Super Incredible Cold Weather In Chicago Is Sign Of ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach January 29, 2019 – 2:17 pm

Who didn’t see this coming?

The big focus on this polar vortex has been on Chicago, and we end up with the typical Warmist claptrap fearmongering

Read More »

Read: Super Incredible Cold Weather In Chicago Is Sign Of ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach January 29, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is an ocean that will soon, it’s totally coming, guys, rise and swamp all the land, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Evil Blogger Lady, with a post on Tom Brokaw apologizing for speaking the truth on assimilation.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 25 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Many Democrats Break Ranks To Back Venezuela Strongman Maduro

By William Teach January 29, 2019 – 11:19 am

The big question here is are they backing him because he’s a fellow socialist or due to a kneejerk reaction to be for anything Donald Trump is against? Or both? We saw this same type of thing from Democrats while George W Bush was president and Hugo Chavez was around

PROGRESSIVES BREAK WITH DEMOCRATIC PARTY OVER US OPPOSITION TO SOCIALIST DICTATOR NICOLAS MADURO

At least three progressive Democrats have broken with their party to criticize President Donald Trump for his Wednesday decision to oppose Venezuela’s socialist dictator Nicolas Maduro.

Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii and Ro Khanna of California excoriated Trump when he became one of several world leaders to recognize Venezuelan National Assembly President Juan Guaido as the country’s leader instead of Maduro.

The people of Venezuela have faced extreme economic hardship and crackdowns on their freedom under Maduro, who succeeded infamous socialist dictator Hugo Chavez. The Trump administration announced sanctions against Maduro Monday. (snip)

“A U.S. backed coup in Venezuela is not a solution to the dire issues they face. Trump’s efforts to install a far right opposition will only incite violence and further destabilize the region. We must support Mexico, Uruguay [and] the Vatican’s efforts to facilitate a peaceful dialogue,” Omar wrote on Twitter Thursday.

Gabbard also spoke out against recognition of Guaido by the U.S. Nearly 15 nations including Brazil and Canada have also recognized Gauido over Maduro, reported Bloomberg.

Omar is an ant-Semite of the 1st order, and has ties to hardcore Islam, so, it’s no wonder she would back Maduro while fearmongering against Trump. Gabbard is running for president, so, she wants to burnish her far-left cred with the unhinged Democrat base, which is also running roughshod in backing Maduro over Trump. Khanna? Meh. He’s a back-bencher.

Many Democrats, like Dick Durbin, who is mentioned in the article, are backing Guaido, because they understand how bad Maduro is, and how bad Venezuela has become. Interestingly, Khanna makes an interesting point in his press release, which is entitled

STATEMENT: REP. KHANNA SLAMS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S HANDLING OF RELATIONS WITH VENEZUELA

“The United States should not anoint the leader of the opposition in Venezuela during an internal, divided conflict. There is no doubt the Maduro’s economic policies have been terrible, and he has engaged in financial mismanagement and also political authoritarianism. But crippling sanctions and threats of military action are making life worse for ordinary Venezuelans, and the U.S. stands alone in its decision to impose economic sanctions against the Venezuelan government. We should work to support the efforts of Uruguay, Mexico and the Holy See for a negotiated settlement and end the sanctions that are making the hyperinflation worse. I plan to circulate a letter to my colleagues to the Trump Administration urging them to immediately change course in its policy toward Venezuela.”

Funny, he’s more upset with Trump than Maduro. Further, in regards to what I’ve put in bold, isn’t that exactly what the Progressive/Socialist/Communist/whatever you want to call it wing wants to do in the U.S.? Yes.

Read: Surprise: Many Democrats Break Ranks To Back Venezuela Strongman Maduro »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Walls Can’t Keep Out ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach January 29, 2019 – 7:07 am

No matter what is going on, you can expect some Warmist somewhere to drag ‘climate change’ into it. But, interestingly, they often end up ruining their own narrative. Here’s Paul Brown at the U Guardian

Weatherwatch: walls cannot keep out climate change

History is littered with examples of rulers building walls to keep out undesirables, invaders and immigrants. The Great Wall of China and Hadrian’s Wall in Britain are among the best-known examples, and there is a 2,000-mile (3,200km) fence between India and Bangladesh.

The earliest-known barrier for this purpose was in the cradle of civilisation in Mesopotamia about 4,300 years ago. A 110-mile wall called the “Repeller of the Amorites” was built to keep out the tribe of that name who were known as “a ravaging people with the instincts of a beast”.

This was because they did not grow grain but hunted for their food. The wall did not work, however, because the Akkadian empire was being overwhelmed by a force greater than the Amorites – climate change. A drought in the region that lasted for 300 years destroyed the empire. During that period, the whole Middle East region was subject to mass migrations as various tribes looked for greener pastures as their homelands dried up.

Exactly what caused that drought is still not clear, but the effects are exactly those that are beginning to happen worldwide at the moment – an unpredictable climate forcing millions of people to migrate to survive. History teaches us walls will not solve the problem.

First off, neither wall was built to keep out “immigrants” or “undesirables”, unless you consider invading armies to be one or both. The invaders part is correct, but, they really weren’t worried about illegal aliens back then, but people bringing war. As for the “Repeller of the Amorites”, um, Paul is kinda making the case FOR a wall, considering all the crime illegal aliens bring to the U.S. If walls didn’t work the majority of the time, you wouldn’t see them still in place around the world. Military bases, CIA, NSA, the White House, and so much more.

Second, what caused the climate change way back 4,300 years ago? It was a warm period thought to be warmer than it is during the current warm period. It was at the same time the Egyptians were at the height of their own empire, and right before the Bronze Age. Were they driving fossil fueled vehicles? Using evil air conditioning? Using coal power plants?

Trying to link things to make one’s point without really understanding them can be dangerous.

Read: Walls Can’t Keep Out ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

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

Democrat Darling Kamala Harris Vows To Eliminate All Private Insurance, Ban “Assault Weapons”

By William Teach January 29, 2019 – 6:49 am

It looks, at least at the moment, like Kamala Harris is the chosen one for the Democrat big wigs and the liberal media. Heck, even Joe Scarborough has given up all pretense of being a Republican and is squeeing over her. But she, like so many Democrats, isn’t even hiding how utterly far left she nor what she wants

Kamala Harris vows to get rid of private health care plans: ‘Let’s eliminate all of that. Let’s move on’

California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris, speaking during a town hall Monday night, vowed to eliminate all private health care insurance for approximately 150 million Americans if she is elected president.

Asked by CNN host Jake Tapper if people who like their current health care insurance could keep it under Harris’ “Medicare for All” plan, Harris indicated they could not — but that, in turn, they would experience health care without any delays.

Her statements appeared to be a full-throated call for single-payer health insurance, as opposed to merely expanding Medicare, and a dramatic embrace of the kind of proposals advocated by Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders.

“Well, listen, the idea is that everyone gets access to medical care. And you don’t have to go through the process of going through an insurance company, having them give you approval, going through the paperwork, all of the delay that may require,” Harris told Tapper.

Right, so now we would have to wait for the federal government, always renowned for its speed at doing things, to approve the medical process, deciding you aren’t worth the knee operation and should just get some pain pills and a cane. Too bad Jake Tapper didn’t ask her how she would pay for it.

In August 2017, Harris became the first Senate Democrat to support Sanders’ “Medicare for All” bill. The program, if implemented, would cost tens of trillions of dollars over a decade, experts say.

Several independent studies have specifically estimated that government spending on health care would surge by $25 trillion to $35 trillion or more in a 10-year period. A study released over the summer by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, for example, estimated that Sanders’ program would cost $32.6 trillion — $3.26 trillion per year — over a decade. By comparison, the federal budget proposal for the fiscal year 2019 was $4.4 trillion, the Congressional Budget Office states.

Now just imagine what pure single payer would cost. How much your taxes would go up. Sure, you’d eliminate premiums and probably deductibles, but, you’d end up paying more overall.

Also

Speaking separately in response to a gun rights question at Monday’s town hall, Harris urged a ban on “assault weapons,” without defining the term.

“There is no reason in a civil society that we have assault weapons around communities that can kill babies and police officers,” Harris said to applause. “Something like universal background checks — it makes perfect sense that you might want to know before someone can buy a weapon that can kill another human being, you might want to know have they been convicted of a felony where they committed violence? That’s just reasonable. You might want to know before they can buy that gun if a court has found them to be a danger to themselves or others. You just might want to know. That’s reasonable.”

Which we mostly have now. California has this, and it has failed again and again. As for “assault weapons”, does she plan to come around and confiscated those who have them now? Good luck with that.

Or police officers.

Read: Democrat Darling Kamala Harris Vows To Eliminate All Private Insurance, Ban “Assault Weapons” »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats, Healthcare, Unhinged Tools | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

Vox Decides To Fat Shame To Push ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach January 28, 2019 – 3:04 pm

Two of the latest crazy things going around are “fat shaming” and “body positive.” These are SJW concepts which have become methods to push being overweight and even obese as “positive” life styles, despite what doctors will tell you. You almost can’t go a day where someone is writing something about someone fat shaming them (they are usually majorly overweight) or about them being body positive (meaning very fat). So, what’s up with this, Julia Belluz at Vox?

Want to fix obesity and climate change at the same time? Make Big Food companies pay.

Obesity, climate change, and malnutrition are among the greatest global crises facing our world today. Wouldn’t it be great if there were solutions to tackle all three problems at once?

That might sound far-fetched. But a new report, published Sunday in Lancet, implores us to think about the possibility of big, systemic fixes for these interrelated scourges.

Overnutrition, undernutrition, and global warming share common causes: Powerful commercial interests that promote overconsumption, “policy inertia,” and weak governance, according to the report, led by the University of Auckland in New Zealand, George Washington University in the US, and World Obesity Federation in the UK.

Nowhere is that more pronounced than in the global food industry: Large food companies stuff our shelves with calorie-dense, nutrient-poor foods. They market their sugary drinks and snacks to children. And they lobby politicians to obstruct policies and subsidies that’d help us eat healthier.

This global food system also generates up to a third of total greenhouse gas emissions.

Here’s an idea: don’t buy that food. Have some willpower. Regardless, the same wankers pushing obesity being linked to ‘climate change’ are the exact same people yammering about fat shaming and being body positive. Think I’m kidding?

Fat shaming, explained in one terrible tweet

Yeah, that’s Julia. And these same people will make all sorts of excuses. Anyhow

“Trying to prevent malnutrition, obesity, and unsustainable agricultural practices has been impossible in the face of food industry opposition to public health measures that might reduce product sales,” said Marion Nestle, a food policy researcher at New York University, who was not involved in the study. “This report makes it clear that governments must act to curb food industry practices that promote poor health and damage the environment.” To do that, the report authors argue, we need an international treaty, one that treats Big Food companies like Big Tobacco. Here’s why.

Funny how this comes down to government force regarding….food.

Read: Vox Decides To Fat Shame To Push ‘Climate Change’ »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach January 28, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is an angry ocean from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Brass Pills, with a post on the fallout of a woman trying to make her man jealous and getting what she wanted.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Hey, Can We Not Do The Kamala Harris Birtherism Meme, Please?

By William Teach January 28, 2019 – 10:46 am

When it came to the Obama birtherism thing, it sorta made sense. First, because it was a fun way to generate conversation. Second, because it was started by people associated with Hillary Clinton’s 2008 campaign. Then you have the notion of how bad Obama’s certificate of live birth looked. It did appear manipulated. And he wouldn’t release his actual birth certificate, which was surely him trying to troll people. And succeeding. And the media pretty much refused to investigate anything in Obama’s background, which meant people would run wild.

However, with Kamala Harris, this is simply dumb beyond belief. On Twitter, Dana and both engaged a Kamala Harris Birther, and this is what they are pushing

https://twitter.com/ConR689/status/1089612028656930816

This has been debunked easily by many. Here’s what they are pushing

(Snopes) In January 2019, Jacob Wohl — a Twitter political troll and veteran of a failed smear campaign against Robert Mueller — dipped his toes into the topic of constitutional law, asserting his view that 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Senator Kamala Harris of California was constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States:

https://twitter.com/JacobAWohl/status/1087736259517108224

Now, Snopes is not perfect. Nor is Politifact. But they are correct

The U.S. Constitution says that “no person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.”

So the key language is whether Harris is a “natural born citizen.” And experts say she meets that definition.

First, there’s the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The relevant portion says that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

Second, there’s a 1952 statute (8 U.S. Code § 1401) that echoes the language in the Fourteenth Amendment and says that people born in the United States are “nationals and citizens.”

And third, there’s an 1898 Supreme Court decision, known as the Wong Kim Ark case. In its 6-2 majority decision, the justices ruled that Wong — and others born on United States soil, with a few clear exceptions — did indeed qualify for citizenship under the 14th Amendment.

Kamala was born in the U.S. in Oakland. It matters zero that her parents weren’t U.S. citizens. Had they been diplomatic personnel, this would have been different. But, they weren’t. It’s why there is actually a birthing industry where citizens, especially Chinese, come to the U.S. to give birth., making the child a natural born U.S. citizen. It’s why illegals come to have their kids here (well, in this case, to establish roots so that the parents do not get deported). Politifact gives this birther conspiracy a Pants On Fire rating, and it deserves it. The Constitution, the law, and court rulings prove this.

So, just stop. Don’t go there. It’s not even a fun one like with Obama, when so many did it tongue-in-cheek. This is clear cut. Move on. Because you are not helping the show with this. You’re hurting it.

Read: Hey, Can We Not Do The Kamala Harris Birtherism Meme, Please? »

Posted in Uncategorized | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, What Would Australia Look Like With 100% Renewable Energy Or Something

By William Teach January 28, 2019 – 7:51 am

Nicky Ison (@nickymison) is the “founding director of the Community Power Agency and research associate at the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology Sydney.” It sure looks like he has a lot at stake in pushing for more and more “renewable” energy to be built. And he thinks they can do 100%. Despite the utter failure of renewables during a heat wave in Australia

What would Australia look like powered by 100% renewable energy?

Probably like the center area

Anyhow, Nicky thinks it would look like

1. Big on wind and solar

In future, the bulk of our electricity will come from the most affordable technologies – wind and solar photovoltaic (PV). In areas with the best renewable resources, big wind and solar projects connected to transmission lines will generate electricity to power Australia’s industry, transport, cities and exports.

2. Lots of different technologies in different locations

These solar and wind farms will be spread across the country, sharing their output, because in a huge continent the size of Australia, the wind is almost always blowing somewhere.

Basically, they would have to cover over the continent sized nation with solar panels and wind turbines, destroying the pristine areas, destroying wildlife areas, leaving lots of concrete pads for the turbines, disrupting the habits of wildlife as they turn and cast constantly turning shadows, as well as all the solar panels keeping sunlight from hitting the plant life.

Hold on … hydropower in the dry continent of Australia? Yes, they have identified 22,000 potential sites, mainly off-river reservoirs in hilly terrain or abandoned mine sites, and just 0.1% of those could meet all of Australia’s storage needs in a 100% renewable grid.

And the extreme enviros will block these hydropower sites, as well as putting up the solar panels and wind turbines, and, failing that, the transmission lines which can disrupt wildlife and despoil the environment.

Future electricity use will be much more dynamic. When the sun is shining or a gale is blowing, smart software will send a signal to energy users to turn on their pumps and fill up their batteries.

First, the tech to truly hold the necessary energy doesn’t really exist. Second, the batteries only last so long, creating a toxic mess. Good idea, guys!

6. Industry and transport go renewable too, and not just in Australia

In other words, they’re going to force Other People out of their fossil fueled vehicles, and do away with clean, abundant, reliable natural gas. Will they require the demolition of all airports, too?

Such a transition has engineering and policy challenges that must be addressed, but with our smartest minds on the job, creating this energy system of the future is already under way. The biggest question that remains is – will we do it at the speed that climate change demands?

Will they do it at the speed to make Nicky and the other Warmists pushing this lots of money quickly?

Read: Say, What Would Australia Look Like With 100% Renewable Energy Or Something »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

TDS: Washington Post Blames Trump For Convictions Of Pro-Illegal Alien Supporters Who Left “Aid” In Desert

By William Teach January 28, 2019 – 7:27 am

The laws regarding entering the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge without a permit as well as leaving garbage were established long before Trump took office. They were updated in July of 2017 a tiny bit. Yet, somehow, this is all Trump’s Fault, and the Washington Post Editorial Board highlights that they are for open borders with their use of the word “migrants”. Also, they weren’t really convicted for what the headline says

Convicted for leaving water for migrants in the desert: This is Trump’s justice

A FEW weeks ago, federal prosecutors in Arizona secured a conviction against four humanitarian aid workers who left water in the desert for migrants who might otherwise die of heat exposure and thirst. Separately, they dropped manslaughter charges against a U.S. Border Patrol agent who fired 16 times across the border, killing a teenage Mexican boy. The aid workers face a fine and up to six months in jail. The Border Patrol officer faces no further legal consequences.

That is a snapshot of twisted frontier justice in the age of Trump. Save a migrant’s life, and you risk becoming a political prisoner. Kill a Mexican teenager, and you walk free.

The law states that you cannot enter without a permit, nor leave any “aid” supplies, the latter for two reasons: it entices illegal aliens to come illegally, and via a really, really dangerous area. That same “aid” is also then discarded, creating trash in the pristine desert area. The Border Patrol agent had already been through two trials, having been acquitted on one charge and deadlocked on a second in the first trial and a deadlocked jury in the second. There was no point in the third. A quick link above is not a substitute for showing the real details or dropping it at the end of the editorial, WPEB.

The four aid workers, all women, were volunteers in service to an organization, No More Deaths, whose religious views inform its mission to prevent undocumented migrants from dying during their perilous northward trek. They drove into the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge, about 100 miles southwest of Phoenix, to leave water jugs along with some canned beans.

Suddenly, the WPEB is concerned about religious views. If they really cared, they wouldn’t entice illegals to cross through the refuge, a harsh, deadly area if you don’t start with right supplies. Heck, even if you do. Even the National Wildlife Federation says the area is dangerous, and has tons of smugglers and others coming through.

The women — Natalie Hoffman, Oona Holcomb, Madeline Huse and Zaachila Orozco-McCormick — made no effort to conceal their work. Confronted by a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service officer, they said they believed everyone deserved access to basic survival needs. One of them, Ms. Orozco-McCormick, compared the wildlife refuge to a graveyard, such is the ubiquity of human remains there. (snip)

In the past, prosecutors declined to press charges against the volunteers who try to help by leaving water and canned food in the desert. But the four women, arrested in August 2017, were tried for the misdemeanor offenses of entering a refuge without a permit, abandoning personal property and, in the case of Ms. Hoffman, driving in a restricted area. U.S. Magistrate Judge Bernardo Velasco, who presided over the bench trial, said their actions ran afoul of the “national decision to maintain the Reserve in its pristine nature.”

And that’s why you don’t incent people to cross illegally there by leaving them aid. And they admitted they broke the law. Others in their group face trials in February and March, one of them for harboring illegal aliens. And they were damaging the refuge. It’s not Trump’s fault they made the decision to violate U.S. law.

Read: TDS: Washington Post Blames Trump For Convictions Of Pro-Illegal Alien Supporters Who Left “Aid” In Desert »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Unhinged Tools, Wonky Media | Comments Off on TDS: Washington Post Blames Trump For Convictions Of Pro-Illegal Alien Supporters Who Left “Aid” In Desert | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove