Quick Obama And Green Updates

Just a few smaller stories to pass along to you...

Hello, goodbye!
Just days after displaying the monumental arrogance of a self-styled presidential seal at a speech, the Obama campaign has discontinued the use of the seal.  This was a gaffe so bad that even the MSM -- who is so in the tank for him that they need SCUBA gear to breathe -- was poking fun at him.  Some examples:

"What a bizarre and dumb idea," railed NBC political director Chuck Todd. "It really feeds the arrogance narrative."

"The Audacity of Hype," cracked ABC's Jake Tapper. "No word on whether they played a remix of 'Hail to the Chief' as Obama walked in."

Andrew Malcolm of the Los Angeles Times observed that Obama "has decided not to wait for any of the formalities like a presidential election, an inauguration or even a nomination, which he still hasn't actually officially won yet."

Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, said the episode reinforces this media perception of Obama.

"The press corps adopts a subtext for each candidate," Sabato told The Examiner. "Daddy Bush was 'a nice guy but out of touch.' Bill Clinton was 'smart but randy.' Bob Dole was 'heroic but too old.' Gore was 'brilliant but a fibber and a bore.' Dubya was 'pleasant but dumb.'"

He added: "Obama's subtext is rapidly becoming 'charismatic but arrogant.'"

The thing that makes Republicans spitting angry about this is that the McCain camp is either totally inept or totally refusing to capitalize on these mind-blowingly stupid, rookie mistakes.  Either way, it's inexcusable.  For one thing, the move could be construed as outright illegal.  Don't expect McCain to push on this, though.  That might be mean (always remember that when you simply point out a truth or fact about a liberal, he cries about you being mean-spirited).

More investigation
More information is coming out on Barack Obama's birth certificate.  Is it valid?  Is it real?  Is it just a coincidence that despite years of denying its release, the Obama campaign suddenly decided to allow far-Left kook website DailyKos to post a scan of it?  It could be a non-story, but if that's the case, it's a non-story that won't go away.

When will the madness stop?
Not anytime soon, if these two stories are any indication!  First, we have James Hansen, certified climate disaster prediction man, heading back to Congress to suggest that the chief executives of oil firms be put on trial for crimes against humanity and nature.  Some background on Hansen: twenty years ago, Hansen was with NASA (and thus contractually bound to avoid taking public political positions) when he and some colleagues sounded a warning bell about global warming.  He's been on that kick ever since, despite the fact that over the decades his theories have clearly not worked out quite so catastrophically as he's predicted.  It seems to me that he's one of those blame-America-first-no-matter-what nutjobs:

Hansen notes that in determining responsibility for climate change, the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on climate is not determined by current emissions, but by accumulated emissions over the lifetime of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. By this measure the U.S. will be the largest single cause of climate change even after its current emissions are surpassed by China and other developing countries.

So, first it was America's fault that we were producing so many CO2 emissions.  Now, it doesn't matter that we're one of the cleanest nations in the world and about to be surpassed by two other hugely populated nations in terms of emissions; it's still our fault.

This is how the environmentalist's mind works: logic need not apply.  Anyway, he is now heading back to Congress to propose one of the most asinine and drastic measures that can be conceived: throwing the oil execs in jail for crimes against humanity and nature [I'd like to point out that this is another affirmation of my suggestion that environmentalists have replaced God with nature, which they worship, and have a fully functional religion masquerading as a scientific movement].  What worries me is that both Obama and McCain are likely to buy into his tripe, and with the potential of a solid Democrat majority, they may ram something down the throat of the American public who don't want it.  All the more reason to be active in contacting your elected representatives!

But Hansen isn't the only crazy.  Former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan recently said essentially the same thing, calling for 'climate justice':

He said funding should be made available to help disadvantaged communities adapt to the effects of global warming as he urged for the international community to focus on adaptation measures.

"We must have climate justice. As an international community, we must recognise that the polluter must pay and not the poor and vulnerable," said Annan at the first high-level meeting of his new humanitarian forum.

Hm, that's interesting, especially when you take a look at exactly where the worst polluters are:

1. Linfen, China
2. Tianying, China
3. Sukinda, India
4. Vapi, India
5. La Oroya, Peru
6. Dzerzhinsk, Russia
7. Norilsk, Russia
8. Chernobyl, Ukraine
9. Sumgayit, Azerbaijan
10. Kabwe, Zambia

So, is Annan truly proposing that China, India, Eastern Europe, and Africa start paying the rest of us for their planet-destroying pollution?  Okay, cool, I can get on board with that...if that's what would actually happen.  But don't hold your breath.

The article doesn't have any follow up detail, but my guess is that he thinks that nations like America, Japan, and Germany pay up despite the fact that the levels of pollution are (on balance) far, far less than most other places around the world.  That's essentially what happened with Kyoto - China and India were exempted from paying penalties for excessive pollution.  Isn't it funny how the top four most polluted cities in the world should be exempted from paying a penalty on pollution?  Hm...

Remember: it's not about the environment, it's about the money.  It's about redistributing money from the wealthy to the poor, according to some elite's purely subjective opinion of what's 'fair'.  This is why environmentalism is dangerous, especially to us here in America, the wealthiest nation the planet has ever seen.

Environmentalism is one major aspect of liberalism, and these same concepts apply across the board for liberals.  That's why liberalism is so dangerous to every piece of our lives.  That's why it must be stopped.  Here, and now.

There's my two cents.