March 20, 2018

Occupy Occupy D.C. Wind Turbine to Memorialize Dead Birds, Despoiled Land

Washington, D.C. – A mock wind turbine will be erected Monday, March 12 at noontime in Washington, D.C.’s Freedom Plaza to highlight the threat that wind, a celebrated alternative energy source, poses to the American bird community.

“If I was a bird, I’d be an angry bird right now,” said David Almasi, executive director of the National Center for Public Policy Research and director of the National Center’s “Occupy Occupy DC” project. “Countless innocent birds that only want to be with their eggs die every year from crashing into wind turbines. The environmentalists who promote wind energy at the expense of the birds are green pigs!”

Monday’s event is part of The National Center for Public Policy Research’s “Occupy Occupy D.C.” events at Freedom Plaza. The National Center obtained a five-week permit from the U.S. Park Service that forces the Occupy D.C. encampment to share the park between February 12 and March 15.

A report by the National Research Council estimated that wind turbines kill approximately 100,000 birds every year. The American Bird Conservancy claims the number could be triple that estimate — affecting the songbird community most of all.

“At some point the slaughter of birds and bats by taxpayer-subsidized wind turbines is going to trigger serious legal action,” added National Center Senior Fellow Bonner Cohen, Ph.D. “If the full force of the Migratory Bird Treaty and the Endangered Species Act were brought to bear on these unsightly killing machines, investors would turn their backs on this artificial industry in a heartbeat.”

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank with over 100,000 recent supporters. Contributions to it are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated.


Apple’s Climate Change Policy Benefits Gore’s Personal Investments and Not Shareholders, says National Center for Public Policy Research

Apple Board Member Al Gore Faces Conflict of Interest Shareholder Proposal

Washington, D.C. – Today policy experts from the National Center for Public Policy Research are attending Apple’s annual shareholder meeting in Cupertino, CA to challenge board member Al Gore over an apparent conflict of interest between his personal investments in clean energy technology and the company’s climate change policy.

Tom Borelli, Ph.D., director of the National Center’s Free Enterprise Project will present a Conflict of Interest Report shareholder proposal (#4 in the proxy statement) submitted by the National Center, asking Apple to investigate if board member Al Gore violated the company’s Business Conduct Policy by encouraging the company to end its membership in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as part of an effort to pressure the trade group to stop opposing greenhouse gas regulations.

Gore’s significant personal investments in renewable energy and related technologies would have benefited from greenhouse gas regulations. In contrast, Apple does not have a business interest in emissions regulations.

“Shareholders have a right to know if Gore used his board position to end Apple’s membership in the Chamber as a means to cash-in on his personal investments in clean energy technologies. The dirty little secret in clean energy is you need government action to make money on your investment,” said Tom Borelli.

“Gore had the financial incentive and access as a board member, the only question remains was he the catalyst that drove Apple’s policy decision. Board members should represent shareholders interests, not their personal interests” added Tom Borelli.

Several companies, including Apple, ended their relationship with the Chamber in 2009 over the trade group’s aggressive opposition to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill and EPA regulation of carbon emissions. However, unlike utilities Exelon and PG&E, who also ended their membership in the Chamber, Apple will not profit from emissions regulations.

“Beyond holding board members accountable to following Apple’s Business Conduct Policy, shareholders should be concerned about the long-term consequences of ending the company’s membership in the Chamber. The trade group actively promotes intellectual property protection, an issue that represents a core business risk for Apple,” said Deneen Borelli, fellow of the National Center–sponsored African-American leadership group, Project 21.

Currently, Apple is engaged in a trademark dispute with China over its iPad.

“Trademark protection and piracy are business risks to Apple and not climate change regulations. Addressing intellectual property matters through a trade association is an efficient way to address these issues in the international area,” added Deneen Borelli.

The National Center for Public Policy Research is an Apple shareholder.

The Apple shareholder meeting is being held today, February 23 at 10:00 am Pacific Time at the company’s headquarters in Cupertino, CA.


Michelle Malkin: “The Radical Green Machinery is Hard at Work”

In Michelle Malkin’s syndicated column today, she chooses to describe the Obama administration’s environmental “green” movement as, “the high priests of eco-destruction”. Little did she probably know how literally accurate she just might be. But that’s another story.

Malkin provides readers with ample material and links to keep a feller busy for several hours touching only on the topics of the National Parks Service’s Jon Jarvis, Interior Sec. Ken Salazar, issues with the delta smelt and the San Joaquin Valley and dam issues along the Klamath River in California. This barely scratches the surface of the fraudulent and twisted science, greed and corruption that drives the environmental movement.

I pray the day will come when people will begin to realize that what government tells you is all lies….all lies! ALL LIES!

Tom Remington


Santorum: Climate Science is Political Science

*Editor’s Note* The posting of videos or snippets of information does not indicate in any way a political endorsement by me or anyone affiliated with this web site.


Random Thoughts/Comments: Lewis & Clark, Dog Wagging, Pond Scum, Unemployment, Global Cooling

I was rereading through the journals and history of the Lewis and Clark Expeditions. When Lewis and Clark had essentially traveled upstream of the Missouri River to a point they could no longer go by boats, they had yet to meet up with the Shoshoni Indians. While the bulk of the expedition troop camped at “the forks”, I believe it was Lewis, with a small contingency of men, set out to meet up with the natives.

Of course they did find them and an interesting part I was reading was about how the Shoshonis devoured meat from deer and elk that the hunters of the L&C expedition provided for them. They devoured most everything in rapid fashion, including entrails, and didn’t bother to take the time to cook it. Yum!

What I discovered as I read on was that where the Shoshonis had decided to spend their summers was buried deep in the mountains in areas where there was little to eat, i.e. deer, elk, moose or any kind of wild animal to speak of. They mostly tried to subsist on fish and salmon from streams that were mostly part of the Columbia River watershed – obviously they had crossed the Continental Divide by this time.

Essentially, when Lewis and Clark found them, while not starving to death, they certainly were far from being well nourished. But there was a reason they hid out in the mountains. They feared the Minnetaree Indians. They had warred with them over the years and suffered greatly as a tribe. It was only during winter when the Shoshonis moved down out of the mountains nearer where the buffalo roamed.

The Lewis and Clark Expedition spent a fair amount of time around where the Shoshonis hung out and day after day, L&C sent their hunters out for food and came back empty handed. At times they had to dig into their “emergency” supplies of dried foods. They finally had to move out of this area and at the same time send the hunters far away from camp to find food. Interesting. Later events recall serious issues with finding food.

One has to wonder if perhaps there is a bit of tail wagging the dog going on in the world or at least a lot of posturing that has people in a stir. My brother readily uses the analogy of “watching the hand”. He illustrates by overtly waving one of his hands in my face while hiding the other behind his back. The intent is to get you to pay attention to the waving hand in front of your face while the other hand does something deceptive that he doesn’t want you to know about.

Well, there’s an awful lot of hand waving with attempts at getting people to have a look at all the commotion, but what is really going on? Is this clamor a diversion away from events at home while in the middle of a republican presidential primary? Or perhaps it’s deflecting attention toward Iran and Israel in order to be drawn away from some other sinister event.

Everything happens for a reason and the other day when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced troop withdrawal from Afghanistan one year early, there had to be a reason other than “gee I thought it would be cool”.

Today, the chatter is about Israel may attack Iran in the spring. Some reports seem to not be discussing if but when.

Keep an eye on the hand but don’t take your eye off the other hand either. Something is working out of our sight.

Professional sports has sunk to such a disgusting level that even so-called sports reporters can find nothing more to talk about for the upcoming Super Bowl than to call Tom Brady childish names while picking on his wife and revealing an email she sent to close friends and family. What a slime ball this reporter is. And I think Mrs. Brady better reexamine here “close” friends and “family” and see who was dumb enough to share the email.

I forget who the genius political pundit was who warned us all that leading up to the election the Obama Administration would play games with the unemployment rate so things wouldn’t look so bad. While it is a good thing that supposedly 243,000 people got jobs last month, it’s not a good thing that over 2 million people have just disappeared off the jobless radar – they’ve either given up trying to find a job, or perhaps went to work on their own, etc. Regardless, they are off the unemployment rolls and therefore no longer counted. At this rate by November unemployment numbers should be down to 7% and still the same millions of Americans not working.

Now that only a handful of brainwashed global warming cultist still cling to the lies that the earth is warming, I was hopeful. I was actually look forward to some global warming. Less severe winters, better crop production, lower heating costs, etc. However, now we are being told we are heading into a global cooling trend. I think it’s deja vu all over again.

Tom Remington


Our Seven-Day Forecast Calls For Global Warming

It appears that the freaks who have swilled the Kool-Aid and been baptized in Al Gore’s global warming cult are pushing to kick all those local weathermen off the air who don’t espouse to their religion and speak of it on a regular basis while reporting the weather. I suppose their seven-day forecasts would look something like this:

According to the Daily Caller, the true believers want all local weathermen to include man-caused global warming in their daily forecasting of the weather. It’s a far cry difference between forecasting weather and understanding what causes our climate to fluctuate.

But aside from those differences, it’s a moronic statement to define global warming “deniers” as: “anyone who expressly refutes the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change: that it is real, largely caused by humans, and already having profound impacts on our world.”

As was well stated by the late Michael Crichton: “Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science, consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with consensus.”

Tom Remington


Alternative Forms of Energy Consumption

Literally Going Green!


Anchorage Snowbanks

Photo by Al Remington


Agenda 21 For Dummies


Uh Oh! Scientists Say No Need to Panic About Untenable Claims of Destructive Global Warming

No Need to Panic About Global Warming
There’s no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to ‘decarbonize’ the world’s economy.

Editor’s Note: The following has been signed by the 16 scientists listed at the end of the article:

A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about “global warming.” Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.<<<Read the Rest>>>