Climate Cult Grand Poobah Al Gore Thinks That The Climate Crisis Is A War We Can Win

By William Teach September 21, 2019 – 11:23 am

Manbearpig crawled out of his hole to drop an op-ed at the NY Times

The Climate Crisis Is The Battle Of Or Time, And We Can Win

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, but then they happen much faster than you thought they could.

The destructive impacts of the climate crisis are now following the trajectory of that economics maxim as horrors long predicted by scientists are becoming realities.

More destructive Category 5 hurricanes are developing, monster fires ignite and burn on every continent but Antarctica, ice is melting in large amounts there and in Greenland, and accelerating sea-level rise now threatens low-lying cities and island nations.

Tropical diseases are spreading to higher latitudes. Cities face drinking-water shortages. The ocean is becoming warmer and more acidic, destroying coral reefs and endangering fish populations that provide vital protein consumed by about a billion people.

He has his talking points down, you have to give him that

Worsening droughts and biblical deluges are reducing food production and displacing millions of people. Record-high temperatures threaten to render areas of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, North Africa and South Asia uninhabitable. Growing migrations of climate refugees are destabilizing nations. A sixth great extinction could extinguish half the species on earth.

Now we need to ask ourselves: Are we really helpless and unwilling to respond to the gravest threat faced by civilization? Is it time, as some have begun to counsel, to despair, surrender and focus on “adapting” to the progressive loss of the conditions that have supported the flourishing of humanity? Are we really moral cowards, easily manipulated into lethargic complacency by the huge continuing effort to deceive us into ignoring what we see with our own eyes?

Remember, polls say that roughly 68%-75% are unwilling to pay more than $10 a month to stop the “climate crisis.”

This is our generation’s life-or-death challenge. It is Thermopylae, Agincourt, Trafalgar, Lexington and Concord, Dunkirk, Pearl Harbor, the Battle of the Bulge, Midway and Sept. 11. At moments of such crisis, the United States and the world have to be mobilized, and before we can be mobilized, we have to be inspired to believe the battle can be won. Is it really too much to ask now that politicians summon the courage to do what most all of them already know is necessary?

Fortunately, there’s a tax to solve this

Yet for all this promise, here is another hard truth: All of these efforts together will not be enough to reduce greenhouse gas emissions sufficiently without significant policy changes. And right now, we don’t have the right policies because the wrong policymakers are in charge. We need to end the mammoth taxpayer-funded subsidies that encourage the continued burning of fossil fuels. We need to place a direct or indirect price on carbon pollution to encourage the use of cheaper, sustainable alternatives that are already out there. New laws and regulations may be needed as well to encourage innovation and force more rapid reductions in emissions.

See? We can fix it with a tax!

Oh, and when is Gore going to give up his own use of fossil fuels, especially for his private jet usage?

Read: Climate Cult Grand Poobah Al Gore Thinks That The Climate Crisis Is A War We Can Win »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming, Unhinged Tools | 28 Comments | Trackback URL

Jerry Nadler Claims ‘Climate Change’ Will Reduce Life On Earth To Bacteria Or Something

By William Teach September 21, 2019 – 7:50 am

Excitable Jerry Nadler should stick with his Russia Russia Russia stuff, though, this kind of apoplectic apocalyptic yammering is certainly not out of bounds within the Cult of Climastrology

WATCH–Jerry Nadler: Climate Change Will Reduce Life to ‘Bacteria’

House Judiciary Committee Chairman and Democrat New York Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) claimed Friday that the impact of climate change will reduce the planet to “bacteria and maybe a few plants.”
Nadler’s remarks were made as he spoke in Washington, D.C., at one of several global climate strike protests.

“People think, well, the sea leavels are rising, it’ll cost us $100 billion to relocate, two million people will die in Bangladesh in India because that’s bad enough,” Nadler said. “It’s much, much worse.”

“I have a thirteen year-old grandaughter and when I look at her, I get terrified,” Nadler continued. “I don’t know if human life will survive fifty years. We may face, the climate scientists tell us, that we may face the sixth mass extiniction in the history of the globe.”

Nadler then shifted his focus to the acidification of the oceans, which he says will “destroy the entire food chain.”

“If the oceans acidify, which they’re beginning to do, they will destroy the entire food chain and essentially all that will be left will be bacteria and maybe some plants.”

 

I’m not sure who’s nuttier, Nadler or the kiddies marching for Government to take away their freedom, choice, mobility, and money, as well as turning the clock way back on their lives to hundreds of years ago.

Then you have the climate kids

To give us an idea of just how ignorant these kids are on the so-called ‘climate emergency’, Guardian Australia has helpfully released a video. (snip)

Hannah, 10, says:

“Some cows are farting and that’s putting carbon into the atmosphere and that’s bad because the sunlight goes out and can never come back.”

Is this the kind of expertise on which we are now expected to base global climate and energy policy? Lots of greenies and leftists (not that there’s much difference) clearly think so.

That, after all, was the purpose of the Climate Crisis Hearing held in Congress earlier this week – in which a Democrat-led committee invited us to be impressed by just how much a bunch of mopey, whiney teenagers including Greta Thunberg are worried about climate change. (snip)

So what we’re witnessing today is the bizarre phenomenon of tens of thousands of schoolchildren protesting over an issue which they do not remotely comprehend. And then being applauded for it by adults who – astonishingly – are even more stupid than the kids.

And Jerry is right there with the kids.

Read: Jerry Nadler Claims ‘Climate Change’ Will Reduce Life On Earth To Bacteria Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 26 Comments | Trackback URL

Comrade Bernie Finds New Way To Patronize Voters, Calls For Eliminating Medical Debt

By William Teach September 21, 2019 – 7:35 am

Who’s going to pay for it?

Bernie Sanders Calls for Eliminating Americans’ Medical Debt

Bernie Sanders has long wanted to remake the health care system so no one will have to pay directly for medical care again. Now, he also wants to go back and cancel all the medical debts of people who have been billed under the current system.

In a plan set to be released Saturday, Mr. Sanders, the Vermont senator and presidential candidate, proposes wiping out an estimated $81 billion in existing debt and changing rules around debt collection and bankruptcy. He also calls for replacing the giant credit reporting agencies with a “public credit registry” that would ignore medical debt when calculating credit scores. (snip)

Medical debt affects Americans who lack health insurance, of course. But it is also increasingly affecting people who have insurance with holes, like high deductibles or limited networks of doctors whose care is paid for. Around 16 percent of adults with credit reports have at least one medical debt, according to a study published last year in the journal Health Affairs.

The plan calls for the government to negotiate and cancel the debts, though it does not specify the precise mechanism.

That’s quite a bit to unpack, eh? The plan doesn’t say exactly how the debt would be paid, because the companies who are owed the money certainly aren’t going to roll over and lose a ton of money, perhaps even go out of business over it. Nor does it specify who qualifies, so, does it mean that if you owe a couple hundred dollars Someone Else would take care of it? What about future debt? Will that be paid? Or is this a one time shot? It would surely entice people to intentionally blow off future debt, much like amnesty entices illegals to come in the future.

And then there’s the notion of what appears to be a federal government takeover of the credit rating system. What could possibly go wrong with that? And why ignore unpaid medical bills? Why not all unpaid bills if we’re going down this road?

It is interesting that it is “increasingly affecting people who have insurance with holes”, considering what Obamacare has done to the medical insurance industry, is it not? Especially since so many of the plans have high deductibles and limited networks.

While eliminating every American’s medical debt would probably not come cheap, Mr. Sanders’s plan could wind up costing far less than the total amount of debt he is seeking to cancel. Craig Antico, a founder of the charity RIP Medical Debt, which buys and forgives medical debt, estimated that the market price for $81 billion in debt could be as low as $500 million. Most past-due medical debt never gets paid, which is why bill collectors are often willing to sell the debts for pennies on the dollar.

There is that. But, again, it would incentivize people to blow off paying medical debt and then demand that government pay it, which would certainly lead to medical facilities keep private lists of deadbeats, and demanding more up-front payment.

Read: Comrade Bernie Finds New Way To Patronize Voters, Calls For Eliminating Medical Debt »

Posted in Democrats, Healthcare | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Beto’s Really Hot To Take Your Firearms

By William Teach September 20, 2019 – 4:54 pm

He is, he truly is

See, the went from just wanting to reinstate the 1994 assault weapons ban, which only stopped new sales, to wanting to take your assault weapons, to wanting to take all semi-automatic weapons. And they wonder why we won’t agree on any proposals, such as requiring a background check on all purchases, even when we agree with them? Because we know it won’t stop there, and the end goal is what New Zealand just did.

(Townhall) Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) on Thursday applauded 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke for being open and honest about his desire to confiscate millions of AR-15s.

“Look, there are two groups of people behind these bills,” Kennedy told Fox News’ Sandra Smith. “There’s a group of people who I think in good faith honestly believe that further curtailing our Second Amendment rights will enhance public safety,” Kennedy said. “But there’s another group that just hates the Second Amendment, and I want to thank Congressman Beto O’Rourke for being honest — I mean, his honesty was refreshing.”

“And by that, senator, you’re referencing his doubling down on his controversial stance that he’s willing to confiscate guns,” Smith replied.

“I want to thank the Congressman for being honest because I don’t agree with him,” Kennedy aid. “Beto’s copy of the Bill of Rights goes from one to three. Mine includes the Second Amendment. But there are a whole host of people here in Washington, D.C. — not all of my Democratic friends, but many of my Democratic friends — they don’t believe in the Second Amendment.”

Beto (and a few others) really has damaged their Cause

For years, gun control advocates have said they’re not interested in confiscating our firearms. They always say, “No one is coming for your guns. We just want common sense gun laws.” Kennedy is right. Second Amendment-loving folks should be thanking people like Beto. He has confirmed what we knew to be a reality. He has come out and said exactly what he wants to happen. Democrats can no longer hide and say we’re wearing tinfoil hats or that we’re being paranoid. Beto has said what many in the Democratic Party want: a firearm registry and mandatory confiscation.

Now, the response from Beto (which, strangely, no media outlet wants to report, came from this in his visit to Aurora

At one point, Columbine survivor Evan Todd, from the crowd, urged O’Rourke to take an even harder stance by subjecting a wider range of weapons to his proposed mandatory buyback program.

“The (mass) murders all happen with semi-automatics,” he said. “Why not ban (all) semi-automatics?”

Beto agreed with him. Oh, and he hates the U.S.A.

“This wasn’t just a disaster that befell our community,” O’Rourke said. “This is a violent, racist country — with a racist in the White House who’s directing that violence against the most vulnerable among us, including communities of immigrants. So when this happens in El Paso, Texas, we must connect the dots for our fellow Americans so that they understand the cost and the consequence of Donald Trump — (and) so they understand the cost and the consequence of our failure collectively (to act on guns), because all of us are the government.”

Yeah, this rhetoric will help in a general election. Not that he’s going to be the last Democrat standing.

Read: Beto’s Really Hot To Take Your Firearms »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 20, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…are horrid carbon pollution clouds, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jihad Watch, with a post on the Women’s March dropping anti-Semites brought in to replace the other anti-Semites they let go.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: The Green New Disaster Is About Building A Whole New World

By William Teach September 20, 2019 – 10:30 am

Strange, I thought it was about solving ‘climate change’. No?

The Green New Deal is really about designing an entirely new world

(lots of yapping about FDR’s New Deal, which they even say caused a lot of today’s problems)

The Green New Deal resolution states it’s the duty of the U.S. “to invest in the infrastructure and industry of the United States to sustainably meet the challenges of the 21st century.” The language is intentionally ambiguous and open-ended, giving designers and policymakers space to imagine. Creating “sustainable environments” and “building resiliency,” as HR 109 states, will look very different for coastal cities of millions versus sparsely populated inland rural areas. That ambiguity becomes slightly more concrete in the sections that call for “guaranteeing universal access to clean water,” “upgrading buildings,” and “cleaning up existing hazardous waste and abandoned sites.”

Physically, infrastructure changes will need to involve moving us away from fossil-fuel use entirely, adapting the built landscape to sustain severe weather and extreme climatic conditions, using materials and building techniques that are robust and aren’t extractive, and moving people, many of them displaced by natural disasters, to safer and more resilient areas. And most importantly, new infrastructure will need to center quality of life for all people, especially those whom previous policy left behind, ignored, or flat out exploited.

So, they’re going to move everyone out of NYC, Boston, Miami, LA, and such, because they feel that the cities are doomed? Or is it just about forcing people in the suburbs and rural areas into centralized locations for better control?

To Orff, speculative infrastructure has the power to influence new policy through the very process of imagining it. Through the workshopping process, architects and designers could build the diverse coalitions of policymakers, lawyers, community members, engineers, and other stakeholders needed to realize a project and make sure it meets the goals of the Green New Deal.

“We need to visualize and give form to the exciting, new low-carbon landscape,” she said during her presentation. “Let’s convene lawyers, policymakers, and designers to link scales of design to policy… The answer isn’t just for designers to be political, but to design in a political context.”

Lawyers, huh?

Anyhow, this is all about infrastructure and how it relates to the climate change scam, essentially all about designing it to control people

Climate policy is a key issue leading into the 2020 election, and candidates are making their positions known and promising to invest trillions. Joe Biden says he will commit $5 trillion to a climate plan, which includes a call to improve the country’s rail network. Elizabeth Warren is pledging $3 trillion for her climate plan, which includes calls for green infrastructure, like solar and wind farms, and $400 billion earmarked for research and development of green technology. Bernie Sanders has a $16 trillion plan, which aims to decarbonize the country’s transportation and energy systems by 2030. These plans, like the Green New Deal house resolution, are also just policy frameworks. Where policy manifests and becomes real and tangible is in our infrastructure—our transportation systems, energy grid, parks, schools, public spaces, cultural and civic buildings, and the very streets on which we live.

This would give Government even more power over your life and mobility. Surprise!

Read: Surprise: The Green New Disaster Is About Building A Whole New World »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Marianne WIlliamson Recommends Mandatory National Service For Young People To Fight Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach September 20, 2019 – 7:07 am

Marianne may have been one of the less vocally nutso Democrat contenders so far, but, no matter, because she is just as much an authoritarian as the rest in her heart

Marianne Williamson wants a national mandatory service for people ages 18-26 to combat climate change

At a presidential climate change forum on Thursday, author and Democratic presidential hopeful Marianne Williamson floated the idea of a national mandatory year of service for young adults to tackle climate change.

“I would like to ask your opinion, I think during the ‘season of repair,’ we should have a mandatory national service, one year, for people between 18 and 26 because we need you,” Williamson said. “We need to fix this climate. We need to fix this country.”

MSNBC’s Ali Velshi asked the audience, which consisted mainly of students, to raise their hands if they liked the idea. “A few, alright.”

Williamson smirked at the crowd’s reaction.

“To save the country. It’s not just the climate,” she said.

Well, now, that’s interesting that only a few raised their hands. The kids are super excited to Do Something in theory about ‘climate change’, but not excited in practice for themselves. That’s kinda the way this works: Warmists are always excited in theory, but when they have to put their own lives and money on the line, the excitement drops like a dog’s smile as they pass the park on the way to the vet. The kids love that they can blow off school today to protest, but, ask them to give up their modern lives and pay more and they’ll go back to class.

The climate forum was hosted by MSNBC and Georgetown University’s Institute of Politics and Public Service, giving college students the opportunity to ask candidates questions. This is not the first time Williamson has mentioned of national service for young people. Her campaign website includes an outline of a program that would “be a way that every American citizen spends one year of their youth in service to the repair of our nation.”

If they really cared the kids would do this voluntarily, right? Perhaps it’s because belief in ‘climate change’ being mostly caused by Mankind isn’t that strong

Read More »

Read: Marianne WIlliamson Recommends Mandatory National Service For Young People To Fight Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Democrats, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Federal Judge Puts The Kibosh On California’s Tax Return Law

By William Teach September 20, 2019 – 6:47 am

Seriously, other than the moonbat California Democrats who passed it, who saw this coming? Everyone

California judge blocks law requiring Trump to submit tax returns to compete in state’s 2020 primary

A federal judge in California Thursday granted the Trump campaign’s request to block a new law that requires presidential and gubernatorial candidates to release five years of tax returns to run in the state’s primary elections.

The law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, in July would have left the sitting president off of the ballot in California’s March 2020 primary unless he submitted five years’ worth of his tax returns by a Nov. 26 deadline, the Los Angeles Times reported. Under SB 27, Trump would be included on the general election ballot in November 2020. Oppoenents of the law argue depressed GOP voter turnout in the primary could discourage voters from showing up to vote for the president in the main race.

“We are encouraged that the federal court has tentatively concluded that a preliminary injunction should be granted. We look forward to the court’s written order,” Trump’s attorney, Jay Sukelow, said in a statement, according to The Hill. “It remains our position that the law is unconstitutional because states are not permitted to add additional requirements for candidates for president, and that the law violated citizens’ 1st Amendment right of association.”

U.S. District Judge Morrison England Jr., who was appointed by President George W. Bush, said he would issue a final ruling by the end of the month. He said he handed down an initial order from the bench to prevent the “irreparable harm without temporary relief” for Trump and other candidates should the law go into effect, according to the Times. (snip)

Trump’s lawyers said SB 27 would unfairly force the president to give up his right to privacy. Trump has already complied with federal law by submitting an annual report that provides an overview of his finances. The Ethics in Government Act (EIGA), which was enacted in 1976, applies to a range of high-ranking federal officials, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Like it or not, the Constitution says exactly what is necessary to run for President of the USA, and it doesn’t include providing tax returns (which, of course, were not something people had back then). Interestingly, SB27 does not require any other person running for an elected position at any other level to provide tax returns. It is just aimed at the president, which means it is specifically targeting Donald Trump. Shouldn’t the People know the tax returns of whomever is running for California governor? And the general assembly? How about federal Senator and Representative?

You knew this judicial outcome was coming, because it is a law targeting one specific person, which is not how our system works.

Under California’s so-called jungle primary system, all candidates, regardless of party, vie for the same elected office and the top two vote-getters move on to the general election. Since it was implemented in California in 2010, this system has often ensured a Democrat-on-Democrat general election battle in all but California’s most conservative areas. Depressed GOP turnout in primaries could mean even fewer Republicans move on to general elections.

So, that would effect the down ballot votes during the primaries. California Democrats found a very interesting way to depress the GOP vote, eh?

Read: Federal Judge Puts The Kibosh On California’s Tax Return Law »

Posted in Constitution, Current Affairs, Democrats, Donald Trump | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Dem Presidential Candidate Andrew Yang Wants To Take Your Fossil Fueled Vehicles

By William Teach September 19, 2019 – 5:28 pm

Or, is that just not allowing you any privately owned vehicle?

I’ve watched this and tried to find more information as to what his specific meaning is, but, let’s be charitable, and just assume he means you won’t be allowed to have any privately owned vehicle, you damned peasants.

Read: Dem Presidential Candidate Andrew Yang Wants To Take Your Fossil Fueled Vehicles »

Posted in Democrats, Global Warming | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Goes After San Francisco Over Environmental Damage From Used Needles

By William Teach September 19, 2019 – 3:03 pm

It’s never wise to bait President Donald Trump, because he’s more than up to the task to coming back at you, especially when there’s a real problem

Trump threatens environmental action against San Francisco

President Donald Trump says he’s sending San Francisco a notice of violation for its homeless problem.

The president told reports aboard Air Force One on Wednesday that a tremendous amount of raw sewage from the homeless problem- including needles – is going into storm drains that then goes into the ocean.

He said the city is in “total violation” and that he will ask the Environmental Protection Agency to send out a notice very soon.

It was not immediately clear which environmental laws Trump believes San Francisco has violated.

How about the federal laws about raw sewage ending up in the waterways? How about proper disposal of used drug needles ending up in the waterways? Of course, Liberals are having fits over Trump calling them out for the situation the Liberals created

But San Francisco Mayor London Breed responded to the president on Twitter, saying “If the president wants to talk about homelessness, we are committed to working on actual solutions, like adding 1,000 new shelter beds by next year and working to pass a $600 million affordable housing bond to create more badly needed housing. We wish the federal government would offer support on solutions that help people exit homelessness.”

Hey, if we didn’t have to spend so much on housing illegal aliens, the money would be there. If San Fran wasn’t so expensive and created this homeless issue, along with tolerating the garbage, sewage, poop in the streets and used needles in the streets. And then there’s Lefty The Daily Beast

If that’s the case, then why worry about plastic straws? Really, it doesn’t matter, because Democrats will oppose Trump on anything. And now they’ll oppose him on cleaning up the environment.

Read: Trump Goes After San Francisco Over Environmental Damage From Used Needles »

Posted in Democrats, Donald Trump, Environment | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove