Lilly White Sunrise Movement Holds Protest In Durham With Santa

It’s long been known that the ‘climate change’ movement has a race problem, mostly being that few other than white, privileged middle and upper class folks care. And, if you check the video at the link, you’ll see a sea of white faces in a city that is almost 40% black

Young, old and Santa march in downtown Durham for action on climate change

Hundreds of mostly young people took to the streets in Durham Friday, saying they can’t wait for politicians to fight climate change.

“Take a second to look around you and see how many people are ready to stand up and fight for a Green New Deal,” Georgette Sordellini said from a small platform in Durham Central Park.

Behind her, a banner read “Sunrise Movement.” In front of her, more than 200 residents of Durham and Chapel Hill, were gathered to protest government’s failure to respond to climate change.

While it was labeled a youth climate strike, the protesters ranged from elementary children all the way up. One sign in the back of the crowd read, “We can be our grandchildren’s’ heroes.”

Why weren’t they in school?

Speakers gave remarks about being Native Americans and respecting the land, racial equity in the climate-change conversation and investing in regenerative farming. Elijah King from Riverside High School in Durham, evoked a quote from former Ohio state Sen. Nina Turner, “Only all that we love is on the line.”

While each speaker brought a different perspective to the protest, there was a main focus of the event: The Green New Deal.

Yeah, the Extinction Rebellion nutters where present, and pretty darned white.

They also plan on creating citizen councils through local government, which Pentecost said would remove lobbying money and campaigning from the process. The group plans on using “non-violent civil disobedience,” including sit-ins and shutting down roads to get its message across.

So, lots of government is the goal, especially to stop the Free Speech protections, under the US and NC Constitutions, of those who oppose them.

As the group marched through downtown, people banged drums and played guitars. A man in a Santa Claus suit chanted with the crowd, “No more coal! No more oil! Keep our carbon in the soil!” while holding a sign that read “Santa says coal is naughty.”

Right, right, so, all the kiddies are willing to forgo all their Christmas presents and such, right?

Read: Lilly White Sunrise Movement Holds Protest In Durham With Santa »

If All You See…

…is an ocean devoid of oxygen because someone else ate a burger, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Always On Watch, with a post on democracy dying with hate speech laws.

Read: If All You See… »

Democrats Look To Strip Online Free Speech Protections From Trade Deal

Democrats have long had a problem with this whole “free speech online” thing, because it makes it harder to control people and make sure that they only hear and see what the Leftists want. Hence, the push for Net Neutrality

Pelosi Reportedly Wants To Strip Online Free Speech Protections From Trade Deal

The new trade pact between the United States, Canada, and Mexico is a mixed bag, but one of its undeniably excellent components is a provision that effectively exports American protections for online free speech to other countries.

But Speaker of the House Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) is reportedly pushing to cut that language from the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) before Congress votes on the new trade deal. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier today that Pelosi is considering removing the liability protections for online platforms from the trade deal because including that language might make it more difficult for lawmakers to hack away at those same protections domestically.

“There are concerns in the House about enshrining the increasingly controversial…liability shield in our trade agreements, particularly at a time when Congress is considering whether changes need to be made in U.S. law,” a spokesman for Pelosi told the Journal.

As I’ve written before, the USMCA—as well as a new trade deal between the U.S. and Japan—will include provisions shielding tech companies from liability for content, similar to the protections offered by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Though it’s not a simple copy/paste, the trade deals effectively duplicate Section 230’s promise that platforms will not be held liable for user-created content—like videos posted to YouTube or comments made at the bottom of this article.

This matters because Section 230 is basically the internet’s First Amendment. Putting that language into trade deals would allow online platforms doing business across North America to operate under the same legal standard, and would help establish that standard on the wider web. There are already competing legal frameworks out there—the European Union, for example, requires online firms to abide by more stringent regulations, and there is nothing free or open about China’s online space. Those differing legal frameworks for the digital world are inevitably going to clash with one another, and binding together governments to protect free speech online makes a lot of sense.

Pelosi seems to be going for the Angela Merkel approach where free speech must be limited to maintain a free society.

Read: Democrats Look To Strip Online Free Speech Protections From Trade Deal »

Surprise: ‘Climate Change’ Group Finds That Oceans Are Losing Oxygen

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has a big new blockbuster we’re totally doomed “study” out just in time for the latest UN IPCC working vacation in Madrid, and, of course, the compliant media is running the stories without question

Climate change: Oceans running out of oxygen as temperatures rise

Climate change and nutrient pollution are driving the oxygen from our oceans, and threatening many species of fish.

That’s the conclusion of the biggest study of its kind, undertaken by conservation group IUCN.

While nutrient run-off has been known for decades, researchers say that climate change is making the lack of oxygen worse.

Around 700 ocean sites are now suffering from low oxygen, compared with 45 in the 1960s.

Researchers say the depletion is threatening species including tuna, marlin and sharks.

Wait, did they say nutrients?

The threat to oceans from nutrient run-off of chemicals such as nitrogen and phosphorus from farms and industry has long been known to impact the levels of oxygen in the sea waters and still remains the primary factor, especially closer to coasts.

Hence why so many of these sites are near shore. But, hey, this is still your fault for getting that giant flatscreen TV and binge watching shows

However, in recent years the threat from climate change has increased.

As more carbon dioxide is released enhancing the greenhouse effect, much of the heat is absorbed by the oceans. In turn, this warmer water can hold less oxygen. The scientists estimate that between 1960 and 2010, the amount of the gas dissolved in the oceans declined by 2%.

That may not seem like much as it is a global average, but in some tropical locations the loss can range up to 40%.

One has to wonder how sea life survived prior to the Industrial Revolution and the fossil fueled vehicle, you know, when seas were much higher and the oceans much, much warmer. And how they survived in the tropics where the water temperature has always been warmer.

The sad part is that this (highly activist) report actually has some good points about pollution from land pollution runoff, including nitrogen from fossil fueled vehicles, plastic pollution, farm runoff, and other pollution, things that are an actual issue, but, spends the balance of time focusing on Hotcoldwetdry.

But, hey, the Cult of Climastrology needs its apocalyptic talk to stay relevant.

Read: Surprise: ‘Climate Change’ Group Finds That Oceans Are Losing Oxygen »

Washington Post Appears To Want To Blame Trump For Iranian Repression

This is one of those editorial pieces where one would say “how would they have written this about Barack Obama?”

Iran’s repression of protests was an answer to the Trump administration

THE TRUMP administration has been citing a massive wave of protests in Iran as evidence that its “maximum pressure” strategy against the Islamic republic is working. In one sense, that’s probably true. Sanctions against Iranian oil exports helped force the regime to raise gasoline prices by 50 percent or more on Nov. 15, which in turn triggered, by the government’s own account, demonstrations by up to 200,000 people in 29 of the country’s 31 provinces, including attacks on 50 military bases. That could be the biggest popular rebellion since the overthrow of the shah 40 years ago.

The regime responded with brutal and uncompromising repression. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps forces gunned down protesters, in at least one case with machine gun fire. According to Amnesty International, at least 208 people were killed in less than a week, and the real figure could be far higher. The Trump administration claims it could be more than 1,000.

The carnage was likely the result of the regime’s conviction that it needed to prove it was not vulnerable to collapse. “Iranian officials have noted . . . that the speed with which they were able to quiet the streets, regardless of the cost, should demonstrate to Washington that they are in full control,” said a report this week by the International Crisis Group. It remains to be seen whether the unrest really has been quelled — there were reports of new protests in recent days — and, if so, for how long.

But if President Trump’s objectives are, as he says, to force Iran to renegotiate the nuclear deal he scrapped and prevent further aggression against its neighbors, “maximum pressure” is not working . The Crisis Group report says it’s possible that, despite its rhetoric, the regime has been so shaken by the protests that it will look for a way to settle with the United States. If so, an avenue is open: Earlier this year, French President Emmanuel Macron appeared close to persuading Mr. Trump, if not Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, to consider an accord under which Iran would resume observance of the nuclear deal’s terms and agree to renegotiate some of them in exchange for sanctions relief.

So, the brutal theocratic dictatorship, based on hardcore Islamist doctrine, is cracking down and the Washington Post Editorial Board seems to want to aim its blame at Trump and his team? Really?

Hard-liners in the administration, such as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, clearly hope that the protests are a sign that U.S. pressure will trigger revolution and regime change in Tehran. Though that might be a desirable outcome, history as well as the events of the past month suggest it remains unlikely. The administration would be wiser to use this moment of Iranian weakness to offer a path of de-escalation.

Really. The screed could easily have been titled “The Iranian Government Is Really Mean But OMG Orange Man Bad.” Does anyone think that Obama would have been supported and the ire of the article aimed at the Iranian leaders if the PBO was still in office? Or, heck, Hillary in office? Just another case of the hardcore leftist media bias.

Read: Washington Post Appears To Want To Blame Trump For Iranian Repression »

Bummer: Trump Is Trying To Make It Took Expensive For Illegals And Moochers To Stay In U.S.

Obviously, bleeding heart (but not wallet) Democrats will be very upset about this. Of course, they never seem to pony up the money themselves

Trump is trying to make it too expensive for poor American immigrants to stay

Many of the immigration policies enacted by the administration of US president Donald Trump in the last year have been so shocking they’ve made headlines worldwide: family separation, zero tolerance, detained children, to name a few.

But not all of Trump’s efforts to restrict immigration have been so dramatic. In many cases, the administration has chipped away at the avenues for immigration through small bureaucratic changes, like the recent proposal to increase immigration-related fees.

On Nov. 14, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposed a review of the fees required to apply for various immigration services. The proposal is open for comments until Dec. 16. After that, if the new fees are confirmed, they will become effective immediately.

The changes affect a broad range of applications, from green cards through marriage, to naturalization fees, to DACA renewals (though new DACA applications aren’t allowed, existing ones can be renewed).

The new fee structure would also introduce a $50 fee for asylum applications, which would make the United States one of just a handful of countries—including Iran, Australia and Fiji—that don’t offer free asylum applications.

I fail to see the problem. We have too many people coming to this country who feel no allegiance to the US, our founding documents, nor our way of life. Many seem to be ambivalent and even hate the U.S. Many want us to change everything about the nation for these immigrants, be they legal or illegal. There should be no DACA fees: they should leave. Want asylum? Pay for it. The U.S. should no longer be the dumping ground for people who cannot take care of themselves, who have little in the way of working skills, and who will essentially have to be supported by the U.S. taxpayer, instead of us taking care of our own. Let some other nations step.

“It’s (the asylum) not a huge fee,” Kevin Johnson, dean of the school of law at the University of California, Davis, told Quartz. “But it is a huge fee to those who often come at the border with nothing.”

This is an attempt to weed out those who are serious from the BSers looking for easy access to the U.S. Those same BSers generally bring nothing but the need for being on the dole.

The new fees are essentially aimed at tightening the so-called “public charge exclusion,” or reducing the number of people whose immigration applications are rejected because they might require financial support from the US government.

See? I fail to see the problem. And, we wouldn’t need to take these steps if we were allowed to block as many illegals as possible.

Read: Bummer: Trump Is Trying To Make It Took Expensive For Illegals And Moochers To Stay In U.S. »

If All You See…

…are glaciers that only melt because Other People drove fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on the Four Professors Of The Impeachment Apocalypse.

Read: If All You See… »

Your Fault: Climate Crisis (scam) Could Reverse Progress On Gender Equality Or Something

You’re to blame, because you drove a fossil fueled vehicle, use lots of energy, and refuse to go vegetarian

Climate crisis could reverse progress in achieving gender equality

….

Researchers are in a race against time to predict how climate change will affect these communities and help them adapt, with drought and flood resistant crops and cattle breeds for example. But it’s often overlooked that climate change will affect one half of humanity significantly more than the other. Longstanding gender inequality means that within regions of the world that are particularly vulnerable to climate change, women are likely to suffer more than men.

In a recent study, we found that extreme weather and unpredictable seasons disproportionately weaken the agency of women to find well paid work and rise above rigid gender roles, even when these appear to be bending after decades of reform and activism. Without support in the form of assured drinking water, energy, childcare or credit, women end up working harder and in poorer conditions for lower wages. (snip)

To ensure that the health of people in these places doesn’t irreversibly decline, women need to be supported with child and healthcare services, but also drinking water and cooking fuel. The role of community support is crucial during crises, but there’s little that women can do to help themselves without resources and skills.

See? The only way to help women, because the Cult of Climastrology thinks they are weak and unable to do things themselves, is with more Government.

Read: Your Fault: Climate Crisis (scam) Could Reverse Progress On Gender Equality Or Something »

Climate Cult Pope Calls The Crisis (scam) The “Challenge Of Civilization”

Pope Francis seems to spend more time on social justice warrior stuff like ‘climate change’ than Catholic doctrine. Since he is a climate cultist does he now think that abortion on demand and population control are great?

Climate crisis is ‘challenge of civilisation’, says pope

The climate emergency is a “challenge of civilisation” requiring sweeping changes to economic systems, but political leaders have not done enough, the pope has said in a message to governments meeting at the annual climate summit in Madrid.

“We must seriously ask ourselves if there is the political will to allocate with honesty, responsibility and courage, more human, financial and technological resources [to the climate crisis],” he said, in the pontifical message, which was welcomed by activists.

“Numerous studies tell us it is still possible to limit global warming. To do this we need a clear, far-sighted and strong political will, set on pursuing a new course that aims at refocusing financial and economic investments toward those areas that truly safeguard the conditions of a life worthy of humanity on a healthy planet for today and tomorrow.”

He put particular emphasis on the role of young people, who “show a heightened sensitivity to the complex problems that arise from this emergency. We must not place the burden on the next generations to take on the problems caused by the previous ones.”

Hmm, he sounds like the same Modern Socialists in the Cult of Climastrology who want to blow up capitalism and replace it with a government driven and controlled economy.

Neil Thorns, the director of advocacy at the Catholic aid agency Cafod, said: “Pope Francis is clear you can’t tackle the climate crisis on its own: it has to be considered alongside wider issues of environmental degradation, poverty and inequality.

“His message to COP25 highlights the need to reform our model of development alongside refocusing our economic systems, emphasising the ‘challenge of civilisation’ is for us to act for the common good and with the most vulnerable people at the heart of decisions.”

So, it’s not about the actual climate, but, every left wing bit of advocacy, which is really way to the right, being authoritarian.

Read: Climate Cult Pope Calls The Crisis (scam) The “Challenge Of Civilization” »

Joe Biden Blows Gasket At Iowa Event, Calls Voter Fat

Joe Biden’s press office and the Dem supporting media have their job cut out in spinning this. Of course, they can all just not carry the story, but, too many can see it on social media

Biden Calls Voter ‘a Damn Liar,’ ‘Fat’ After a Question About Hunter Biden

On Thursday, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports played a clip of 2020 Democrat presidential hopeful former Vice President Joe Biden being questioned by a voter in Iowa about his son Hunter Biden’s Ukrainian business.

At a New Hampton, Iowa, town hall, a voter asked, “We all know Trump has been messing around in Ukraine over there holding there foreign aid for them to come up saying they are going to investigate you. We all know about that … But you, on the other hand, sent your son over there to get a job and work for a gas company that he had no experience with gas or nothing in order to get access for the president. So you are selling access to the president just like he was.”

Biden said, “You’re a damn liar, man. That’s not true. And no one has ever said that.”

The voter added, “I see it on the TV.”

Biden said, “You see it on the TV. No, I know you do. And by the way, I’m not sedentary. I get up … Let him go. Let him go. Look, the reason I’m running is because I’ve been around a long time, and I know more than most people know, and I can get things done. That’s why I’m running. You want to check my shape on let’s do push-ups together, let’s run, let’s do whatever you want to do number one. Number two no one has said my son did anything wrong, and I did not on any occasion—”

The voter said, “I didn’t say you were doing anything wrong.”

Biden said, “You said I set my son up to work at an oil company. Isn’t that want you said? Get your words straight jack.”

The voter said, “That’s what I hear on MSNBC.”

Biden said, “You don’t hear that on MSNBC.”

The voter said, “The hell I do.”

Biden said, “Look, I’m not going to get in an argument with you.”

The voter said, “I don’t want to either.”

Biden said, “Well yeah you do but look, fat, here’s the deal—”

The voter added, “It looks like you don’t have anymore backbone than Trump does.”

The voter had introduced himself as a Democratic Party and Elizabeth Warren voter and was concerned about Joe’s age. Joe has a long history of making gaffes by speaking the random thoughts in his head that should have been stopped by the mental filter. His press office is trying to say that Joe said “facts”, not “fat”, but, listen to it yourself. Sure sounds like “fat.”

It will be great when the media is forced to ask the tough questions as to what was Joe’s role in Hunter getting that job with Burisma, and with forcing Ukraine to fire the prosecutor looking into Burisma’s shaky business dealings. Why Joe threatened to withhold aid if they didn’t.

Read: Joe Biden Blows Gasket At Iowa Event, Calls Voter Fat »

Bad Behavior has blocked 7174 access attempts in the last 7 days.