THE POLAR BEARS WILL BE JUST FINE... IT IS THE HUMAN SPECIES THAT ARE COMMITTING SELF SABOTAGE
Category: News and Politics

Oil exploration can limit itself... ANWR drilling is to be limited to only 2000 acres leaving 17.5 million acres untouched.  If we increase oil production and domestic refining...and give OPEC a REAL INDICATION that we are going to do whatever it takes to be energy independent.... we can influence the price of a barrel of oil dramatically... just by showing that we mean business when it comes to energy independence for U.S. energy needs. See below. As far as I am concerned... the effect of humans on "global warming" is too questionable to be considered reliable information.  We can do more to reduce energy consumption... NOT buying carbon credits which only puts more money into pockets of corporations and a way for government to impose more taxes to U.S. population. 

NEXT DAY...  Okay, I will concede that the polar ice shelf apparenty is diminishing and the polar bear may see the day their habitat is threatened.... BUT, I still do NOT BELIEVE that buying carbon credits will save the polar bears nor do I believe that taxing is the answer to correct the problem of CO2 in the atmosphere.  I DO BELIEVE that we need to QUICKLY AND JUDICIOUSLY introduce new energy options everyday everywhere across the U.S. that  are renewable and sustainable that are not depleting natural resources at this rate and do not makes U.S. stooges to the oil producing countries.

Inhofe Says Listing of Polar Bear Based on Politics, Not Science

"With the number of polar bears substantially up over the past forty years, the decision announced today appears to be based entirely on unproven computer models."

WASHINGTON, DC – Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, today expressed disappointment with the U.S. Department of Interior's final decision to list the polar bear as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act.

"Unfortunately, the decision to list the polar bear as 'threatened' appears to be based more on politics than science," Senator Inhofe said. "With the number of polar bears substantially up over the past forty years, the decision announced today appears to be based entirely on unproven computer models. The decision, therefore, is simply a case of reality versus unproven computer models, the methodology of which has been challenged by many scientists and forecasting experts. If the models are invalid, then the decision based on them is not justified. It's disappointing that Secretary Kempthorne failed to stand up to liberal special interest groups who advocated this listing.

"Lost in the debate is the fact that polar bear numbers have dramatically increased over the past forty years – a fact even liberal environmental activists are forced to concede. According to Canadian scientists, 11 of the 13 bear populations are stable, with some increasing. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service now estimates that there are currently 20,000 to 25,000 polar bears. These numbers are substantially up from lows estimates in the range of 5,000-10,000 in the 1950s and 1960s. Credit should be given to protection already provided the polar bear by way of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the several international conservation treaties including the 1973 Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears and the U.S.-Russia Polar Bear Conservation and Management Act of 2006, as well as conservation, education, and outreach agreement with native peoples.

"Today's decision will have far reaching consequences. Liberal special interests have employed hundreds of lawyers to try and convert current environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act into climate laws. Yet the ESA is simply not equipped to regulate economy-wide greenhouse gases, nor does the Fish and Wildlife Service have the expertise to be a pollution control agency.  The regulatory tools of the ESA function best when at-risk species are faced with local, tangible threats.  Greenhouse gas emissions are not local. The implications of today's decision, therefore, will undoubtedly lead to a drastic increase in litigation and eager lawyers ready to use this listing to do exactly what they have intended to do all along – shut down energy production."

Related Information:

U.S. Senate Minority Report Debunks Polar Bear Extinction Fears
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service is considering listing the polar bear a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. This report details the scientists debunking polar bear endangerment fears and features a sampling of the latest peer-reviewed science detailing the natural causes of recent Arctic ice changes. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service estimates that the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, up from as low as 5,000-10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s.  A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations "may now be near historic highs."  The alarm about the future of polar bear decline is based on speculative computer model predictions many decades in the future. And the methodology of these computer models is being challenged by many scientists and forecasting experts. (LINK)

Impact: New York Times Features EPW Polar Bear Report
The New York Times reported this week on the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) Minority report debunking fears of polar bear extinction. John Tierney's January 31 article, titled "Polar Bears and Seer Suckers," called the EPW Minority's report "persuasive at debunking the predictions of polar bears going extinct this century." Tierney noted that polar bear extinction fears are "being stoked to build support in the U.S. for listing them as a 'threatened' or 'endangered' species even though it's not clear that their overall numbers are declining." (LINK) Tierney noted that the EPW Minority's polar bear report featured "one very hard piece of evidence that casts doubt on the doomsday predictions: a polar bear jawbone that appears to be at least 110,000 years old, meaning that polar bears have survived eras with considerably warmer temperatures than today." […]  "Dr. Armstrong and his coauthors, Kesten C. Green of Monash University and Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, conclude that the most influential forecasts of polar-bear populations violate at least 73 of the 90 relevant principles of scientific forecasting," Tierney wrote. "They criticize the forecasters for making large extrapolations based on sparse data and questionable models, relying too heavily on a single expert, ignoring contradictory data and tailoring conclusions to fit a political goal (listing the polar bear as a 'threatened' species)," Tierney added.

Polar Bears Potential ESA Listing Called 'Regulatory Monster'

William P. Horn, former Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish, Wildlife and Parks in 1985-1988 (responsible for the ESA program) and experience serving on the Board of Environmental Sciences and Toxicology of the National Academy of Sciences, testified today:  "It would be a mistake to list the presently healthy and sustainable polar bear populations as a threatened species under the ESA. Such action will produce a variety of adverse consequences including (1) creating an ESA listing precedent that opens Pandora's Box in the form of other unwarranted listings that will diminish resources available for bona fide wildlife conservation and recovery efforts, (2) setting the stage for new rounds of litigation and judicial activism to turn the ESA into a regulatory monster of unprecedented proportions, and (3) harming existing successful polar bear conservation and management programs…A decision to list a presently healthy species – exhibiting no present trajectory toward endangerment - based on large scale hemispheric models forecasting problems 50 years in the future is a radical departure from the language of the ESA. It pushes the decision horizon far into the genuinely unseeable future, is predicated on uncertain intervening events where it is difficult if not impossible to tie those events directly to specific on-the-ground situations, and will likely precipitate the subsequent listing of an array of otherwise healthy species which might also be forecast to face problems a half century or more from now.

Polar Bear Pandering By Debra Saunders (San Francisco Chronicle) 

Sunday, November 4, 2007 - Sen. Barbara Boxer of California delivered a speech in the Senate last week in which she linked global warming to the San Diego wildfires, Darfur, the imminent loss of the world's polar bears and even a poor 14-year-old boy who died from "an infection caused after swimming in Lake Havasu," because its water is warmer. Forget arson. Forget genocide. Forget nature. There is no tragedy that cannot be placed at the doorstep of global-warming skeptics. Oh, and there's no need to acknowledge that the regulations or taxes necessary to curb emissions by a substantial degree might damage economic growth. According to Boxer, laws to curb greenhouse gases - this country would have to cut its greenhouse gas emissions in half over 12 years to meet the latest international community goals - will do good things for the American economy and create lots of jobs. It's Nostradamus Science wedded to Santa Claus economics. It is rhetoric such as Boxer's - an odd combination of the-end-is-near hysteria and overly rosy economic scenarios - that keep me in the agnostic/skeptic global-warming camp. Boxer and Sen. James Inhofe, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that Boxer chairs, have been engaging in a running debate on global warming. Last month, Inhofe took on the Al Gore suggestion that polar bears are in peril because of global warming. Inhofe pointed to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services estimates that show the polar bear population at about 20,000 to 25,000 bears - up from the estimated 5,000 to 10,000 polar bears in the 1950s and 1960s.

Canadian Survey Reveals Polar Bears Populations Increasing - Nearly Tripled Since 1980's By Don Martin (National Post)

Tuesday, March 06, 2007- Their status ranges from a "vulnerable" to "endangered" and could be declared "threatened" if the U.S. decides the polar bear is collateral damage of climate change.Nobody talks about "overpopulated" when discussing the bears' outlook.Yet despite the Canadian government 's $150-million commitment last week to fund 44 International Polar Year research projects, a key question is not up for detailed scientific assessment: If the polar bear is the 650-kilogram canary in the climate change coal mine, why are its numbers INCREASING?

Many Agree Polar Bears Should Not Be Listed As Threatened Under ESA

EPW FACT OF THE DAY February 7, 2007 - FACT: Many Canadian indigenous peoples, international governments and conservation groups clearly agree with Dr Foote's position that the polar bear should not be listed. The following comments below were submitted by groups during the US Fish and Wildlife Service petition process regarding the listing of the polar bear: Inuvialuit Game Council (Represents the collective Inuvialuit interest in wildlife and wildlife habitat) "Sound polar bear populations all overlap the ISR ("Inuvialuit Settlement Region"). These populations of polar bears have helped sustain the Inuvialuit for generations to do so. Currently, these populations are healthy and thriving … we can see no justification for up-listing polar bears to 'threatened status' under the U.S. Endangered Species Act … "at this point in time, there is not enough information to say that polar bears are in danger of becoming extinct due to predicted shift in climate … Due to our close relationship with these populations, we, along with other user groups, would be the first to see signs of trouble and we would make sure, through the co-management system, that appropriate management actions are taken to ensure the sustainability of these populations."

Inhofe Speech On Polar Bears And Global Warming

January 4, 2007 - Mr. President, I rise today to address the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's recent action to begin formal consideration of whether to list the polar bear as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).  Over the next year, the Fish and Wildlife Service will examine scientific and commercial data regarding the health of the polar bear population and evaluate the presence of any threats to its existence.  The question that the Fish and Wildlife Service must answer is:  Is there clear, scientific evidence that current worldwide polar bear populations are in trouble and facing possible extinction in the foreseeable future? As the Fish and Wildlife Service reviews the issue over the next year, I feel confident they will conclude as I have, that listing the polar bear is unwarranted. In the proposal, the Fish and Wildlife Service acknowledges that for seven of the 19 worldwide polar bear populations, the Service has no population trend data of any kind.   Other data suggest that for an additional five polar bear populations, the number of bears is not declining and is stable.  Two more of the bear populations showed reduced numbers in the past due to over hunting, but these two populations are now increasing because of hunting restrictions. 

Polar Bear Politics (The Wall Street Journal Editorial) January 3, 2007; Page A12

Unless you've been hibernating for the winter, you have no doubt heard the many alarms about global warming. Now even the Bush Administration is getting into the act, at least judging from last week's decision by Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to recommend that the majestic polar bear be listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. The closer you inspect this decision, however, the more it looks like the triumph of politics over science. "We are concerned," said Mr. Kempthorne, that "the polar bears' habitat may literally be melting" due to warmer Arctic temperatures. However, when we called Interior spokesman Hugh Vickery for some elaboration, he was a lot less categorical, even a tad defensive. The "endangered" designation is based less on the actual number of bears in Alaska than on "projections into the future," Mr. Vickery said, adding that these "projection models" are "tricky business." 

5:58 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

IT IS TIME FOR A NEW CONCEPT
Current mood: argumentative
Category: News and Politics

LET US VOTE IN A PRESIDENTIAL TRIO....

MAYBE THE JOB IS JUST TOO MUCH FOR ONE MAN.

I SAY WE VOTE IN A NEW TRINITY FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.  THE MAJORITY OF THE THREE.... THAT IS THE POLICY THAT RULES....

I VOTE FOR GLENN BECK, BEN STEIN AND RON PAUL TO DO IT ALL TOGETHER.

BEYOND THAT....

Let's get back to our Representatives and Senators actually in Congress representing the majority of their constituents and NOT INFLUENCED with the bias of lobbyists and big money.

Why wouldn't that work and/or at least worth a try?

I KNOW... I should not be such an IDEALIST!!!  I used to be more open minded but I am becoming cynical instead.  I used to trust government and elections and the system.  I WANT TO... but as in life, my expectations were too high and I was shot down to the gutter again. 

I DO HAVE HOPE AND TRYING TO DO SO, YET REALITY IS SO DISAPPOINTING.

2:54 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

I AM STILL ASKING????
Current mood: angsty
Category: News and Politics

I AM STILL ASKING.... What is my son doing fighting for "freedom" of Iraqi government when my own politicians are supporting sanctuary cities.... the government is not funding and STRONGLY SUPPORTING A SECURE BORDER. We are not FIGHTING THE WAR HERE AT HOME of deporting illegal immigrants in our country. My Congress and politicians at many levels are NOT UPHOLDING THE LAW against illegal immigration in every city, county, state. We are letting BIG BUSINESS call the shots... employing these illegal immigrants... and I do not care if you are Mexican or Irish... YOU ARE ILLEGAL and you are allowed benefits that my tax dollars are paying for and I AM ANGRY. Let us PENALIZE EMPLOYERS, pass local and state laws and enforce them to drive these "rats" out of their holes and back to their homes. These illegal immigrants are destabilizing our federal and state social programs. They are using our resources and they keep getting by with it over and over again.  I am not "against" any specific nationality, I just want LEGALITIES ENFORCED.  I am sure there are many, many wonderful people here in U.S. and if and when I know the ones that are here are LEGAL.... because the laws are being enforced, I will do all I can to help new citizens integrate to our country, I will welcome them with open arms from any and all nations.  I will VOLUNTEER to help with an immigration assimilation society but I am as angry at my country for lack of enforcement as I am that MILLIONS of people are in this country that should not be here. My ancestors came here in mid 1800s from Sweden.  I have read local history books. They were made fun of for speaking Swedish and ostracized too, but they came here LEGALLY I realize it takes time, it was the second generation that spoke English too and my great grandmother and "Ida" across the street... I sat there and listened to them speak in Swedish during conversations when I was very young!

I had that good suggestion from my friend..... let the illegal immigrants fight in IRAQ!!!   IF they want to work for slave wages and hours for U.S. money, maybe we could reinstitute indentured servitude. Once reported or turned in by him or herself to the U.S. Immigration Service authorities, they could:  1)  PLEDGE to learn English, 2) PLEDGE service to a government program that would accept ONLY the most willing to assimilate and show loyalty to the U.S. Constitution, 3)  Fight in Iraq or Afghanistan, 3) Work in a program like they had in the depression for FREE LABOR to the good of the majority for public works and maintenence to save tax dollars upgrading highways and infrastructure giving themselves to PUBLIC SERVICE by meeting strict guidelines and supervision to become U.S. citizens.  Since they want to bypass the "system" and rules and regulations to apply for U.S. citizenship in the normal process, they could become indentured public servants for 7 to 10 years and after that amount of time, they could take the test for citizenship.  That would of course, cause all kinds of new U.S. bureaucracy and cost the U.S. government trillions of dollars to keep track of all of them, provide them room and board, the paperwork.  It would open up new avenues nationwide for corruption and government waste of U.S. TAX DOLLARS,  OH SHIT.... NEVER MIND.... 

LET'S JUST ENFORCE THE U.S. IMMIGRATION LAWS THE WAY THEY ARE ON THE BOOKS NOW!!!!!!!

1:52 PM - 2 Comments - 4 Kudos - Add Comment

How many soldiers died fighting against Communism?
Current mood: ashamed
Category: News and Politics

58,196 names are on the Vietnam Veteran's Memoral Wall.   Department of Defense reports 54,246 Americans were killed during the Korean War. 

So why did we decide all those lives lost were insignificant... that instead of fighting Communism, we are in bed with Communist China. We allow them to import all these things to the U.S. that take away American jobs?  People are buying it up, filling up U.S. homes with all these items and we need to look for U.S. sources to buy instead. They are out there.

Does anyone else see something wrong with this picture?  Check out American Dream Federation group on my page.

And also along those lines in a new direction I think it is too bad the Communists can be capitalists and the Mexican entrepreneurs cannot follow their lead.  If we were importing and buying more products that were "Made in Mexico" their citizens would not be migrating north illegally and they would have sources of income in their own country.

BUT IN THE BIG PICTURE... We need to keep taxes down so businesses can expand and grow and employ U.S. citizens here in this country and still make a profit keeping us totally ahead of the game instead of self sabotaging our country.  That also includes new sources of wind energy, solar energy, hydropower, whatever it takes.. so that this country is totally self sufficient. I encourage you to do an Internet search for biodiesel/algae... it sounded better than ethanol which consumes food sources to produce fuel and messes with our food prices and market.  I wish I had money to invest in some new energy alternatives!!

I would just like Obama to realize the ones of us who are anti-immigration and anti-trade are not frustrated or bitter, we just believe in the principles this country was founded on and want to get back to our roots with the best of the past entwined with what is the best technology and resources of today.  I just would like to see people following the rules of law and have some common sense for a common purpose.

6:04 PM - 0 Comments - 0 Kudos - Add Comment

MICHELLE OBAMA... MY
Current mood: angsty
Category: News and Politics

Michelle Obama said this while she was in North Carolina. " The truth is most Americans don't want much.  Folks don't want the whole pie. Most Americans feel blessed to thrive a little bit ... but that's out of reach for them. The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more."

I don't know about you... my pie is small but I work TWO JOBS to get what I want and need and to pay my bills.  I finished tech school and have 34 years of experience in my field but I do have to work harder and I have worked two jobs or overtime for 21 years now.  (YEP.... I might as well have gone back to college but I had a child to raise and did not know about grants!!!) AND it never even occured to me to check on welfare benefits.

If other people out there want socialist interference from their government by electing Clinton or Obama, then this country is going down the tubes all the more. I WANT TO KEEP MORE OF MY PAYCHECK, NOT LESS. Please understand McCain was not my idea of an opposition candidate either.  What a dilemma!!!  Now what to do?

And I doubt the wealthier people want more of their money taken away from them either.

This country has got to CUT SPENDING... there is a way to be more efficicient...encourage tax breaks for businesses to hire more people and thrive...AND I MEAN LEGAL PEOPLE... and we need to increase production of goods in our own country.

Please watch GLENN BECK for more TRUTH. 

APATHY and DEPENDENCE on government programs are already ruining this country.

2:10 PM - 1 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment