Warmists Super Excited Bernie Will Join AOC For Green New Deal Rally Monday

Would this be the same Green New Deal that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez refuses to demand get a House floor vote? The same one which she and Democrats threw a fit over having a vote on it in the Senate? The one that zero Senate Democrats voted for, instead voting “present” (except for the few who voted “no”)? And aren’t these two people who use vast amounts of fossil fuels to travel around?

Bernie Sanders to join AOC at Green New Deal rally in DC

Sen. Bernie Sanders will join Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at a rally next week sponsored by a group of young activists in D.C. to promote a Green New Deal.

Sanders, I-Vt., a 2020 presidential candidate, will headline the Sunrise Movement’s final stop of its “Green New Deal Tour” on Monday night at Howard University, the group announced Saturday.

Sunrise has also pressured 2020 presidential candidates to pledge to reject donations from fossil fuel interests, as Sanders has.

So, they won’t take donations but they’ll use a ton traveling around the nation to mostly Democrat voting areas? Is that correct?

Sanders has associated himself with Sunrise and endorsed the Green New Deal, although he has not yet released a detailed climate change policy such as Democratic rivals Washington Gov. Jay Inslee and former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke.

His website currently has just a few talking points, most aimed at fossil fuels, including natural gas. Will he come out with a deeper plan, like for 2016, when he wanted to “bring climate deniers to justice”, a call that treats people who do not toe the Cult of Climastrology line like terrorists?

The middle ground is a shot at Joe Biden, but, how would we get rid of fossil fuels when Democrat Believers refuse to give up their own use of them? Meh, we all know they’re hypocrites.

Read: Warmists Super Excited Bernie Will Join AOC For Green New Deal Rally Monday »

Bummer: Democrat Leaders Feel Squeeze From Both Sides Of Lunatic Party

If Democrats are going to act like lunatic moonbats, are going to patronize the lunatic moonbats, then lunatic moonbats get elected, and they go lunatic in office, well, this happens

Dem leaders feel squeeze on Trump strategy

House Democratic leaders scrambling to manage their oversight of the Trump administration are increasingly being squeezed by both wings of their diverse caucus.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is a biting critic of President Trump, but she’s rejected early calls for impeachment hearings, instead favoring aggressive investigations into potential abuses of administrative power.

That methodical approach has plenty of support within the Democratic Caucus — not least from moderates in battleground districts wary of the political fallout of impeachment proceedings. But cracks are beginning to show at the edges.

Yes, the moderates are the lunatics who are investigating everything Trump in a personal manner, rather than on actual policy.

On the left, a number of progressive lawmakers are now sounding the alarm that leadership’s strategy is not aggressive enough to confront a president they deem unfit for office. And from the center, some those vulnerable moderates are voicing fears that even the cautious approach could alienate middle-of-the-road voters — and hurt centrist Democrats at the polls next year.

So, Nancy and Company are hemmed in by lunatics in their own way on both sides, either of which will help get Trump re-elected

Van Drew said the years-long investigative saga into Trump’s conduct reverberates with die-hard partisans — both those who adore the president and those who detest him. But “the large, amorphous body of people in between,” he cautioned, have reached a phase of “investigative exhaustion” with a cast that includes special counsel Robert Mueller and Attorney General William Barr.

“What comes up the most with those people is, in all honesty, they want it to come to an end,” he said. “Mueller, Barr the president, everybody — they sent us to Congress to get things done.”

Most Americans are over this, especially since the Mueller report was a big nothingburger. There are too many lunatic moonbats, from so many of the newbies like AOC, anti-Semites Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, to veterans like Nadler and Schiff, all going loony and shooting themselves in the foot. Let them keep doing this. As the saying goes “never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

Read: Bummer: Democrat Leaders Feel Squeeze From Both Sides Of Lunatic Party »

If All You See…

…is a world turning to desert due to Other People using ice makers, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Weasel Zippers, with a post on a school renaming its Mother’s Day event.

Read: If All You See… »

Bummer: Illinois Proposes Massive Tax Hike On Electric Vehicles

This has EV owners (who are so often upper middle class and people considered “rich”) Very Upset

Illinois might start charging $1,000 per year to own an electric vehicle: ‘It’s outrageous’

A proposed hike in Illinois’ annual registration fee for electric vehicles, from $17.50 to $1,000, is being called unfair by current EV owners, and a sales disincentive by manufacturers — just as the new technology is beginning to gain broader traction.

“It’s outrageous,” said Nicoletta Skarlatos, 56, of Chicago, who bought a Tesla Model S five years ago. “I thought Illinois was progressive and would want to encourage EV ownership.”

Aimed at raising money to make overdue road improvements across Illinois, the proposed legislation would also more than double the state’s gas tax to 44 cents a gallon and raise the registration fee for standard vehicles to $148, from $98, among other elements.

But the kicker is a nearly 60-fold increase in the electric vehicle registration fee — one that is sure to cause sticker shock across a nascent segment of the auto industry, which has depended on government incentives to entice early adopters.

This does not cover hybrids, both regular and plug-in

The justification for the dramatic hike? Electric vehicles don’t provide the state with any gas tax revenue.

“There’s definitely a push, because electric vehicles don’t pay any gas taxes,” said Pete Sander, president of the Illinois Automobile Dealers Association.

Realistically, it wouldn’t raise all that much, since there aren’t that many pure EV vehicles out there, but, more people are purchasing them (for the life of me, can’t figure out why. Just seems too much of a pain in the behind). Remember, though, what we’ve seen over the past 10-15 years is a push to raise gas and other automobile taxes and fees because autos are getting much better fuel economy, so there was less revenue coming in to the treasuries. And much of the better gas mileage was due to government mandates on auto manufacturers. So, much is a problem caused by government solved by raising your taxes for saving money on gas used.

For Skarlatos, a self-employed software developer who bought her Tesla using $7,500 in federal incentives and $4,000 in state incentives, the idea of suddenly having to pay a $1,000 registration fee to own an electric vehicle in Illinois is “unfair,” and would have dissuaded her from an environmentally motivated purchase. The $11,500 in incentives, she said, persuaded her to take the plunge.

If you have to offer a big tax incentive to get people to purchase, perhaps the product isn’t that great.

Read: Bummer: Illinois Proposes Massive Tax Hike On Electric Vehicles »

AOC, Dems Incensed Over Biden’s “Middle Ground” On ‘Climate Change’ Comment

Joe Biden is certainly a leftist, but, he’s more old-school leftist, as opposed to today’s unhinged Modern Socialist leftist. His policies are, for the most part, not as extreme as the rest running for president, and he’s smart enough to push more middle of the road policies. So, we get something like this

Exclusive: Presidential hopeful Biden looking for ‘middle ground’ climate policy

Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden is crafting a climate change policy he hopes will appeal to both environmentalists and the blue-collar voters who elected Donald Trump, according to two sources, carving out a middle ground approach that will likely face heavy resistance from green activists.

The backbone of the policy will likely include the United States re-joining the Paris Climate Agreement and preserving U.S. regulations on emissions and vehicle fuel efficiency that Trump has sought to undo, according to one of the sources, Heather Zichal, who is part of a team advising Biden on climate change. She previously advised President Barack Obama.

The second source, a former energy department official advising Biden’s campaign who asked not to be named, said the policy could also be supportive of nuclear energy and fossil fuel options like natural gas and carbon capture technology, which limit emissions from coal plants and other industrial facilities.

Of course, ‘climate change’ is still a low hanging issue for most Americans, something they may profess to care about, but not enough to even pay more than $10 a month to deal with. Joe seems to be crafting a policy designed to make people feel good, but not destroy their cost of living. So, of of course

Blaming blue collar Americans? Huh what? The leadership part is amusing, since she refuses to demand a vote on her Green New Deal in the House, flipped a wig when Cocaine Mitch held a vote in the Senate (her proposal received exactly zero yes votes), and has even said that “it’s messaging focused and was never meant to be passed”. Where’s Squeeky’s leadership?

The crazy climate kids are not amused, either

A death sentence, you guys! But, they’re cool with fossil fuels if it gets them to places, such as spring break. And, going back to Naomi Klein, let’s not forget that she gives lots of talks and writes books and newspaper pieces about getting rid of capitalism. But, hey, this is all Science, not politics, right?

Read: AOC, Dems Incensed Over Biden’s “Middle Ground” On ‘Climate Change’ Comment »

Healthcare Expert: Medicare For All Would Crash System, “Nearly Irrational” To Even Discuss

When it comes to Medicare For All, a cute way of saying Single Payer, we already know it would be beyond expensive. It was too much for tiny Vermont to run, and studies found that the California proposal would see it cost twice the yearly Ca. budget, a number so high that the Ca. general assembly leadership refused to bring it up for a vote. But, Democrats won’t give up on it, so

Health care CEO: Medicare for all ‘would just collapse the system’

Health care is becoming a main point of contention as the U.S. gears up for the 2020 presidential election. Several Democratic presidential candidates, including Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Kamala Harris (D-CA), have called for Medicare for all, while Republican politicians like Mitch McConnell are in favor of cutting health care spending.

Medicare, along with Medicaid and Social Security, are the largest expenses in the U.S. And according to eHealth CEO Scott Flanders, this is “all the more reason” why an idea like Medicare for all is “nearly irrational” to discuss.

“You’re already saying that it’s a challenge to fund what we’ve already committed to our seniors,” Flanders said on Yahoo Finance’s On the Move. “So, to layer on another 180 million people outside of the employer market into Medicare would just collapse the system.”

I’m sure people like Bernie and Kamala will totally say that it wouldn’t happen, but have no facts to back that up.

The Congressional Budget Office stated in a May 2019 report that a single-payer health care system transition “could be complicated, challenging, and potentially disruptive.”

As it stands, approximately 156 million Americans are insured through their employer, while another 21 million are insured through the private market. At the same time, more and more Americans are becoming uninsured in the Trump era.

In Sanders’ proposal, Americans would gain universal health care coverage, while employers would be prohibited from providing separate plans. However, it would also require at least $3 trillion a year in new government revenue, as Yahoo Finance previously reported, leading to higher corporate and individual taxes.

“The bill that’s been promulgated by Bernie Sanders would actually outlaw all private insurance,” Flanders said. “So, 180 million employer-insured individuals and families would lose the insurance they have now.

Wouldn’t it be simply awesome to have the Central Government fully in charge of your health insurance/health care? I mean, they do such a great job with so many other things, right? And they’re super responsive! And this wouldn’t be subject to the whims of Congress, judges, presidents, political appointees, and unelected bureaucrats, right?

I’m sure people will like to attack Flanders personally, make an issue about his salary, assign bad motives, but, who would know the way health care and insurance work better than someone like Flanders? Instead, we’re supposed to listen to politicians with delusions of grandeur who’ve never actually worked in either insurance nor health care? Flanders has to take into account client care vs company profit. Those pushing Medicare For All are only considering their personal power and how to give government more power over citizens, the better to control their lives.

Read: Healthcare Expert: Medicare For All Would Crash System, “Nearly Irrational” To Even Discuss »

Chick-Fil-A Is Like Pornography To California College Kids

Wait, I thought there was a big push from Progressives to approve of porn and normalize it?

From the link

Students at California Polytechnic University are calling on the administration to kick Chick-fil-A off campus because of its owner’s political inclinations, with the senate vice chair even comparing the presence of the chicken chain on campus to pornography and Hooters.

The Cal Poly academic senate passed a resolution Tuesday calling for the removal of the franchise, which has been a campus dining staple for 25 years, according to KCBX.  However, the establishment signed a five-year renewal contract with the university just last year, reported the San Luis Obispo Tribune. It also happens to be the only Chick-fil-A in the entire county, grossing $2 million in 2018 sales.

According to Academic Senate Vice Chair Thomas Gutierrez, Chick-fil-A’s donations to “anti-LGBTQ” groups are grounds for removal of the establishment from campus. He claims that these donations don’t align with the university’s values.

“We don’t sell pornography in the bookstore and we don’t have a Hooters on campus — we already pre-select those kinds of things based on our existing values,” Gutierrez explained, according to Mustang News. “This is a similar thing, the difference is we’re actually profiting from this. So our money, every dollar a student is spending at Chick-fil-A, is going to these causes that are in violation of our values.”

Read: Chick-Fil-A Is Like Pornography To California College Kids »

If All You See…

…is a world flooded due to Other People eating burgers, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jihad Watch, with a post on Amazon about to pay the price for their leftist politics.

Read: If All You See… »

Our Broken Democracy Is Failing The Climate Test Or Something

Why is our democracy broken? Because Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton fair and square according to the rules of the game. So, of course

Will our broken democracy fail the climate test?

We have entered a pivotal period in American history, one that will tell whether our arthritic, not-so-representative democracy can respond to the critical challenge of the 21st century.

That, of course, is climate change. The world faces a well-known, well-researched, well-documented, and increasingly evident peril from the human-caused warming of the planet. We need large reductions of carbon-dioxide emissions by 2030. And yet, in the last two-and-a-half years, the United States has gone from a global leader on the issue to a laggard whose gridlocked government simply ignores the problem.

Events in recent days underscore the see-no-warming, hear-no-warning nature of our government. Fewer than three years ago, we had, in Barack Obama and John Kerry, a president and secretary of state who helped lead the world to adopt the Paris Agreement, a hopeful if not wholly adequate step to stave off the worst effects of climate change. But Donald Trump is pulling us out of that landmark pact and, as Foreign Policy reports, has put us on the sidelines in the United Nations’ planning for a fall summit on climate matters.

That would be the pact that was a) voluntary, and b) crafted to avoid the need for elected U.S. lawmakers to vote on it, right? Anyhow, after much whining about Trump Trump Trump

And yet, it’s still acceptable in Republican circles to put off action with vapid and easily refutable deflections: There is no consensus on human-caused climate change; or the climate has changed before, and this is nothing different; or, there was once a magazine article about global cooling, so today’s scientists shouldn’t be believed; or even, carbon dioxide can’t be contributing to global warming because human beings emit it when they exhale. Which is why a Republican government, led by a denialist president who didn’t win the popular vote and abettedby a small-minded coal-state senator, twiddles while the globe burns.

We have a broad national consensus about the problem and the need for change. We have policy tools. We have viable energy alternatives. What we lack are federal leaders ready to act. If we can’t produce them in the 2020 election, our system will have proved itself too dysfunctional to contend with the threat we face.

See? If Republicans who refuse to be members of the Cult of Climastrology win, well, that means Democracy is broken! You know what’s really broken?

It would be the Cult of Climastrology, chock full of people who refuse to practice what they preach, but happy to attempt to get government to force you to make changes.

Read: Our Broken Democracy Is Failing The Climate Test Or Something »

On Climate Injustice, We Must Avoid Falling Into Green Colonialism And Word Salad

Remember, as you read this, the anthropogenic climate change movement has nothing to do with politics, especially far, far left politics. It certainly has nothing to do with getting rid of Capitalism. It’s all about Science!

As the left wakes up to climate injustice, we must not fall into ‘green colonialism’

The mainstream transatlantic left has been acting different lately. Having been subsumed into third-way politics for several decades, it seems we are growing back some teeth in our bite on the big systemic issues of today. From Labour calling for a national climate emergency, to prominent Democrat congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez declaring capitalism “irredeemable” – we are slowly unzipping ourselves from the straitjacket of incrementalist politics. The left has a new centre, and it’s not messing about.

It is nonetheless critical to ground these struggles in their long history. Indeed, many post-independence struggles in the global south have been struggles against capitalism and the political and ecological injustices it produces. Take climate change. We are finally seeing something of a start to the kind of mass mobilisation and political will needed to rise to the challenge. Most importantly, Labour’s successful call to declare a national climate emergency marks a well overdue shift from the idea we can solve this by changing individual behaviours, in which climate change becomes the responsibility of working-class people who just need to behave themselves – eat less meat, use fewer plastic bags, have fewer kids. If real action follows, the move signifies promising recognition that this crisis requires rapid, large-scale political action and systemic change – and it is the companies and institutions responsible for the crisis that need to pay.

However, alongside the hope, we also need to acknowledge we are miles away from where we need to be. While our political leadership has continually acted as if rising global inequality and conflict is merely bad management of an otherwise rational system, communities in the global south and indigenous populations have been giving their blood, sweat and tears to resist an economic system that puts profit above people and planet. Whether it’s Ken Saro-Wiwa, who was murdered in his struggle to break the political bond between Shell and the Nigerian government, or the 1977 Egyptian bread riots, in which hundreds were killed resisting the IMF-mandated neoliberalisation of the economy, the connection between capitalism as a system and its injustices is something the global majority is well-versed in.

This isn’t limited to popular movements – governments across Latin America and the Pacific Islands have harboured an organised resistance to the manifold ways in which global capitalism poses an existential threat to the lives and livelihoods of millions. Many of these efforts have not only been ignored, but actively sabotaged by US and European state leaders. This history of resistance does not emerge from some kind mystic internal knowledge held by black and brown people. It is down to the material fact of white supremacy, which means the brutalities of neoliberalism have been felt in their most extreme by what we call “developing countries”. The IPCC report declaring us to be in “decade zero” was not a shock in Dominica, where a single hurricane set back development by a generation. Or in Pakistan, where the 2015 heatwave claimed 2,000 lives. 1.5C might seem like new science to us, but the chant “1.5C to stay alive” has been screamed from across the global south for years.

It’s great how they merge ‘climate change’ fanaticism with hatred of capitalism, eh?

This means understanding that any “Green New Deal” or “green industrial revolution” cannot be bound within our nation’s borders, or prioritise the wellbeing of westerners over black and brown lives in the rest of the world. As we make these moves towards climate emergency, it is important that progressives do not internalise the colonial principles that got us in this mess, either by simply ignoring the global historical context of resistance to emergency issues, or even actively arguing we should under-develop “Bombay” to deliver growth in Wigan. Indeed, the industrial revolution was financed and sustained by the blood money and infrastructure of slavery and colonialism; a “green” version of this is no better.

By centring ourselves in the resistance to neoliberal capitalism and ecological crisis, we will likely repeat the mistakes of the past. A “green colonialism” or “socialist imperialism” is no victory worth claiming, and it is the default left position if we do not actively fight for a different vision. We must come into this space not as self-appointed leaders, but figures of solidarity. We are the last to join the party – let’s not behave once again like the world’s policeman and have it shut down before it’s even begun.

So, the “Green” movement is pretty awful? Is that what I’m reading? Because there really aren’t any policy proposals, other than dismantling international energy companies and strange stuff. Just Modern Socialist word salad and gripes.

Read: On Climate Injustice, We Must Avoid Falling Into Green Colonialism And Word Salad »

Pirate's Cove