Enough with Freakin' Christmas Already

This bitch takes the cake. She is linking...liberalism to Darwin. WTF? I always assumed Darwin was a scientist. He worked very hard this guy. Observed birds and those giant turtles. It's amazing how he's become a lynchpin in debate between so called liberals and conservatives. Conservatives prefer to believe that mankind just emerged fullblown from God's imagination. We did not slowly evolve up from apes. There was a little more holy magic involved. I don't have any problem with this. Believe what you will.

But this witch is extrapolating this argument to support the idea that we should not help the polar bears. Helping the bears is creating some kind of conflict with her free marketeering ideas. It's anti-business somehow. The ice is melting and these bears are just totally screwed. Why not help out if you can? Is compassion a political stance?

Don't get me wrong. I believe that they should lower taxes and give everyone in America a handgun. I'm no friend of liberals. But only a monster would turn their back on a starving polar bear. Unless it was about to attack you.

What if it turns out that we need the polar bears to translate some secret atom bomb code? Or if it they poop something that cures cancer? Then the joke would be on us, right? Damn.

And enough with Christmas already. Just gimme another pint and shut up alright! SHUT UP RIGHT NOW!!!

If you own a television, you've probably seen them: commercials pleading in somber tones to save the polar bear from extinction. A memorable public service announcement for the World Wildlife Fund features one-time "ER" actor (and now, it would seem, full-time polar bear advocate) Noah Wyle, assuring us that, "Climate change is threatening one of the most magnificent wild animals on the planet." However you feel about these creatures, the heart-tugging WWF ads are nonetheless pretty compelling.

Liberal animal rights and global warming activists have bonded together to save this formidable predator from what they tell us is certain death. They insist that, thanks to us, species are becoming extinct faster than ever (though I don't think we were measuring back in 500 BC).

Good rule of thumb: If you're quick to blame America for most bad things that happen in the world, you also may be quick to blame human kind for everything sad that happens on the planet. And frankly, that's just species-ist.

But unsurprisingly, President Obama isn't impervious to the maudlin message. He is currently considering reclassifying the poor polar bear's status from "threatened" to "endangered" under the federal Endangered Species Act. This year, he set aside 187,000 square miles in Alaska as a "critical habitat" for polar bears, which has prompted the state of Alaska to consider suing the administration for potentially costing it millions in lost economic activity and tax revenue.

But here's a question that's rarely asked: Why should we necessarily bother saving a species - any species - from extinction? And what's so gosh-darn special about the polar bear? Yes, animals are dying. But death - of a single animal or a whole species - is a part of life.

At least, that's what Darwinists tell us. In fact, if you think hard about it, animal conservation should actually be anathema to the Darwin-loving liberal agenda, which holds up evolution - and not altruistic compassion - as the final word on the survival of a species.

[Daily News]