…is a….hey, wait a minute, those wonderful trains so often use fossil fuels to move them and move fossil fuels, they should be banned!!!!!, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is This ain’t Hell…., with a post on Jussie Smollett and his 16 felony charges.
Also below the fold, one to clear out, so see The First Street Journal, with a post on the stupidity of antvaxxers.
Read: If All You See… »
Democrats passed their big HR1 bill Friday, and here’s what the Washington Post had to say
House Democrats pass H.R. 1, their answer to draining the swamp
It’s laughably called the For The People Act, and bears as much to being for the people as The Patient Protect and Affordable Care Act was to patient protect and affordable care. Republicans have dubbed it the “Democrat Politician Protection Act.” There’s a lot of issues with it, read more here. And here’s one more issue
We've watched Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens for a while now. But today they took it a step further by blocking our motion to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in elections—effectively devaluing the vote of legitimate voters. pic.twitter.com/mEnXNCSsAA
— Steve Scalise (@SteveScalise) March 8, 2019
(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) – House Democrats voted Friday to defend localities that allow illegal immigrants to vote in their elections, turning back a GOP attempt to discourage the practice.
The vote marks a stunning reversal from just six months ago, when the chamber — then under GOP control — voted to decry illegal immigrant voting.
“We are prepared to open up the political process and let all of the people come in,†Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and hero of the civil rights movement, told colleagues as he led opposition to the GOP measure.
The 228-197 vote came as part of a broader debate on Democrats’ major legislative priority this year, HR 1, the “For the People Act,†which includes historic expansions of voter registration and access, as well as a major rewrite of campaign finance laws.
The measure would have had no practical effect even if it had passed. Illegal immigrants — and indeed noncitizens as a whole — are not legally able to participate in federal elections.
But Republicans had hoped to send a message to localities such as San Francisco, where noncitizens are now allowed to vote in school board elections.
“It sounds like I’m making it up. What kind of government would cancel the vote of its own citizens, and replace it with noncitizens?†said Rep. Dan Crenshaw, Texas Republican.
Expect Democrats to push for illegal aliens and non-citizens to be able to vote in federal elections soon.
Senator Joe Manchin is telling all the coal miners in West Virginia that their jobs have to go, and Lisa Murkowski is just being her always sqish self. They did forget something very important in their missive, though
It’s time to act on climate change — responsibly
The two of us have more in common than might meet the eye. We come from different parties, but we are both avid outdoorsmen and represent states that take great pride in the resources we provide to the nation and to friends and allies around the world. Alaska and West Virginia know that resource development and environmental stewardship must move in tandem, which is why we are committed to putting forward bipartisan solutions to help address climate change.
There is no question that climate change is real or that human activities are driving much of it. We are seeing the impacts in our home states. Scientists tell us that the Arctic is warming at twice the rate of the rest of the world. Rising temperatures and diminishing sea ice on Alaska’s shores are affecting our fisheries and forcing some remote communities to seek partial or total relocation. In summer 2016, West Virginia experienced unprecedented flooding that killed 23 residents and inflicted tremendous damage across the state.
None of those prove anthropogenic causation.
Congress is in the middle of a debate about the appropriate way to tackle climate change. This is often portrayed as an issue with just two sides — those who support drastic, unattainable measures to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, and those who want to do nothing. We believe the time for sensationalism is over. And we are seeking ideas that will bring people together, rather than drive them apart.
Well, first you have to prove that mankind is mostly/solely causing the minor rise in temperatures.
On the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, we are working together to find pragmatic policies that can draw strong and enduring support. In our hearings this year, we have heard from a range of experts who are helping us to gather facts that shape these efforts.
Just this week, we held a hearing focused on climate change and the electricity sector. We heard that utilities are pursuing cleaner energy technologies and integrating them into their networks. These changes to the generation mix reduced carbon dioxide emissions by 28 percent between 2005 and 2017 and lowered costs to consumers.
Yet, our witnesses also agreed that to effectively mitigate the impacts of climate change, we must do more to pursue low- and zero-carbon technologies that will continue to lower emissions.
In other words, they want Congress to force you to reduce your carbon footprint.
Anyhow, there’s a few more paragraphs, ending with
American ingenuity has solved many of the great challenges of our time and is key to addressing climate change. If the United States is going to lead by example, we must continue to lead the world in the development of new and improved technologies. On the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, we agree it is time to act. And that is why we will work to find responsible solutions worthy of West Virginians, Alaskans and all Americans.
Did anyone see a plan? Or is it simply “well, we’ll let you know what laws we want to jam down your throats”? Joe’s party is the party of climate action extremism. Lisa is just Lisa. Those who offer lofty words but keep their ideas to themselves are as dangerous as those who release nutty plans like the Green New Deal.
Read: Manchin, Murkowski Say We Need To Act Responsibly On Hotcoldwetdry Or Something »
It’s rather hard to turn the page when the Democrats didn’t actually, specifically condemn Ilhan Omar’s Jew hatred, nor all those who offered cover and protection for said Jew hatred
Dems struggle to turn page on Omar controversy
Democrats desperately want to turn the page on a painful week but doing so is proving to be difficult.
Freshman Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who has been the center of a debate on anti-Semitism and other forms of hatred that has exposed deep divisions within the new majority, on Friday signaled she’s not going to stop battling on social media with her critics.
Less than 24 hours after the House adopted a resolution broadly condemning bigotry in the wake of Omar’s comments about U.S.-Israel relations, she launched into a Twitter battle Friday morning with Meghan McCain over the thorny topic.
Omar did so by retweeting a message from Mehdi Hasan, a columnist for The Intercept and a host of Al Jazeera English, that was deeply critical of McCain’s father, former Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who died last year.
“Meghan’s late father literally sang ‘bomb bomb bomb Iran’ and insisted on referring to his Vietnamese captors as ‘gooks’†Hasan wrote. “He also, lest we forget, gave the world Sarah Palin. So a little less faux outrage over a former refugee-turned-freshman-representative pls.â€
President Trump also got into the act on Friday, seizing on Omar’s remarks and the House resolution — which to the dismay of several veteran Jewish Democratic lawmakers changed from a measure condemning anti-Semitism to one that condemned many kinds of hatred — to argue that Democrats had become an “anti-Jewish†and “anti-Israel†party.
If GOP bigwigs aren’t ready to bring up Democrat protection of anti-Semitism in 2020, you can bet that Trump won’t forget and will make sure that voters will remember.
And then there was Nancy Pelosi, who probably never thought she’d have to deal with the crazies in her own party
On Friday, she defended Omar for a second day in a row, arguing she is not anti-Semitic.
“I think she has a different experience in the use of words, doesn’t understand that some of them are fraught with meaning,†Pelosi said of the Somalian-born Omar, who came to the United States in 1995 after years in a refugee camp in Kenya.
https://twitter.com/jeffmarshallep/status/1104102607658930176
She’s been here for 24 years. Was her assimilation that bad? Is she still living in the Jew hatred world of radical Somalia? She’s almost 40. If she’s so ignorant, should she be sitting on the Foreign Affairs Committee? What Pelosi is saying is that Omar is anti-Jew, she just doesn’t know how to express it in terms that don’t expose her being anti-Jew.
Omar, Andre Carson (D-Ind) suggested, isn’t about to alter her aggressive messaging style.
“On one end, we know that there are members who are going to be free, they’re going to candid, they’re going to be fearless in their approach to getting their message out,†he said. “There are other folks who are going to be more measured and pragmatic, and I don’t think we’re in a place to condemn one methodology over the other.â€
In other words, she has no problem hiding her Jew hatred, and expect more to come.
Read: Democrats Have Trouble Turning The Page On Their Anti-Semitism Problem »
It’s pretty bad when CNN has to set the record straight
Why were these men wearing pearls at a gun control hearing?
A decision by a group of male Republican New Hampshire lawmakers to wear pearls during a hearing on gun control legislation sparked accusations that they were being sexist and insensitive to the mothers of those killed in shootings.
State conservatives, however, say the lawmakers were supporting women’s rights to arm themselves for defense.
The controversy began Tuesday afternoon during debate over a bill that would restrict access to firearms from people deemed to pose an “immediate risk to themselves or others.”
Photos posted on social media show several male Republicans wearing pearls during the hearing.
And here’s Excitable Shannon
Male New Hampshire lawmakers on the hearing committee wearing pearls to mock @MomsDemand volunteers and gun safety advocates. #NHPolitics pic.twitter.com/rc1S3Bj9lG
— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) March 5, 2019
The lawmakers also were condemned on Twitter by Democratic US Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California, who said the New Hampshire lawmakers were mocking the mothers.
But
But the president of the Women’s Defense League, a New Hampshire gun rights group that focuses on “training and educating women” on practical self-defense skills, disputed the accusation, saying the pearls were worn in support of their group.
“These men are supporting women and supporting women who support actual women’s rights. They are the farthest thing from sexist and there was a women lawmaker wearing them, too. That was conveniently left out,” Kimberly Morin, the president of the Women’s Defense League, told CNN Wednesday.
These are the people that Democrats want to disarm, law abiding women who want a firearm for protection.
Read: Men Wear Pearls To Gun Grabbing Hearing, Gun Grabbers Freak »
…is a wonderful low carbon train crossing the country instead of evil fossil fueled airplanes, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Victory Girls Blog, with a post on Rashida Tlaib’s nutty impeachment push.
Read: If All You See… »
Remember, the original release of the Green New Deal included
We set a goal to get to net-zero, rather than zero emissions, in 10 years because we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast.
And then AOC and staff walked this back after the release, claiming it wasn’t the real document meant to be released (it was, and that link has links to the initial document), and the liberal media provided cover.
But, was it real? Consider this piece by the very left leaning UK Guardian, which is not shy about showing its biases, especially on ‘climate change’
What the Green New Deal will mean for your hamburger
Amid the various critiques of the proposed Green New Deal, few capture the alarmism of the American right quite like Sebastian Gorka’s now viral claim that the deal’s proponents “want to take away your hamburgers … this is what Stalin dreamt about but never achievedâ€.
While it is debatable whether Stalin would have rejoiced in a vegan United States, it is true that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal for a low-carbon economy would require a major reduction in livestock production. But there doesn’t need not be an either/or choice between the Green New Deal and meat consumption: the solution to the Green New Deal’s hamburger problem lies in Silicon Valley’s “clean meat†startups.
Cellular agriculture technology can already produce meat that is virtually identical in genetics and flavor to industrially produced meat, and it can do so without harming any animals. Last week, the UK thinktank Chatham House released a report urging EU policymakers to promote rapid regulation of and investment in this new technology. The United States needs to do the same. Government investment in scaling up alternative proteins should form a backbone of the Green New Deal’s commitment to job creation, industrial innovation and food security.
Every year over 9 billion land animals are slaughtered in the United States. Beyond being a nightmare for animals, industrial agriculture contributes 14% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Cows make up 41% of that, and the United States is home to just under 100 million of them. Reducing our carbon footprint must entail abandoning industrial agriculture, but changing people’s minds about eating meat is difficult, and getting them to actually eat less meat in even harder.
What is “cellular agriculture technology”?
A far more promising avenue for ensuring an abundance of hamburgers is the emergent cellular agriculture industry. The plant-based meat and milk alternatives sector has seen tremendous growth in recent years, and the market for meat-alternatives such as the Impossible Burger is on track to grow to $5bn a year by 2020. But these products are mere alternatives. Cellular agriculture, meanwhile, uses animal stem cells to grow meat in a lab setting that is genetically analogous to meat from slaughtered animals. The Bay Area startup Memphis Meats has already produced meatballs indistinguishable from the real thing. Compared with conventional meat, clean meat generates 96% less GHG emissions, and uses 99% less land and up to 96% less water.
Ewwwww!
But, what do they do with all the cows? They don’t say.
Read: Say, What Would The Green New Deal Mean For Your Hamburger? »
Trackback URL
No more riding in fossil fueled vehicles to school, practice, friends house, or vacations for the kiddies. No showers longer than 2 minutes. No more gaming systems nor tablets nor smartphones, because of the energy use, including what’s called vampire energy. No more energy drinks or sodas, due to CO2 content. No more streaming shows. I could continue with more, but, let’s move into the story
Tens of thousands of students from around the world will join together this month by skipping school to demand action be taken by politicians on global warming.
The global strike, dubbed School Strike 4 Climate, will take place on March 15.
“We are striking because our world leaders have yet to acknowledge, prioritize, or properly address our climate crisis,†a description of the movement read on its web site. “We are striking because if the social order is disrupted by our refusal to attend school, then the system is forced to face the climate crisis and enact change.â€
The movement is inspired by Swedish teen activist Greta Thunberg who has been on strike outside of the Swedish parliament building every Friday since September, and supports The Green New Deal, according to a report by Sierra.
“We are striking for the Green New Deal, for a fair and just transition to a 100% renewable economy, and for ending the creation of additional fossil fuel infrastructure,†the School Strike 4 Climate web site states. (snip)
Now, children in at least two dozen countries and 30 U.S. states have planned to skip school to demand that nations commit to cutting fossil-fuel emissions in half in the next 10 years to avoid global warming, the Washington Post reported.
How are the tykes expecting to get to the protests? Think they’ll walk or bike? Or, want mom/dad/the school to drive them there? I’d have a good laugh checking the one in Raleigh out on Friday the 15th, but, you know, work. List of all here.
Further, did anyone notice that, despite the headline, the “article” fails to mention how much the seas are rising? If they did, it would be rather inconvenient. The average sea rise over the last 8,000 years (a time frame used after the Great Meltwater Pulse ended post-ice age) is 6-8 inches per century. During Holocene cool periods the rise is much lower, which means during warm periods it has to be much higher. That’s how we get averages. Some think a warm period should see 16-22 inches per century.
Do you know how much there was in the 20th Century? I’ve mentioned it many times. 8 inches. Average. Nor is it accelerating.
According to Tides and Currents, run by NOAA, Atlantic City, NJ (the above article is from NJ.com) is seeing 4.09 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.15 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1911 to 2018 which is equivalent to a change of 1.34 feet in 100 years. That’s also includes land changes, and is normal. The gauges at Sandy Hook and Cape May are similar.
Across the waters at The Battery (NYC) we see 2.85 millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.09 mm/yr based on monthly mean sea level data from 1856 to 2018 which is equivalent to a change of 0.94 feet in 100 years. Land changes are stripped from the data due to the location.
This is inconvenient data for climahysterics. As is most. Notice that real world data is rarely ever included in scaremongering articles.
Read: Worldwide Student ‘Climate Change’ Protest Is Coming To The U.S. Or Something »
People often wonder why Democrats are so in favor of open borders and illegal immigration, as well as taking in massive numbers of refugees from 3rd world shitholes developing nation. They give us all sorts of feelings based squishy reasons, but, really, it does come down to one thing, and Pelosi just let it out of the bag
Watch–Nancy Pelosi: New Immigrants Must Not Have Their Votes Suppressed
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said the United States must not suppress the vote of newly arrived legal immigrants — including those foreign nationals who arrive en masse at the U.S.-Mexico border.
During a press conference in Austin, Texas this week, Pelosi admitted that the goal for the country’s mass illegal and legal immigration system is to ensure the more than 1.5 million new arrivals who come to the U.S. every year are on the voter rolls.
Pelosi added that it is immigrants, not American citizens, who make the nation “more American.â€
When we talk about newcomers, we have to recognize the constant reinvigoration of America that they are, that we all have been – our families. And that, unless you’re blessed to be Native American – which is a blessing in itself that we respect – but that constant reinvigoration of hope, determination, optimism, courage, to make the future better for the next generation, those are American traits. [Emphasis added]
And these newcomers make America more American. And we want them, when they come here, to be fully part of our system. And that means not suppressing the vote of our newcomers to America. [Emphasis added]
The “newcomers†who should be fully able to participate in voting, Pelosi said, include the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens and border crossers who arrive at the southern border every year.
“We, in California, see people coming from a different direction, but the same welcome. You see them coming, many from the south, southern border, but should be the same welcome,†Pelosi said.
It’s all about the vote with Democrats. There are no high minded ideals about helping people from distressed areas. They’d help Detroit and other American cities and citizens if they cared. Democrats just want votes.
Democrats would win major victories politically from increased legal immigration levels, research finds. The latest analysis by The Atlantic senior editor Ronald Brownstein revealed that nearly 90 percent of House congressional districts with a foreign-born population above the national average were won by Democrats.
This means that every congressional district with a foreign-born population exceeding roughly 14 percent had a 90 percent chance of being controlled by Democrats and only a ten percent chance of electing a Republican.
And that’s why they want them. Votes. Nothing else. Democrats do not care about legal immigrants nor illegal aliens. They just want the votes. Consider their talking points about how they want to only deport the bad illegals, not the ones with no or just minor civil/criminal convictions. They refuse to hold illegals with charges/convictions for things like rape, sexual assault (including against children), trafficking, drug dealing, arson, assault, attempted murder, gun charges, and murder, among others, for ICE to come pick up.
Democrats could care less how this harms legal U.S. citizens.
Read: Not Open Borders Or Something: Pelosi Wants All New Immigrants To Be Able To Vote »
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.