­way I hate shav­ing. I shave the bare min­i­mum to get away with. I con­stantly try to find shav­ing prod­ucts that have to meet sev­eral cri­te­ria. The first is that the fuck­ing blades stay sharp longer than two shaves. With­out excep­tion this require­ment dis­qual­i­fies Gillette, Wilkin­son Sword and Schick. All of their blades are com­plete rub­bish and two shaves on my beard does in the blades.

The sec­ond cri­te­ria is that the shave is close with­out tear­ing my skin off. Again all the major brands fail.

I have now found a con­tender. The King of Shaves Azor. Accrod­ing to the mar­ketng it is;

“A razor that shaves closer, lasts longer and costs less. The fin­ished item looks simple.”

You know what? It does. More marketing;

“What you see is what you get. A razor, with super long last­ing (Endurium coated) car­tridges which allows you to “shave closer, for longer, for less”.”

Ok so “Endurium” is mar­ket­ing bull­shit but the blades do last longer, they are quite a bit cheaper and they cer­tainly shave closer than all the other crap brands out there. I went at the Mo’ today, ok a lit­tle early, but I was over it. It stripped that thing off like it was never there. I even tried out one of my old Gilette razors in com­pe­ti­tion and gave up. The Azor sim­ply blitzed it. The Gilette had a brand new blade and the Azor one I’ve been using for two weeks. End of story as far as I am concerned.

Even bet­ter the boss of KoS has a blog and so too does the Azor Cam­paign Bat­tle Bus. Well blog­gers have to sup­port blog­gers so I will be using the Azor from now on.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

Labour chal­lenges coali­tion com­pro­mise over cli­mate deal – Labour is cry­ing foul over a cli­mate change com­pro­mise reached between Act and National [TVNZ News Pol­i­tics]

Labour’s fat lit­tle pud­ding cli­mate change spokesman is all upset because a select com­mit­tee is going to be set up to look at the sci­ence of cli­mate change.

News­flash Charles baby! You lost, eat that!

I hope that the first per­son that the select com­mit­tee invites to tes­tify before it will be Vis­count Mon­ck­ton of Brench­ley. Then in no par­tic­u­lar order these fel­lows;

• Dr Vin­cent Gray, of Welling­ton, an expert reviewer for the Inter­gov­ern­men­tal Panel on Cli­mate Change (IPCC), most recently a vis­it­ing scholar at the Bei­jing Cli­mate Cen­tre in China.
• Dr Ger­rit J. van der Lin­gen, of Christchurch, geologist/paleoclimatologist, cli­mate change con­sul­tant, for­mer direc­tor GRAINZ (Geo­science Research and Inves­ti­ga­tions New Zealand).
• Pro­fes­sor Bob Carter, a New Zealand-trained geol­o­gist with exten­sive research expe­ri­ence in palaeo­cli­ma­tol­ogy, now at the Marine Geo­phys­i­cal Lab­o­ra­tory, James Cook Uni­ver­sity, Queens­land, Australia.
• War­wick Hughes, a New Zealand earth sci­en­tist liv­ing in Perth, who con­ducts a com­pre­hen­sive web­site: www.warwickhughes.com
• Roger Dewhurst, of Katikati, con­sult­ing envi­ron­men­tal geol­o­gist and hydrogeologist
• Pro­fes­sor David J. Bel­lamy OBE an Eng­lish botanist, author, broad­caster and envi­ron­men­tal cam­paigner, who orig­i­nally trained as a botanist at Durham Uni­ver­sity, where he later held the post of senior lec­turer in botany until 1982, and still holds the post of Hon­orary Pro­fes­sor for Adult and Con­tin­u­ing Education.

They cer­tainly look like emi­nent peer-reviewed sci­en­tists that don’t believe the hype of the new reli­gion­ists. You see unlike the adher­ents of the new reli­gion of cli­mate sci­ence I sim­ply do not believe that there is any­where near a con­sen­sus that is claimed. A select com­mit­tee exam­in­ing ALL of the evi­dence is a fine thing to have hap­pen, then at least all sides get to pro­duce evi­dence and when I mean evi­dence I don’t mean imag­i­nary “evi­dence” like the “hockey stick”.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]

“Cap­i­tal­ism gone wild“, IS exhorts us to believe, with the reports that some­one died at a Wal-Mart due to shop­pers being crushed due to crowds.

Pop­u­lar­ity: 1% [?]