Woman Kisses Whale On Excursion And It’s Obviously About ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach April 9, 2025 – 7:15 am

The hallmarks of a cult: there’s a cool moment between a human and a whale and then having to drag your cult beliefs into it

Kissing a whale in Mexico and witnessing firsthand the effects of climate change

In the bays and lagoons of southern Mexico, where gray whales have gathered for thousands of years to give birth and nurture their young, tourists flock for exciting, close-up encounters with the ocean giants.

But there are troublesome signs that the whale population is suffering from lack of food, due to climate change, and a low birth rate.

“They look thinner, you can see their vertebrae and ribs more,” said Pepe Garcia Rodriguez, our friendly, small boat captain who took us out for a day-long whale-watching tour at the end of February in Magdalena Bay, in Mexico.

The gray whales make a remarkable 10,000-to-12,000-mile round trip migration from Alaska to their Mexican nurseries each year, fattening themselves up in the Arctic before starting their journey south.

But “they don’t have enough food in Alaska,” Pepe said. “When that happens, there’s going to be less babies on the next year, more and more whales dead.”

There couldn’t possibly be other reasons, like, over-fishing and actual pollution, right? Whales have survived just fine during previous Holocene warm periods, which were as warm if not warmer. Dragging the climate cult into the mix actually creates an impediment to deal with the real issues.

“I kissed a whale and I liked it,” was my wife’s refrain after she leaned over the side of the small boat to plant a big smooch on one of the cooperative gray whale moms in 2019, the last time we were in San Ignacio.

So, the writers wife had a cool interaction, and he had to fire off what is a long article? Cult.

Read: Woman Kisses Whale On Excursion And It’s Obviously About ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

SCOTUS Rules In Trump’s Favor On Fired Probationary Workers

By William Teach April 9, 2025 – 7:00 am

At least temporarily

Supreme Court halts order to rehire probationary workers fired by Trump

The Supreme Court on Tuesday paused an order by a lower-court judge requiring the Trump administration to rehire about 16,000 fired probationary employees, at least a temporary victory for the president’s efforts to radically downsize the government and dismantle some agencies.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled last month that the government’s human resource agency, the Office of Personnel Management, had no legal authority to direct mass firings at the departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Interior, Treasury and Veterans Affairs. Most of the workers had been on the job a year or two, but some were more veteran employees.

The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Alsop’s order, which was based on the allegations of nine nonprofit groups, was improper because the groups did not have standing to sue, meaning they did not have a direct stake in the firings so they could not bring legal action. The high court’s order did not address allegations brought by workers’ unions that are also part of the lawsuit. The fired probationary workers were not parties to the legal action.

The impact of the ruling will be somewhat limited because a federal judge in Maryland issued a similar injunction last month against the firing of many of the same workers in 19 states and the District of Columbia. The Maryland ruling remains in effect and was not part of the high court’s decision.

If the POTUS cannot terminate employees for cause then what is the point of having a POTUS, when some random judge can decide they Do Not Agree with the duly elected POTUS?

Two liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, said they would have denied the government’s application to pause the rehirings while litigation continues.

Surprised it wasn’t one of those two and Amy Coney Barrett.

“The District Court’s injunction was based solely on the allegations of the nine non-profit-organization plaintiffs in this case. But under established law, those allegations are presently insufficient to support the organizations’ standing,” the majority wrote.

What do those non-profits have to do with it? Oh, right, they would have a tougher time getting the graft money?

The plaintiffs in the 9th Circuit said the Supreme Court ruling was “only a momentary pause” in their efforts to fight the firings.

“There is no doubt that thousands of public service employees were unlawfully fired in an effort to cripple federal agencies and their crucial programs that serve millions of Americans every day,” they said in a statement. “Today’s order by the U.S. Supreme Court is deeply disappointing but is only a momentary pause in our efforts to enforce the trial court’s orders and hold the federal government accountable.”

Yup, they want their grat money.

Read: SCOTUS Rules In Trump’s Favor On Fired Probationary Workers »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Donald Trump | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Cult: Disney’s Snow Woke Had A Huge Carbon Footprint

By William Teach April 8, 2025 – 3:00 pm

This is the type of thing only a member of a doomsday cult would care about, would even think about finding out, and then writing about it. But, it makes good blog material for those of us who laugh at the cult, like Green Jihad, where I first saw this

Disney’s Snow White had higher carbon emissions than the latest Fast & Furious film

At a screening of the new Snow White movie in London last month, influencers walked through an artificial fairytale forest, complete with a full-size thatched cottage filled with models of furry animals. In the US, Disney paraded an actual bunny in a brown knitted jumper down the red carpet at the film’s Hollywood premiere.

But the film’s theme of being at one with nature seems not to have extended to the real-life environment, with company documents showing the making of Snow White generated more greenhouse gas emissions in the UK than the latest Fast & Furious film, despite the latter’s reliance on an array of gas-guzzling cars.

Analysis of more than 250 sets of filings from the Walt Disney Company reveals that the live action remakes of Snow White and another animated classic, The Little Mermaid, created more pollution than any of its other movies made in the UK since 2019, when the environmental reporting requirement was introduced.

By “pollution” they mean CO2, otherwise known as plant food.

It obliges companies to disclose the emissions generated in the UK, so the global total may be higher. The Little Mermaid, for example, was also filmed in Sardinia, while the Fast and Furious film-makers travelled to Italy and the US.

The combined emissions for Snow White and The Little Mermaid are higher than the annual amount produced by Birmingham and Luton airports. Each movie generated higher emissions than the annual total for Blackpool Pleasure Beach and London’s O2 Arena, where the Snow White influencer event took place.

But, outside of cult world, does anyone really care? Were any of the tiny amount of Snow Woke fans thinking “hey, I wonder what the carbon footprint of the movie is”? The whole thing is nutbar.

Despite being made by an American studio, both Snow White and The Little Mermaid were filmed at Pinewood Studios, just outside London. Studios filming in the UK get up to 25.5% of their spending reimbursed under government plans to incentivise the industry. As part of this process, accounts must be filed for the ­production company behind each movie, showing the cost of making the movie and the emissions generated in the UK.

That’s nuts, both for the need to calculate the carbon footprint and being reimbursed. It’s one thing to have a tax break to film, something else to give taxpayer money to film, especially if the movie will make money. And, Snow Woke would probably have lost money even without Rachel Zelger opening her big mouth, and that lefties hate Gal Godot because she is Jewish and Israeli.

Consider that Minecraft, which was panned by reviewers as bad as Snow Woke, has made $157 million in the US and Canada and $144 internationally on it’s first weekend. I think it is stupid, but, people went for apparently just good, message free fun. Snow Woke will probably lose about $115 million. And the climate cult is upset with it!

Read: Cult: Disney’s Snow Woke Had A Huge Carbon Footprint »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Film, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 8, 2025 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fossil fueled truck that needs to be cleaned from the Bad Weather created mud, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Bunkerville, with a post on Pa Gov Shapiro giving $5 million to a Philly mosque.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 23 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Goes TDS Over Trump’s “New Economy Behind Wall Of Tariffs”

By William Teach April 8, 2025 – 10:30 am

The front webpage headline adds “What if” to the beginning and a question mark to the end of the below headline as read in the single page. Because what looks to be straight opinion is now how the WP writes news

Trump is serious about building a new economy behind a wall of tariffs

President Donald Trump faces a major obstacle in trying to transform the U.S. economy into a self-reliant colossus: himself.

The Credentialed Media just can’t help themselves. Anyways

Building the factories to realize the president’s promised high-tariff “Golden Age” and finding the workers to operate them will not be easy. But Trump’s use of unilateral presidential authority, rather than congressional legislation, to enact new import taxes, his contradictory policies, and his history of changing course may discourage business executives from even starting.

Since his April 2 high-tariff announcement, Trump and his senior advisers have given conflicting signals about whether he intends to use the tariff threat as leverage to win concessions from U.S. trading partners or levy permanent import taxes of up to 50 percent on some countries (and even higher in the case of China).

That’s kind of the point: wanting other governments to be unsure

“They can both be true. There can be permanent tariffs and there can also be negotiations,” the president said on Monday as he welcomed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House.

And it is a long, long, long screed saying “the US cannot do this! We cannot have tariffs! We cannot have manufacturing in the U.S.!” It’s almost like the Washington Post is rooting against the U.S. But, let’s see. The WP forgot to mention a few things

Seems good

Even if the president agrees to lower or waive the highest tariffs that he has announced for individual countries, the across-the-board 10 percentage point increase in tariff rates that he implemented on April 5 lifted the U.S. average to its highest mark since at least the 1940s. Many analysts believe that new tax will be permanent. (snip)

Some products — such as coffee or bananas — cannot be produced in the continental United States, even if protected by tariffs. So Americans will pay higher prices to import them. Other goods could be produced in the U.S., but will also cost more since American wages are significantly higher than in other countries such as China or Mexico, said Furman.

The easiest answer is that the other countries remove their tariffs.

Read: Washington Post Goes TDS Over Trump’s “New Economy Behind Wall Of Tariffs” »

Posted in Donald Trump, Economy, Wonky Media | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Cult “Scientists” Say A Hurricane Will Hit Pennsylvania This Year

By William Teach April 8, 2025 – 7:00 am

Of course, they are hedging their bets, because they wouldn’t want to go on record and say something like that will happen for sure

Will Pennsylvania be hit with a hurricane this year? A top forecast for 2025 is here

Hurricane researchers are predicting another active Atlantic hurricane season, with as many as 17 possible storms and at least one hurricane that could impact Pennsylvania, according to experts from Colorado State University.

Long considered the most respected of hurricane forecasts, the CSU research team released their initial predictions last week, stating that nine of those storms could become hurricanes, with four expected to develop into major hurricanes at Category 3 strength or above. A typical year averages about 14 tropical storms, seven hurricanes and three major hurricanes, according to data from the CSU team from 1991 to 2020.

Yeah, well, CSU is hot and cold, sometimes good, sometimes not. They predicted 23, then upped it to 25, then down to 23. There were 18. They were on the money for hurricanes and major hurricanes, at 11 and 5.

Since Pennsylvania is not located along the East Coast, Colorado State did not estimate the odds of a named storm, hurricane or major hurricanes impacting the Keystone State. One hurricane is forecasted to hit upper Delaware area and South Jersey this season, according to Accuweather, which could impact Pennsylvania.

Oh, so, wait, it isn’t that CSU is making the prognostication, it is Philly Burbs.

Due to their location, no hurricanes have hit Pennsylvania directly, although the remnants of several have devastated the state, leading to numerous deaths, extreme storm surges, damages in the billions and massive power outages.

Hurricane Sandy impacted Pennsylvania when it raced up the East Coast and made a rare turn toward New Jersey in October 2012. Sandy devastated the Garden State, leaving at least 38 dead, and had a destructive and deadly impact in Pennsylvania. At least 12 people died in Pennsylvania as a result of Sandy, according to the CDC.

Except, by the time it hit NJ it was not longer a hurricane, particularly since a massive cold front interacted with the storm.

The East Coast has a 26% chance of getting hit by at least one major (Category 3, 4 or 5) hurricane, which is above the average 21%, according to records from 1880 to 2020. Major hurricanes have wind speeds of at least 111 mph.

Obviously, this is all your fault if a hurricane hits Philly. Maybe it could clean the streets.

Read: Climate Cult “Scientists” Say A Hurricane Will Hit Pennsylvania This Year »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 18 Comments | Trackback URL

SCOTUS Rules In Trump’s Favor On Keeping The Venezuelan Repatriation Flights Going

By William Teach April 8, 2025 – 6:45 am

At least temporarily

Supreme Court grants Trump request to lift stay halting Venezuelan deportations

The Supreme Court on Monday granted President Donald Trump’s request to vacate a lower court’s ruling barring the administration from using a 1798 wartime immigration law to immediately deport Venezuelan nationals – including alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang – from the U.S., marking a significant victory for the administration as it advances key immigration priorities.

Justices on the high court ruled 5-4 to grant the administration’s request to lift the stay, in a temporary victory for Trump and his allies.

At issue was the Alien Enemies Act, or the immigration law passed by Congress in 1789 to immediately remove certain migrants from U.S. soil.

Lawyers for the Trump administration had urged the court to vacate the lower court ruling, arguing in a Supreme Court filing that the lower court orders “rebuffed” their immigration agenda, including their ability “to protect the Nation against foreign terrorist organizations and risk debilitating effects for delicate foreign negotiations.”

Well, that’s good an all in a nutshell, but, let’s go to MSNBC, if you can believe it, because, did you notice the 5-4 decision?

A divided Supreme Court vacated temporary restraining orders issued by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., which had halted certain deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. The court split 5-4, with Republican appointees in the majority and Trump appointee Amy Coney Barrett dissenting alongside the court’s three Democratic appointees.

I hate to say she has become a disappointment, because I appreciate when Judges follow the Constitution and the law, but, she sure seems to be voting with the liberals quite a bit on big cases, eh?

In an unsigned “per curiam” ruling, the majority said detainees must bring their challenges in habeas corpus proceedings and must do so where they are confined. “The detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia,” the majority said.

The majority also said detainees under the act “must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs.”

The Trump admin should have an immigration judge on hand to adjudicate before they are packed on planes and shipped out.

Writing a dissent joined by the other two Democratic appointees and partially by Barrett, Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the majority’s legal conclusion “suspect.” She said the court granted the government “extraordinary relief” and said the court did so “without mention of the grave harm Plaintiffs will face if they are erroneously removed to El Salvador or regard for the Government’s attempts to subvert the judicial process throughout this litigation.”

What of the grave harm to American citizens from murderers, rapists, child predators, and gang members?

Read: SCOTUS Rules In Trump’s Favor On Keeping The Venezuelan Repatriation Flights Going »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Senate Republicans Look To Kill PRC EV Mandate

By William Teach April 7, 2025 – 3:00 pm

It’s a shame that the People’s Republik Of California’s EV mandate won’t just be about the PRC: every experiment needs an experimental group, plus, it’s always fun watching people who voted for leftist government dictates get hit with leftist government dictates

Report: Senate Republicans Look to Axe California EV Mandate

Senate Republicans are looking to scrap a Biden-era rule that essentially allows Democrat-run California to impose an electric vehicle (EV) mandate across the United States.

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) proposed a resolution on Friday that would repeal California’s “Advanced Clean Cars II,” which Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signed off on weeks before Trump’s second term, the Daily Caller News Foundation reported. The rule would ban the sale of gas-powered vehicles in California and 11 other states by 2035.

Capito proposed the resolution despite the Government Accountability Office (GAO) stating in March that the EPA waiver was not subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Capito, who is chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, is arguing that the California EV waivers are rules that can be repealed under the CRA, according to the report.

“By submitting these waivers, the Trump EPA is complying with the law and giving Congress the opportunity to reject California’s effort to impose its EV mandate on all Americans,” Senate Environment and Public Works Republicans posted to X on Feb. 14.

Opponents of California’s EV mandate “are optimistic” that Senate Republicans will secure a full repeal, despite uncertainty over procedural hurdles, the report states.

I wonder if the EPA under Trump could rescind the approval?

California’s EV mandate is set to go into effect for model year 2026 and would phase out the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. The eleven states who have planned to implement the standard, as allowed by the Biden EPA waiver, are: Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and Vermont, as well as Washington, D.C.

The thing is, those states are in a pact with the PRC to follow the PRC’s lead. But, do consumers really want this? Not too mention that there isn’t infrastructure or the energy production for this. Not that the Elites in those states care. Even though most do not drive EVs themselves. Oh, and that the PRC mandate was imposed by the California Air Resource Board, not the PRC legislature.

Oh, and this is fun, from the enviro-weenies

Best comment at the story: “Apparently it’s not private property but it’s rental property from the environmentalist and city however you pay all the taxes and required to maintain the property the way they want you to. I would sell and leave!”

Read: Senate Republicans Look To Kill PRC EV Mandate »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Enviroweenies, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 7, 2025 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fossil fueled vehicle having water wasted on it, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Green Jihad, with a post on an ex-federal worker and his Green NGO wife were arrested for vandalizing Teslas.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Deal In The Works For Congressional Proxy Voting For New Mothers

By William Teach April 7, 2025 – 10:30 am

It’s not going to be quite the big deal the new mothers who are federally elected representatives want

Johnson strikes deal with Luna on parental proxy voting

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has reached a deal with Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) over her push to allow new parents to vote by proxy, a development that is set to unlock the House floor after the explosive issue — and the GOP rebellions it sparked — brought the chamber to a standstill.

Under the agreement being worked out, the House would formalize “vote pairing,” two sources familiar with the matter confirmed to The Hill.

The procedure allows a member — in this case, a new mother — who must be absent for a vote to coordinate with a lawmaker voting opposite their stance who is willing to abstain from the vote, that way the new mother’s absence is canceled out.

As part of the deal, according to the sources, Luna would not force a vote on her discharge petition, which she successfully executed last month to dispatch Rep. Brittany Pettersen’s (D-Colo.) resolution to the floor that seeks to allow members who give birth or lawmakers whose spouses give birth to have another member vote for them for 12 weeks.

Additionally, Johnson is still looking at increasing accessibility for young mothers in the Capitol, one of the sources said, a prospect that the Speaker revealed last week. He said he is eyeing a room for nursing mothers and potentially allowing mothers of young children to use their official funds to travel between their home districts and Washington.

Proxy voting is absolutely nothing new. It has been done forever, because lawmakers have been skipping votes for one reason or another forever, though it is rarely used these days. There was no real agreement, just that two reps who would vote opposite agreed not to vote. Even though their job requires them to be present for votes. Requires them to debate it. But, hey, sometimes people get hurt. I guess Johnson is just trying to avoid a vote on the petition, which would cause issues, and would be a waste of time since the Quorum Clause requires lawmakers to be physically present to vote. If they have a problem with that, they should attempt to get an amendment passed allowing remote voting. That is the only Constitutional method that would change anything.

But, you know, it doesn’t seem like Luna has any problem speaking to the press about it. But, what of Brittany Peterson? Will she agree?

She is showing up even in person to talk about it. Can her husband, and other husbands of federally elected lawmakers, not watch the baby while they do the job they campaigned for?

Read: Deal In The Works For Congressional Proxy Voting For New Mothers »

Posted in Constitution | 10 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove