Global Warming Alarmists Using Polar Bear as a Pawn

Why it shouldn't be listed under Endangered Species Act

By Bluey Posted in | | | Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

The Washington Post devoted its KidsPost page today to a sympathetic plea for the polar bear -- the predatory creature that environmentalists want listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. With a decision looming on Thursday for the Bush administration, the Post is apparently pulling out all stops, including liberal spin for kids.

Although the Post devotes just one paragraph in a 534-word article to the negative ramifications of listing the polar bear, there are plenty of reasons for Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne to ignore the advice of environmentalists. Let’s start with a few of the consequences outlined by nine U.S. senators in a letter to Kempthorne last week:

• The worldwide polar bear population is somewhere between 20,000 and 25,000 today -- more than double the 8,000 to 10,000 that were living in the 1960s. If and when the Endangered Species Act is used, it should protect species with declining populations.

• Listing the polar bear is really just a ploy by environmentalists to shut down any chance of drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge or explore for oil in other parts of Alaska. Bloomberg columnist Kevin Hassett says listing the polar bear could mean $200-a-barrel oil. At a time when America is growing increasingly dependent on foreign sources of oil, now is not the time to clamp down on domestic exploration.

• Set aside all the compassionate gibberish from WWF and it becomes clear why the polar bear is just a pawn: environmentalists will turn to activist judges citing the Endangered Species Act to halt construction of new power plants and factories that emit fossil fuels. The Green Policy Fairness Coalition already cites efforts by global warming alarmists to use lawsuits against the federal and state governments bypass the legislative process.

The nine Republican senators who signed the Kempthorne letter -- Jim DeMint (S.C.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), Jim Inhofe (Okla.), Mike Enzi (Wyo.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), John Cornyn (Tex.), Orrin Hatch (Utah), Wayne Allard (Colo.) and John Barrasso (Wyo.) -- deserve praise for standing for sound principles. Meanwhile, the Senate’s No. 2 Republican, Jon Kyl (Ariz.), also opposes listing the bear, telling bloggers yesterday it would open the door for environmentalists to do devastating harm to America’s energy needs.

The decision should be simple for Kempthorne. Caving to radical environmentalists who want to use the Endangered Species Act to achieve their goals is the wrong approach. It’s not about the polar bear for the left; it’s really a ploy to impose even higher energy costs on Americans.


« Thank the Polar Bear for Higher Energy CostsComments (23)
Global Warming Alarmists Using Polar Bear as a Pawn 8 Comments (0 topical, 8 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

Bears are killing machines!

"I believe all God's creatures have a soul — except bears, Bears are actually Satan's children."

—Stephen Colbert, on his show, The Colbert Report

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

Now just which of these two needs to be protected and from whom ?


"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

I think if we can just get the bears and the seals to sit down and "dialog" with each other, you know, they can find common ground (or in this case, ice).

"Broadly speaking, liberalism emphasizes individual rights and equality of opportunity. ... including extensive freedom of thought and speech, limitations on the power of governments, the rule of law, the free exchange of ideas, a market or mixed economy,

If you just take a look at the arguments they make in support of their causes here its obvious that hysterics are their normal mode of existence.


"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

...how much of the polar bear's habitat is actually in the US? A sliver of Alaska, maybe? And I bet there aren't many bears living there, just by doing the math of population versus habitat...

...so why are they suddenly our problem?

"No matter how much lipstick you put on the taxation pig, it's still a pig... and it's currently snout-down in your wallet." - Michael Fisk

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that environmental issues are becoming a bi-partisan suicide pact. I think those standing against this tide of insanity deserve all the praise and support we can muster because they are surely being opposed by the majority.

There has to be some sort of balance between protecting wildlife and protecting ourselves. Would the polar bear sacrifice for us if the shoe was on the other foot? Do we really need polar bears in the grand scheme of things? If they can't survive a little loss in habitat then nature needs to select them for extinction.

-------------------------------------------------------------
I am a Positivist Pastafarian for the alliteration alone.

The polar bear ploy is an attempt to leverage the Endangered Species Act to deal with global warming. Which is rather dumb, since such a move would have absolutely no effect on greenhouse gas emissions in the entire rest of the world anyway.

But it's probably moot, and after this November, environmentalists will probably stop it.

Because all three remaining major candidates for the Presidency are now on board the global warming issue.

All three (including McCain) now accept its reality.
All three (including McCain) support a cap-and-trade system to deal with it.

The only difference remaining is the schedule and magnitude of the proposed targets to be reached in greenhouse gas emission reductions. McCain's are somewhat more modest than Hillary's or Obama's.

But any significant effort by America, even the more modest McCain proposal, will be viewed as a great improvement over doing nothing.

So I predict that global warming won't even come up much in the Presidential campaign this year. McCain has neutralized this issue.

Do you think McCain embraces the occasional wisdom of inaction ?


"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service