Democratic has-been calls Democratic never-was a “tremendous national leader”

In the last presidential election, leftist special-interest groups and socialist billionaires like George Soros waged war with an unprecedented...

Read Full Article

Read Full Article

Read Full Article

Similarly, Obama would have us believe he doesn't accept the recent endorsement of his candidacy by Ahmed Yousef of the terrorist organization Hamas. John McCain, he said, had "lost his bearings" for asserting, "If Sen. Obama is favored by Hamas, I think people can make judgments accordingly."

We have, and we hope the American people will as well.

Oh, really? If McCain's remarks were a "smear," senator, why did you tell the Atlantic magazine:

"It's conceivable that there are some in the Arab world who say to themselves, 'This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he's not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush." Except these people launch rockets at Israel and oppose its existence.

(By the way, isn't it funny how Obama can mention his middle name in a national forum when convenient, but if a Republican uses it, it's racist and offensive? Imagine the reaction if McCain had mentioned his legal name was Barack Hussein Obama or had made the above comments about Obama. When a warm-up speaker at a McCain event said "Barack Hussein Obama" repeatedly, media hell broke loose.)

Read Full Article

Though bullied by the court, Kempthorne still had a choice. He just made the wrong — and an unnecessary — one. The polar bear is already under the shield of the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act and its population is at a historic high.

Oh, you thought its numbers were shrinking? Forget the maudlin media wailing about global warming leading to the extinction of the polar bear because man-made global warming will melt its habitat.

Its numbers are actually growing. There might be as many as 25,000, and probably no fewer than 22,000, today while 50 years ago, there were somewhere between 8,000 and 10,000.

Read Full Article

It’s been in the works for quite some time, but now the decision is official. Polar bears have been listed by the Bush Interior Department as a “threatened” species. This is the first listing attributed to global warming.

What’s really going on here?

Listing the polar bear as a threatened species would have significant public policy consequences. It would set a new precedent, representing the first linkage of species endangerment with global warming. Such a listing would basically wall off the entire Arctic region to exploration, resource extraction, and development–at least by U.S. companies–and a threatened species listing would give environmental groups the ability to sue future U.S. governments to force them to reverse climate change by whatever means necessary.

There is little doubt that such lawsuits would be filed quickly. According to the NRDC:

Listing the polar bear guarantees federal agencies will be obligated to ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out will not jeopardize the polar bears’ continued existence or adversely modify their critical habitat, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be required to prepare a recovery plan for the polar bear, specifying measures necessary for its protection.
…

The bottom line for rational cost-benefit analysts:

At present, polar bear populations are robust and, according to native people, are considerably larger than they were in previous decades. Predictions of polar bear endangerment are based on two sets of computer models: one set predicts how much Arctic sea ice will melt as a result of global warming, and the other predicts how polar bear populations will respond. But computer models of climate are known to be fraught with problems, and the ecological models used to predict polar bear response are equally limited.

Because of extreme limitations in data, it is essentially impossible to decide whether polar bears are endangered and whether their habitat is threatened by man-made global warming or other natural climate cycles. This is acknowledged by the experts themselves–the actual IUCN/SSC report is more broad in naming causes and more conservative about estimating their effects.

What we do know about polar bears is that, contrary to media portrayals, they are not fragile “canary in the coal mine” animals, but are robust creatures that have survived past periods of extensive deglaciation. Polar bear fossils have been dated to over one hundred thousand years, which means that polar bears have already survived an interglacial period when temperatures were considerably warmer than they are at present and when, quite probably, levels of summertime Arctic sea ice were correspondingly low.

In discussions of whether to drill in the Arctic, one of the arguments raised by environmentalists is that this would harm the habitats of the many creatures, including polar bears, that make their homes in Alaska. If polar bears are placed on the endangered species list, the legal hurdles to oil and gas drilling will increase. There are two subpopulations of polar bears in Alaska. One of them, the Southern Beaufort Sea population, is shared with Canada, and the other, the Chukchi Sea population, with Russia. Best estimates for these areas show approximately 3,500 polar bears total in these two subpopulations. Last year, Shell Offshore Inc. was about to start drilling in the Beaufort Sea area when a court order halted the activity on the grounds that the federal government did not thoroughly assess the environmental impact before granting permission to drill.

In petitioning against the drilling, environmental groups invoked sea ducks, whales, and, of course, polar bears, as well as the effect that drilling could have on native populations. The U.S. Minerals Management Service estimates that the area holds the potential for 7 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 32 trillion cubic feet of recoverable natural gas. With oil at over $100 a barrel and natural gas at $7.60 per one thousand cubic feet, these are some very expensive polar bears.

A prime example of why Republicans are losing: McCain accepted the global warming hoax, and embraced Algore-type socialist solutions -- and Democrats still aren't happy!

NYT: McCain “sealed away” from the lessons of Vietnam

Bad news: Polar bears “threatened”