The plot in Berkeley continues to thicken. The Daily Californian is reporting that a group of students are trying to get the same permits that “Code Pink” currently has. This should be interesting to watch.

The Berkeley College Republicans are looking to get the same permit privileges that anti-war group Code Pink use to protest outside the Marine recruiting center in Downtown Berkeley.

Working with Councilmember Kriss Worthington, the group is asking for sound waiver permits and a parking spot reservation outside the center on Wednesdays from 12 to 4 p.m., the same time Code Pink protests outside the center, said Kimberly Wagner, activism chair for the Berkeley College Republicans.

“(Code Pink’s) claim is that they’re protecting free speech,” she said. “I kind of don’t feel they are, they are inhibiting the recruitment center in general. It’s important that they are not unopposed, that there are people willing to fight them. Even though it’s Berkeley, the liberal center of America, there will be people (opposed).”

All American Blogger applauds the Berkeley College Republicans. It’s sad that the city council of Berkeley is allowing the liberal wingnuts from Code Pink to harass our Marines. Let’s see if they will allow the same freedom to speak to these conservative students that they have allowed to the liberal protesters.

In 1990, a small, round faced Canadian described a scenario to a reporter. He envisioned a small group of world leaders concluding that the rich countries were the “principle risk to the Earth.” This group then created a plan to get the rich countries to “sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment.” When the rich countries refused, the group decided “the only hope for the planet” was for the industrialized civilizations to collapse. He pondered, “Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Two years later, he helped lay the foundation for the Kyoto Protocol at the Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. His name is Maurice Strong, and he would love to see America collapse. Continue reading →

Behold the power of a federal judge:

A federal judge has ordered the Interior Department to decide within 16 days whether polar bears should be listed as a threatened species because of global warming.

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken agreed with conservation groups that the department missed a Jan. 9 deadline for a decision. She rejected a government request for a further delay and ordered it to act by May 15.

“Defendants have been in violation of the law requiring them to publish the listing determination for nearly 120 days,” the judge, based in Oakland, Calif., wrote in a decision issued late Monday. “Other than the general complexity of finalizing the rule, Defendants offer no specific facts that would justify the delay, much less further delay.”

As I noted in “Polar Bears are a Prop, Not An Endangered Species”:

According to the February 7, 2005 Edinburgh Scotsman ( http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=143012005), “The world’s polar bear population is on the increase despite global warming.

“According to new research,” the Scotsman reports, “the numbers of the giant predator have grown by between 15 and 25 per cent over the last decade.

“We’re seeing an increase in bears that’s really unprecedented, and in places where we’re seeing a decrease in the population it’s from hunting, not from climate change,” Canadian polar bear expert Mitch Taylor told the Scotsman. (Source.)

Yesterday, another report was issued that said polar bears are not threatened with extinction:

“Based on the best available information at hand, there was insufficient reason to think that the polar bear was at imminent risk of extinction,” the panel’s chairman, Jeff Hutchings, explained.

“That’s not to say that it’s not in trouble. A special concern species is a species at risk in Canada and requires legislative action.”

The report noted that polar bears currently face a double threat, both from hunting and the melting of ice.

Newt Gingrich says that there is a chance that the good Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright is going out of his way to damage Barack Obama’s chances at the White House. From ABCNews.com:

In a Tuesday appearance on Good Morning America, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., suggested that controversial pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright is angry with parishioner Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and may be deliberately trying to hurt his presidential bid.

Saying that Wright “went out of his way to weaken Obama” during Monday’s address at the National Press Club, Gingrich told Barbara Walters “I think Reverend Wright has a greater interest in his self-importance.”

WATCH THE FULL INTERVIEW HERE!

Gingrich described Obama former pastor as “hard-line anti-American”, and said “if Rev. Wright continues to talk that the burden that Sen. Obama carries becomes bigger and bigger.”

You have to think that Gingrich is right here. If Rev. Wright was really interested in Obama’s success, he would be on an island somewhere, out of the spotlight. Instead, he goes on a nation-wide speaking tour.

This isn’t going to help Obama. It will only keep the issue in the forefront.

I have been having a tough time sitting down and doing the podcast. There are a lot of things going on on this side of the site, and the podcast is one of the things that has suffered for it.

Soon, I should have things back to a little bit of normalcy, and the podcast will go back to Monday, Wednesday and Friday, with the usual high level guests you expect.

In fact, this Friday, Ray McKinney (no relation to Cynthia) will be on the show to talk about his campaign to represent Georgia in the U.S. Congress. Talk to you then.

Barack Obama is currently nailing down 80-90% of the black vote in America. Would it be fair to say that race has a bit to do with that percentage? Perhaps. Geraldine Ferraro told a story on John Gibson’s radio show last week about a black man accosting a black female for supporting Hillary Clinton by saying something to the effect of, “How can you choose your gender over your race?”

Maybe I’m outside the mainstream, but I guess I look at the positions and beliefs of the candidate, and not the skin tone. Because of that, I’ve pretty much found myself without a candidate to support. I suppose I could just support the old white guy because he’s white, but I really don’t agree with too much of what he says or does.

Anyway, if you find yourself supporting Barack Obama because you are excited about him being the first black President, perhaps you could take the time to support these fine black Americans*:

1. J. C. Watts, Jr.

   (born November 18, 1957) is an American conservative Republican politician, CNN political contributor, former Representative from Oklahoma in the U.S. Congress, and former professional Canadian football player and much celebrated quarterback for the University of Oklahoma from 1977 to 1981. Watts is, to date, the last black Republican to serve in Congress.

   Watts captured national attention in 1996 with a speech before the Republican national convention, when he said, “You see character does count. For too long we have gotten by in a society that says the only thing right is to get by and the only thing wrong is to get caught. Character is doing what’s right when nobody is looking.”[2]

   Continuing to be a rising star for the national Republican Party, Watts was selected in 1997 to deliver the Republican response to President Bill Clinton’s State of the Union Address.[3] During the speech, Watts chastised some black Democrats and civil rights leaders as “race-hustling poverty pimps”, whose careers he said depend on keeping blacks dependent on the government.[4][1]

Continue reading →

PopPhoto has photoshopped some images of the candidates to show how they are likely to look in four years. For those of you who vote based on looks, this might be helpful to you.

Aging takes time, even when you make it happen artificially with software. Each candidate took about four hours of retouching. To mimic the ravages of time, we did the following:

- Used the Burn and Dodge tools to deepen wrinkles and paint in age spots.
- Cloned the eyebrows and moved them lower.
- Used the Liquify filter to hollow out cheeks, make jowls, thin out lips, and enlarge ears and noses.
- For Clinton and Obama, brought in forehead wrinkles from separate photos and used the Match Color tool to blend them in.
- For Obama, painted in gray hair on top of his current hair; for Clinton, desaturated with the Sponge tool to make her grayer.

To get a look at McCain and Obama click here.

Imperial Warrior writes:

…why should conservatives support a Hillary Clinton ticket instead of a John McCain one? Here’s why.

First, if Republicans line up to support this backstabbing RINO jerk, the message that the RINO infested Republican Party beltway establishment will receive is that the Republican voter base is so desperate, defeatist, and despirited that it will accept a big government liberal phony in conservative clothing no different from a liberal Democrat instead of bonafide genuine conservatives who pursue a limited, small government, Constitutional originalist, free market agenda.

Furthermore, by supporting a flagrant opponent of conservatives and conservatism, not only will more RINO frauds be put forth for political office, conservatives will be admitting that conservatism itself is worthless and invalid, and future Republican politicians would be right in mocking and condemning it. Lastly, just by putting a clueless Republican liberal dope dressed in conservative clothing in office only to be savaged, betrayed, and eventually torn to pieces by his “liberal buddies” for the sake of their own party’s future political fortunes, will showcase the failure not of stupid liberal policies pursued by a Republican President or the folly of surrounding oneself with the political opposition, but simply the failure of Republicans as a party period.

A McCain Presidency will see not only the continued betrayal of conservatives and rank and file Republicans but the seizure of political power by liberals and Democrats using a clueless and unstable megalomaniac who hates his own party as a useful idiot to propel their own agenda on his watch, under his nose, and our dime.

However, by supporting Hillary Clinton, Republicans and conservatives would be sending an unequivocal message to the treasonous backstabbing RINO liberal scum that have run the Republican Party into the ground, destroyed the conservative agenda, and abandoned and abused their base that they will no longer be rewarded with power or succeed in peddling more phony liberal frauds as conservatives as a solution to jackbooted, Marxist, big government socialism when they are on the same page.

IW has some very valid points. I too am tired of being taken for granted.

But is it worth it to put a Clinton back in the White House to prove a political point, or should we get McCain in there and try to force him to do what we want? Remember how it worked out with Dubya?

Personally, the best argument I have heard for voting for McCain is right here:

I intend to nominate judges who have proven themselves worthy of our trust that they take as their sole responsibility the enforcement of laws made by the people’s elected representatives, judges of the character and quality of Justices Roberts and Alito, judges who can be relied upon to respect the values of the people whose rights, laws and property they are sworn to defend.

Fear of the Clinton court will help me to swallow the bitter pill of voting McCain. Take some time and read the whole thing and let me know what you think.