If All You See…

By William Teach April 25, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful low carbon scooter that should replace all fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on the sourest of grapes.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Who’s Up For A 1% Surcharge At Restaurants To Pay For ‘Climate Change’?

By William Teach April 25, 2019 – 11:06 am

I actually love this idea for Warmists

What’s behind a new surcharge coming to your restaurant bill in California

Some California restaurants will put another surcharge on their bills later this year — but this time, it won’t be for service or employee benefits. It will be to fight climate change.

The initiative, announced Wednesday, is called Restore California Renewable Restaurants, and it will allow restaurants statewide the option of charging diners an additional 1 percent. They money would go toward California’s Healthy Soil Program, which helps farmers transition to methods that put carbon back in the soil.

It’s a partnership between the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), the California Air Resources Board and the Perennial Farming Initiative, a San Francisco nonprofit. (snip)

Leibowitz and Myint hope to sign on 200 restaurants statewide by the end of 2019. The program should begin by early fall.

While the surcharge will be added to every bill at participating restaurants, diners will be able to opt out by telling their server to remove it. Mission Chinese Food added a similar charge back in August as a test run, and Myint said no one has opted out yet.

I think this is a great idea, because it allows Warmists to put their money where their mouths are. Further, if they think about it, they are essentially paying for the eatery to be “carbon neutral”. They get to see that the costs for their beliefs are passed on to the consumer.

It’s also great at realizing you, the consumer are getting screwed. The photo above comes from ABC7 in San Fran. Can anyone tell me what’s wrong with the numbers if it is supposed to be just 1%?

And, of course, what comes next? This voluntary surcharge will become mandatory.

Read: Who’s Up For A 1% Surcharge At Restaurants To Pay For ‘Climate Change’? »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Global Warming | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Here We Go Again: Winston-Salem Wants To Change Name Of Its Big Yearly Fair

By William Teach April 25, 2019 – 7:33 am

The city of Winston-Salem, NC, has apparently become all sorts of Woke, despite almost no one having an issue with a certain name

After 130-plus years, NC fair will change a name some call a reminder of slavery

After more than 130 years, a popular fair in North Carolina will change its name to avoid controversy or links to negative historical connection.

City officials in Winston-Salem tweeted Wednesday that the Dixie Classic Fair will be rebranded with a new name.

“We have started a process to change the name of the Dixie Classic Fair,” Winston-Salem officials said on Twitter.

The decision to change the name of the fair came after members of the community took issue with the word Dixie, pointing to its connections to slavery and the Confederacy, WXII reported.

“We have come together as a community … and we are standing together this time to say that that is a name we are asking you as a council to consider renaming our fair to be more encompassing in embracing us as a community,” the Rev. Sir Walter Mack Jr., the pastor at Union Baptist Church, said at a Winston-Salem City Council meeting, according to the TV station.

Those sentiments made an impact because Assistant City Manager Ben Rowe told members of the Fair Planning Committee that the City Council decided the time has come to change the name, the Winston-Salem Journal reported.

They’re running a survey, soliciting new names. What if people overwhelmingly choose to keep the name Dixie?

“We are putting a lot of energy into finding a new name rather than finding out if a majority wants a new name,” committee member Lisa Eldridge said of the process that could be determined by a June 17 City Council meeting, according to the Winston-Salem Journal.

Well, obviously Ms. Eldridge is a white supremacist, if we’re going to go by Woke beliefs. But, say, wouldn’t that make the entire city council white supremacists and racists and supporters of slavery? Because the name “Winston” comes from Joseph Winston, an American Revolution hero. Who, oh yes, own around 15 slaves.

So when are we doing away with the Winston part? If we want to play this Woke rename everything game.

Read: Here We Go Again: Winston-Salem Wants To Change Name Of Its Big Yearly Fair »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, NC News | 29 Comments | Trackback URL

Media Seems Pretty Upset That Trump Is Done With All The Investigations From Partisan Democrats

By William Teach April 25, 2019 – 7:19 am

The entire Russia Russia Russia probe was based on fake documents and irrational hatred, followed by Hillary losing fair and square to Donald, because she was a terrible candidate, insulted tens of millions of Americans, failed to go to needed states, and passed out on 9/11. On video.  That loss prompted Sore Loser Syndrome from Democrats, who were itching to investigate. So, you got the Mueller investigation. Which found no collusion, no criminal conspiracy, no criminal obstruction.

But, Democrats won’t give up, so we get

Trump’s defiance puts pressure on Congress’s ability to check the president

President Trump’s defiance of congressional attempts to investigate his administration has put new pressure on the legislative branch’s ability to serve as a constitutional check on a president who sees few limits on his executive power.

Since taking office, Trump has consistently treated Congress as more of a subordinate than an equal — often aided by the tacit approval of congressional Republicans who have shown little interest in confronting the president.

But tensions between Trump and Capitol Hill have escalated in recent days as the White House refuses to comply with subpoenas from newly empowered House Democrats eager to conduct aggressive oversight of his administration.

Trump’s decision not to cooperate with House committees, coupled with reluctance from Republicans in control of the Senate to cross him, has left Congress struggling to assert itself as a coequal branch of government — most likely leaving it to the courts to settle a series of power struggles that could define the relationship between the executive and legislative branches for years to come.

Interesting. So, it’s not the Democratic controlled House that is going overboard in mostly wanting all these personal investigations, things that have nothing to do with government policy, that’s the problem. And, would you be shocked that the above is not on the opinion pages of the Washington Post? It’s a front page article. Here’s the editorial

Sorry, Mr. President. Congress has every right to investigate you.

“THERE IS no reason to go any further, and especially in Congress,” President Trump told Post reporters Tuesday, explaining why he was preparing to stonewall congressional requests for administration documents and testimony, possibly by invoking executive privilege. “We’re fighting all the subpoenas,” Trump said on Wednesday. “These aren’t like impartial people.”

If that were the standard, then Congress could never investigate anything. Mr. Trump’s Republican colleagues must remember the battles they fought with President Barack Obama over transparency only a few years ago when they ran the House. Mr. Obama asserted executive privilege to prevent then-Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. from turning over documents on the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scheme. Republicans held Mr. Holder in contempt of Congress.

Right, right, that Obama guy, who trotted out executive privilege on most things which had to do with what was going on with government, and the Washington Post in all facets never complained. Congress, as run by Republicans, didn’t investigate Obama because he won elections, they investigated because of important issues, like losing track of at least 2,500 weapons, which ended up in the hands of Mexican cartel members, showed up at a terrorist attack in Paris, wounded at least 200 Mexicans, including children, and killed others. And we found out because they were used to murder two US federal agents. And Obama resisted all attempts to get the information, just like he did with the IRS targeting scandal, the Benghazi debacle, and Hillary’s server. Among others.

Speaking of Hillary, she’s also whining in the Washington Post. Of course, the same FBI that used their powers to investigate a presidential candidate because they didn’t like him also gave her a free pass. Will the Washington Post be cool with the investigations in how President Obama’s Executive Branch spied on a presidential candidate?

These investigations against Trump have nothing to do with things Trump is doing as president, but simply because they Hate him. With a capital H. They’re deranged. The same WP, and other media folks, weren’t concerned  with Obama treating Congress dismissively and as a “subordinate than an equal,” using his phone and pen to go around Congress with all sorts of big things, like the Waters Of The US, Clean Power Plan, Paris climate agreement.

Read: Media Seems Pretty Upset That Trump Is Done With All The Investigations From Partisan Democrats »

Posted in Current Affairs, Donald Trump, Wonky Media | Comments Off on Media Seems Pretty Upset That Trump Is Done With All The Investigations From Partisan Democrats | Trackback URL

We Need To Start Prosecuting People For Ecocide Or Something

By William Teach April 24, 2019 – 5:03 pm

Warmists have already called for prosecuting, jailing, and even executing Skeptics, as well as fossil fuels companies executives, so this kind of derangement should come as no surprise, nor that major world news outlets, in this case the UK Guardian, put this stuff out. This piece is about letters responding to recent coverage of ‘climate change’, the insane, violent Extinction Rebellion, and Cult of Climastrology dupe and huge user of fossil fuels Greta Thunberg, but the first letter is a doozy

Human responses to the threat of climate change and ecocide

Bill McKibben is right to believe in humans (To stop global catastrophe, we must believe in humans again, 23 April). After all, in the blink of an evolutionary eye we have gone from being able to stand upright to being able to fly off our planet, from believing that the horizon was the end of the earth to being able to peer into deep space-time, from understanding how our bodies work to being on the verge of being able to create life itself. We love to compete and we love to collaborate, often combining both activities in the name of sport. We are inherently social and have formed our immensely complex civilisation on the basis of agreeing what is “socially acceptable” and enshrining that with laws and rules.

With climate change, where we have gone astray is failing to update those laws and rules to cope with our burgeoning population, especially in our relationship with nature and the functioning of our economy.

There are two actions we could take that would transform our chances of surviving into the future. The first would be to enact a law of ecocide – the death of whose principal proponent was sadly reported in the same issue (Polly Higgins, tireless advocate for ecocide law, dies aged 50, 23 April). And the second would be to change the rules of accounting so that all companies using natural resources had to reinvest, say, 2% of their revenues in the restoration and repair of the natural environment.

As for the companies thing, well, these idiots never seem to realize the cost will not be born by the customer. As to ecocide, they been pushing this for a while now, and tried to get it added on the the Rome Statute, which is part of the International Criminal Court, to go with things like genocide and war crimes. It’s not new, going back to at least 1972, and turns doing something to the environment into a Major Crime. The Cult of Climastrology has essentially taken the extreme environmental movement over, and subsumed the notion of ecocide under the Cult’s banner.

What would they do? Prosecute companies and individuals in the ICC. Interestingly, many Leftists believe the ICC is too weak, and gives too much power to, get this, defendants. Hey, I know, we can start with all the Warmists who don’t practice what they preach, starting with the big shots like Al Gore, Barack Obama, Bill de Blasio, and others.

The major idea for Warmists, though, is to move ecocide from the ICC to national governments, making it much easier to prosecute violators and people engaged in Wrongthink. They would further move this down the chain into smaller areas. Districts, states (something mostly only used in the U.S.), counties, cities.

Read: We Need To Start Prosecuting People For Ecocide Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 24, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is horrific heat snow from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is White House Dossier, with a post on the White House attempting to stop aides from testifying to the Dem House over personal attacks.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Who’s Up For Destroying The Flow Of Money Into Medical Facilities?

By William Teach April 24, 2019 – 10:47 am

So, hey, what about hospitals in the Democrats Single Payer, er, Medicare for All scheme?

This Is The Part Of ‘Medicare For All’ That You Never Hear About

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and his allies talk a lot about how “Medicare for All” would take back money from insurers and drug companies, and use those savings to help make sure every American has generous health insurance. That is accurate.

But Sanders and his allies rarely mention that Medicare for All would also restrict the flow of money into the rest of the health care industry, including the parts that aren’t as easy to demonize in speeches.

At the top of that list are hospitals, which alone account for roughly one-third of the nation’s health care spending. No other sector, not even pharmaceuticals, rivals it. Under the Medicare for All proposals from Sanders as well as some other potential reforms getting attention these days, the federal government would limit payments to hospitals, quite possibly reducing their incomes significantly.

The case for squeezing hospitals is strong, given the available research on what they charge and why. Even some experts historically wary of government regulation are warming to the concept.

But actually crafting a policy that would cut hospital payments enough to free up big sums of money without adverse effects wouldn’t be easy and getting such a policy through Congress could be even tougher. The hospital industry is already pushing back and, as this debate moves forward, it’s only going to push harder.

There’s no doubt that hospitals probably get too much money, that they charge too much for the service they provide, especially when compared to hospitals around the world. And, I’m sure, many can make the argument that the costs are what they should be (an aspirin costing $30? No.) But, do we want to squeeze them so much that they cannot provide proper care?

The promise of simplicity is one reason price regulations are getting another look. If hospitals could send bills just to one place, instead of dozens, and if they could have just one list of prices, they wouldn’t have to maintain such complex electronic billing systems and hire so many people to run them.

More important, though, giving government the power to set prices would mean giving government the power to set those prices a lot lower than they are today.

So, um, yeah, putting the Central Government pretty much fully in charge of hospitals nationwide. If you control the money, you control the institution.

Not every hospital closure is a problem. The worry is that some hospitals might cut back on services like psychiatry that typically lose money but are already insufficient to meet current demand. Reducing hospital income crudely could make these sorts of problems worse, causing even longer waits for services ― or simply making it harder to deliver care effectively. (snip to end)

Adopting Medicare for All, Medicare for America, and other schemes that would regulate hospitals would require trade-offs of one sort or another. But so would doing nothing.

You could see hospitals closing, as well as reduced care and long wait lines. Surprise? Really, though, the Medicare for All crowd doesn’t care about costs or service, they just want the government in control of everything.

Read: Who’s Up For Destroying The Flow Of Money Into Medical Facilities? »

Posted in Government, Healthcare | 32 Comments | Trackback URL

Grandparents With Nothing Better To Do Embrace ‘Climate Change’ Activism Or Something

By William Teach April 24, 2019 – 7:51 am

Is this a thing now?

From the silly article

For Charlene Lange, the breaking point came on her bucket-list trip to see the Northern Lights in Canada’s far north. Her tour came by plane because melting tundra caused local train tracks to sink. Now, she lobbies governors to fight climate change.

Gary Krellenstein was an investment banker who helped finance new power plants. Part of his job was examining the data on global warming so he could argue it wasn’t real. Until he found he no longer could. He spends his time today barraging his state senators with letters advocating for clean energy sources.

Susan Dobra dealt with the consequences up close and personal – literally running down a road as a massive wildfire, partly blamed on climate change, consumed her car, her home and her entire town of Paradise, California, in November. This month, she spoke before the City Council of the town she’s taken refuge in to urge it to pass a climate emergency declaration.

You might call them senior climate commandos. Each is over 60 – some well over – an age not generally thought of as being consumed by activism. And yet they, and a growing number of other older Americans, say climate change has created an all-hands-on-deck moment for humanity, a call they are compelled to answer.

So, people who lived their lives while using lots of fossil fuels, enjoying life, enjoying travel, making cash, essentially living a life they want to deny to future generations. They got theirs, now want to deny it to future generations. Because they’re bored.

“I’ve come to the conclusion that climate change is going to ruin the planet for my nieces and nephews,” said Mike Shatzkin, a New York publishing industry veteran who’s wound down his business to rally presidential candidates to back the reduction of carbon emissions. “I’m 71 and I expect to see the beginnings of the climate apocalypse before I’m gone.”

Apocalypse!

The 66-year-old Iowa City, Iowa, native had “pretty much ignored” the issue of climate change, she said. But once she got home she started reading, beginning with old National Geographic magazines.

“Basically, I was a denier,” Lange said. “I was amazed at how my head has been in the sand. This stuff has been going on for 20, 30 years,” she said.

What she learned horrified her, but she said she was also “sometimes pleasantly surprised” to find all the work being done around the world to deal with the problem.

Funny how the information on what changed her mind, other than reading magazines made from dead trees, is missing.

But he felt he couldn’t do anything else. He’d looked at the computer models and they convinced him that without serious change the world is headed toward a fundamental change in the environment.

Would those be the computer models that don’t accord with the actual real world data?

Anyhow, this keeps going and going and going with News Activism, ending with

“I worry that government and society will break down. We’re not built to withstand the changes we face,” he said.

But he sees a bright side too: more people of his age getting involved every year.

“There are lots of us,” he said. “We care about our planet.”

Yeah, now that they’ve lived their lives they’ve decided they’re going to Do Something. Based on fake data. Good job.

Read: Grandparents With Nothing Better To Do Embrace ‘Climate Change’ Activism Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrats Are Charging Ahead On Passing Some Sort Of Un-named Comprehensive Immigration Reform

By William Teach April 24, 2019 – 7:21 am

This will be right after they tilt some windmills on something else

Dems charge ahead on immigration

Hispanic Democrats are charging ahead with plans to move a comprehensive immigration reform bill this year, bolstered by recently secured support from some of the party’s top brass.

Leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) are drafting a measure that some Democratic leaders say they are ready to bring to the floor after the chamber tackles legislation that would both create a path to citizenship for so-called Dreamers under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and strengthen protections for temporary protected status (TPS) beneficiaries.

“We need to move forward first on the DACA and the TPS — people who have been here making America better, creating jobs,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said this month during the Democrats’ retreat in Northern Virginia. “And then we need to move very quickly onto comprehensive immigration reform.”

The article offers zero details on any type of “comprehensive immigration reform”, but we do learn from it that even the squishy Gang Of Eight type legislation from 2013 might be too much in terms of border security for the Democrats new Democratic Socialist base to pass. They’ll certainly want to abolish ICE, do away with detention facilities, and give easy voting citizenship. Further, it’ll get shut down in the Senate, just like with DACA, particularly since DACA is all about just giving citizenship away with zero security measures.

Some CHC leaders are warning that there could be dire consequences for the party if House Democrats don’t have a comprehensive immigration bill to show Hispanic voters in November 2020.

They might be over-estimating the support from Hispanics who immigrated to the U.S. legally, went through the process, paid the fees, and earned their citizenship, as well as those who have been citizens for generations, even hundreds of years.

Democratic leaders appear keen to have a homegrown proposal to run on in 2020, particularly as a way to counter Trump next year, when he is all but certain to make immigration a centerpiece of his reelection campaign.

Democrats will be offering what is essentially a reward to people who entered the U.S. illegally/overstayed visas and took advantage of the nation’s generosity (not to mention their crimes like murder, rape, sexual assault on children, identity theft) while Trump will be offering security from people who break our laws. How will that work?

Still, a consensus bill is unlikely as Democratic leaders aim for legislation that delineates the party’s core position ahead of 2020.

“It is a very controversial issue and the president has made it even more controversial,” Hoyer said. “The populist mood on the right has made immigrants an enemy. They’re not an enemy. The immigration community has made America what it is. So we need to move forward on that.”

Perhaps many, even most, of illegals (notice Steny Hoyer can’t even call them illegals) are good people. It doesn’t matter. They broke our laws in entering the nation, and have zero remorse. They’re demanding food, clothing, shelter, medical care, education, jobs, citizenship, and the right to vote. Not asking. Demanding. That’s why the majority are against illegal immigration.

Read: Democrats Are Charging Ahead On Passing Some Sort Of Un-named Comprehensive Immigration Reform »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

CNN: We’re Losing The War On Hotcoldwetdry Or Something

By William Teach April 23, 2019 – 4:25 pm

This comes from the mind of John D. Sutter, who seems to take lots of long fossil fueled trips

We’re losing the war on climate change

For years now, people like environmentalist and journalist Bill McKibben have been screaming from the treetops that we need a World War II-scale mobilization to fight the scourge of climate change.

They’re right, of course. And on Earth Day — that 24-hour sliver of the calendar when we talk about the fact that humans exist on, and because of, a living planet — it’s clear not only that we are losing this war but that we still are failing to recognize it’s taking place at all.

I mean, yes, I’ve met Greta Thunberg, the Swedish teen who is “schooling world leaders” on climate policy and who started a global school walkout movement. I’ve read the Green New Deal and seen the videos of young people demanding that US reps adopt it. Just this month, protesters in London shut down parts of the city in their calls for a reckoning. It’s true that clean energy sources keep getting cheaper. Electric cars are more popular than ever.

If he’s met Greta, it means he took a fossil fueled airplane trip to Europe

But the scale of the outrage in no way matches the magnitude of this disaster, which, like WWII, threatens to cripple or even obliterate human life on the planet as we know it.

We’ve known the truth about climate change — that people are burning fossil fuels and warming the atmosphere, with potentially catastrophic consequences — for decades now. James Hansen testified about the dangers of global warming when he was an NASA scientist in 1988. The New York Times headline: “Global Warming Has Begun, Expert Tells Senate.”

Like flying to Europe? How about the fossil fuels used by CNN? Heck, CNN has all sorts of advertisements and articles on traveling to places using fossil fuels.

Since then, the eco-woke among us have created more than enough deadlines to try to force change. In 1990, as George Marshall wrote in his book “Don’t Even Think About It,” the magazine Ecologist published a book called “5,000 Days to Save the Planet.” About 5,000 days later, the Institute for Public Policy Research declared that there were “Ten Years to Save the Planet.” In 2008, he wrote, the New Economics Foundation said it was “100 Months to Save the World.”

As a journalist who’s been covering climate for years, I’ve been part of that deadline trend. In the leadup to the Paris climate talks in 2015, I wrote that there were “100 days to save the world.”

The deadlines aren’t the problem. It’s our failure to heed them.

See? It’s not that the deadlines keep failing…..no, wait, that is the problem. The stupid continues in the article, you’re welcome to read it.

Read: CNN: We’re Losing The War On Hotcoldwetdry Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 17 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove