Looking Deeper Into The Democrats “Green New Deal” As They Take Over The House

By William Teach January 3, 2019 – 5:02 pm

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is telling us what the new unhinged Statist wing of the Democrats want to do (via Twitchy)

And that Green Deal?

He’s not kidding. Let’s check Section 6 (B) in that file

  • (i) provide all members of our society, across all regions and all communities, the opportunity, training and education to be a full and equal participant in the transition, including through a job guarantee program to assure a living wage job to every person who wants one
  • (iv) ensure a ‘just transition’ for all workers, low-income communities, communities of color, indigenous communities, rural and urban communities and the front-line communities most affected by climate change, pollution and other environmental harm including by ensuring that local implementation of the transition is led from the community level and by prioritizing solutions that end the harms faced by front-line communities from climate change and environmental pollution;
  • (v) protect and enforce sovereign rights and land rights of tribal nations;
  • (vi) mitigate deeply entrenched racial, regional and gender-based inequalities in income and wealth (including, without limitation, ensuring that federal and other investment will be equitably distributed to historically impoverished, low income, deindustrialized or other marginalized communities in such a way that builds wealth and ownership at the community level);
  • (vii) include additional measures such as basic income programs, universal health care programs and any others as the select committee may deem appropriate to promote economic security, labor market flexibility and entrepreneurism; and
  • (viii) deeply involve national and local labor unions to take a leadership role in the process of job training and worker deployment.

Once again, it looks like the “greens” are really about red: call it socialism, communism, Marxism, Progressivism, whatever, it’s all the same thing, using ‘climate change’ and a bit of environmentalism to push hardcore leftist beliefs.

Number 5 is a howler: the same people who want to protect sovereign rights and land rights of Indians want the complete opposite for our borders and protection for illegal aliens, as well as telling everyone how they handle their own property. Remember the Waters of The U.S. rule?

Read: Looking Deeper Into The Democrats “Green New Deal” As They Take Over The House »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 3, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible evil sub causing obesity which is bad for climate change (but we can all be totally body positive about it), you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Geller Report, with a post on a Washington Post reporter chanting death to America and death to Israel, among others.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Washington Post Offers Lots Of (Big Government) Ideas To Solve Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach January 3, 2019 – 10:30 am

The Washington Post and their staff could do their part by giving up their own use of fossil fuels to gather and disseminate the news, along with using only solar panels and wind turbines to power their operations….oh, right, right, it’s all about you being forced

How we can combat climate change

Last year’s report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change sounded the alarm: The world has until 2030 to implement “rapid and far-reaching” changes to our energy, infrastructure and industrial systems to avoid 2 degrees Celsius of warming, which could be catastrophic. But the scale of the challenge can appear so overwhelming that it’s hard to know where to start. The Post asked activists, politicians and researchers for climate policy ideas that offer hope. Radical change from one state, or even the whole United States, won’t address climate change on its own, but taking these actions could help start the planet down a path toward a better future.

11 policy ideas to protect the planet

When you look at that list, you realize that other than two, nuclear and open electric markets, every single one of them involves the growth and power of Government, from the local to the state to the federal level. And that your cost of living and choice/freedom will be reduced.

As far as nuclear goes, they do not want to build new plants, ones that are that last generation, no, they just want to make sure they stay open till “green” energy is up and running. For the electric markets, this doesn’t include anything but wind and solar. They think introducing this competition will decrease costs, despite wind and solar being vastly more expensive. You know that they would block natural gas plants.

The Green New Deal is cute

While the Green New Deal would require a scale of government action not seen since the Great Depression and World War II, this type of job-creating policy is extremely popular and could ensure economic security to millions of Americans for the first time in decades, especially people of color and poor or middle-class Americans who have been left out of the economic gains of the past four decades. We can solve the biggest challenge humanity has ever faced and protect our air, water and land for future generations.

Young people have a right to good jobs and a livable future. The Green New Deal is a winning plan for both.

Funny how this looks exactly like every other Statist type proposal which grows government and looks like social justice warrioring.

You can bet that if we put a carbon tax on news orgs which use lots of fossil fuels and lots of trees to make their papers, as well as lots of energy to broadcast the news, the news media would give up their affection and preoccupation with ‘climate change’.

Read: Washington Post Offers Lots Of (Big Government) Ideas To Solve Hotcoldwetdry »

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

Almost All Paris Climate Agreement Nations Are Missing Their Commitments

By William Teach January 3, 2019 – 8:36 am

Is it still “historic” if nations are bothering to implement it?

Almost all countries have fallen short on climate change commitments

The Paris agreement set a goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius over pre-industrial levels. Climate Action Tracker measures countries’ progress toward meeting this goal and the latest report finds that just two countries, The Gambia and Morocco, currently have policies that meet the 1.5-degree target.

Scientific evidence shows that a 2-degree warmer world will be far more disastrous for civilization than a world that warms by 1.5 degrees or less.

Climate Action Tracker’s Yvonne Deng notes that the group’s ratings take into account the unique situations of each country. (snip)

In addition to rating each of the countries’ commitments under Paris, Climate Action Tracker also uses what they call their CAT Thermometer, a tool that measures global temperature rise under various scenarios. For example, they’ve calculated that if countries do what they’ve committed to doing under the Paris agreements, the world will see a rise of about 3 degrees Celsius by the end of this century.

Huh. So the commitments wouldn’t be 1.5C or 2C, but 3C? Despite the world temperature going up just .9C since 1850? And only two are on track for the 1.5C goal? Where are all the other nations who were super enthused? I’m guess that all the restrictions and taxes and rises in the cost of living aren’t helping.

Hey, maybe it has to do with the people realizing that people who think of themselves as our political masters are making all sorts of deals to force citizens to pay more and lose freedom while jetting all over the world and living the high life on the public dime.

Read: Almost All Paris Climate Agreement Nations Are Missing Their Commitments »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

At White House Meeting, Democrats Refused To Even Listen To Briefing On Border Security

By William Teach January 3, 2019 – 8:25 am

One of the assigned duties per the U.S. Constitution for the federal government is to protect the borders of the nation. Things like Medicare for all, ‘climate change’, free college (which will be worth what it costs), and so much of the rest of the Democrats agenda is not. Yet, this is what we get

OFFICIAL: DEMS ‘REFUSED’ TO EVEN LISTEN TO BORDER SECURITY BRIEFING AT WHITE HOUSE

Democratic lawmakers brought a border security briefing at the White House to a screeching halt Wednesday, refusing to even listen to Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, a White House official tells The Daily Caller. (video at the link)

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy echoed this version of events to reporters outside the White House immediately after the briefing, saying, “Once the secretary started, Schumer interrupted her and didn’t want to hear it.”

Republican and Democratic lawmakers after the meeting indicated little progress was made toward ending the partial government shutdown and that they agreed to reconvene Friday. The White House official says there was a consensus in the room that negotiations would be put on hold until Pelosi officially assumed her expected role of Speaker.

The White House official told TheDC that both Pelosi and Schumer refused to hear out Nielsen’s briefing and instead advocated for two solutions to end the government shutdown. Neither of the Democratic options would provide the additional funding for border security requested by The White House.

“Democrats in the room either don’t care that there is a humanitarian crisis on the border or just prefer ignorance. It was incredibly disheartening that they don’t want to know the facts when making policy,” DHS Spokeswoman Katie Waldman said in a statement to TheDC.

NBC News also reported the same

“We never did get through the complete briefing,” McCarthy said, which was led by Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who beamed in via video link from California. “I was a little disappointed with some on the other side. Once the secretary started, Senator Schumer interrupted her and they really didn’t want to hear it.”

Just seconds after Nielsen began her presentation, according to two sources familiar with the meeting, House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif cut in. Democrats redirected the conversation to how they planned to open the government once they take control of the House tomorrow.

It’s almost like they don’t care about border security

Before interrupting – and effectively halting – the White House meeting on border security Wednesday, the likely speaker of the House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., vowed “nothing for the wall” will come in talks to end the government shutdown.

“No, nothing for the wall,” Pelosi told NBC News’ Savannah Guthrie in an interview that will air Thursday on “Today.” “We’re talking about border security.”

The Democrats are offering $1.3 billion for border security, but that is not for any new wall sections, only for “enhanced surveillance” and “fortified fencing”, maybe a few drones to be able to count the illegals as they cross in and disappear. Many are saying that Trump torched a $2.5 billion compromise, but, the thing is, that was something floated by VP Mike Pence, which Democrats had zero intention of agreeing to.

So, here we are, with a party that has no care about securing out borders and protecting our citizens.

Read: At White House Meeting, Democrats Refused To Even Listen To Briefing On Border Security »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 21 Comments | Trackback URL

Who’s Up For Eight Steps You Can Take To Thwart ‘Climate Change’?

By William Teach January 2, 2019 – 4:20 pm

It’s a brand new year, so, Elaina Hancock at the U of Connecticut offers some helpful advice…I wonder how much electricity is used by UConn to operate?

Want to Thwart Climate Change? Here are 8 Steps You Can Take

Now that the New Year’s Eve party is over, it’s time to lay off the balloons and glitter – both are scourges to the environment.

UConn faculty members make the case for those and other personal lifestyle changes that can help protect the environment for future generations.

Skip the balloons, and glitter, and coffee cups, and plastic bags …

Plastics in the environment are bad news. Besides leading to immense gyres of plastics in the ocean, plastics in the environment break down into microplastics, says Michael Willig, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology and director of UConn’s Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering. “Broken down by UV radiation abrasion during transport,” he says, “these plastics are transformed into microplastics that range in size from the barely visible (a few millimeters) to the invisible (within the range of nanoparticles).”

Microplastics obstruct digestive tracts of animals. And, Willig, says animals can also absorb and concentrate other chemical contaminants such as heavy metals and pesticides, potentially magnifying exposure to these contaminants to species further up the food chain, potentially with significant effects on humans and top predators.

Actually, those aren’t that bad, but, they are about protecting the environment, and have nothing to do with Hotcoldwetdry. Let’s look at the others

Reduce Seasonal Sodium

Actually, not a bad idea, as this is referring to the use of salt brine and similar stuff, which is seriously overused to protect the roads for drivers during winter weather events, and has actually been shown to create salt water marshes in areas nowhere near oceans. They are often sprayed early to make people believe the government is Doing Something, and they often wash away before being helpful.

  • Turn Down the Heat (they never tell us what we’re supposed to turn it down too. I keep mine at 68 in the winter. Should I turn it to 65? To what?)
  • Get Lazy with Lawn Care (you can bet the neighborhood association and/or city government will have an issue with this)
  • Plant Natives – They Make Good Neighbors (nothing to do with AGW)
  • Protect Green Space (necessary in big liberal cities which have paved over most of it)
  • Express Yourself (this is about spreading awareness as opposed to changing your own life)
  • Don’t Wait to Start! (the phrase “Lead by example, it’s contagious” is included. Yet, almost none do)

Mostly, these have nothing to do with ‘climate change’, and aren’t really Doing Something. Just give up your use of fossil fuels, Warmists, and live like it’s 1499.

Read: Who’s Up For Eight Steps You Can Take To Thwart ‘Climate Change’? »

Posted in Global Warming | Comments Off on Who’s Up For Eight Steps You Can Take To Thwart ‘Climate Change’? | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 2, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fridge causing the temperature to go up dozens of degrees soon, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is America’s Watchtower, with a post on Elizabeth Warren preparing a 2020 presidential run.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Liz Peek: Ways To Move Forward On Illegal Immigration Despite Demo Opposition

By William Teach January 2, 2019 – 10:44 am

Liz Peek thinks she has the solution to the stalemate on border security

Liz Peek: Dems’ opposition to Trump’s wall exposes hypocrisy on immigration– Here are 5 ways to move forward

Nothing better illuminates Democrat hypocrisy that the ongoing squabble over the wall. Donald Trump wants it; Chuck Schumer says he can’t have it. This is the same Senator Schumer who began an address before the Migration Policy Institute in 2009 declaring:

“Illegal immigration is wrong, and a primary goal of comprehensive immigration reform must be to dramatically curtail future illegal immigration.”

He continued, “Operational control of our borders – through significant additional increases in infrastructure, technology and border personnel – must be achieved…”

Here’s the thing, though: Schumer was not serious. Much during the previous shamnesty push by President George W Bush, and the later Gang of 8 push, it was all talking points designed to get “comprehensive immigration reform” passed, which promised security, but would really only end up with amnesty for illegals.

Democrats have changed their tune on border security and illegal immigration for two reasons. First, they are against The wall because President Trump is for it. They hope that preventing its construction, one of the president’s key campaign promises, will torpedo Trump’s popularity with his base as we near the 2020 election.

Second, as she notes, it is for Hispanic votes. Unmentioned is that if they give amnesty to the illegals they’ll get their votes. They’ve admitted it.

She offers up some facts about illegal immigration, then moves on to five measures (actually, 6)

1) Build the 700-800 mile wall or fence that President Trump proposed last spring. Democrats endlessly quack that they support secure borders, but offer no solutions. They just don’t like Mr. Trump’s solution.

She notes we don’t need it everywhere, and that the Border Patrol can pick which methods are best in some areas, but this would stop a major flow.

2) Many argue that the majority of undocumented people in the country did not enter illegally but rather overstayed their visa, a problem The wall would not address. The solution is making E-Verify mandatory. E-Verify is a reliable, free government service which will prevent people without papers from working.

Need more than that. Need to make sure that the companies and schools who bring them are in charge of making sure they are in compliance. That we can find them and boot them out when their visas expire.

3) Scrap the diversity visa program. In that Harvard-Harris poll last year, 68% opposed the random selection of 50,000 people allowed to enter the country each year.  We should admit people based on what they offer our country. Other countries have done this; why not the U.S.?

No complaints there.

4) Resolve the DACA problem by granting those young people who have grown up in the U.S. a path to citizenship. It is unconscionable that their futures remain uncertain.

First, it is not unconscionable. They are not our burden. They shouldn’t be here. Regardless, I wish I could find the post on this, but, I offered an idea where we would offer a pathway to legal status for the DACA kids, which would include the people who brought them here illegally having to self-deport prior to any pathway starting for each individual. They would have to learn the same stuff and pay the same fees as those who apply for citizenship the lawful way. And if the parents come back illegally, said pathway is cancelled and the Dreamer is immediately deported. That would be part of the contract. The talking point is that the kids shouldn’t pay for the sins of the parents. Well, someone has to pay. That would be the parents.

5) Allow people living in the country illegally a one-time opportunity to achieve legal status. They would not be given a path to citizenship, but rather could become registered legal aliens. There is a penalty for not waiting your turn.

No. Just no. Because this would entice more to come, expecting that they would get the same opportunity once the numbers hit a critical mass. We could give them a chance to self-deport after which they could apply to become a citizen. You don’t reward bad behavior. This is the kind of thinking that gets the GOP into trouble, and keeps the illegal alien train flowing.

6) Rationalize our work-visa programs to assure sufficient labor to meet the needs of our agricultural and hospitality industries.

Of course, one problem here is the number of visa holders who just never leave. We could expand these work visas, but, it has to be coupled with the notion of immediate deportation if an overstay occurs.

But, remember, Democrats really do not want to solve the issues, because this helps whip their base up.

Read: Liz Peek: Ways To Move Forward On Illegal Immigration Despite Demo Opposition »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 22 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Governor Jay Inslee Is Running For President Because ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach January 2, 2019 – 8:10 am

Democrats now have another old, white person running for the nomination. As a governor, he might have a better chance than the rest of the yahoos expected to run, being Senators, but, not with this climahysteric platform

Jay Inslee Is Running for President
The Washington governor has a single-minded focus: pulling the country back from the climate-change brink.

What if a meteor were hurtling toward the Earth, about to kill millions and reshape life on the planet as we know it?

And what if the president, instead of doing anything to help, made it worse in just about every way, and called it a hoax (and any solutions a scam) instead of the very real, very clear disaster taking shape?

And what if all the Democrats running to beat him in the next election went on and on about how concerned they were and how it’s our most pressing problem—but none had ever done much more than talk about the problem, and for the most part only started doing that in just the past few years?

That’s where Jay Inslee thinks America is when it comes to climate change. And that’s why he’s going to run for president.

“When you’ve been working on something for over a decade, and now seeing people awakening to that, it’s just really gratifying and heartening,” the Washington governor recently told me, sitting in his private study on the top floor of the governor’s mansion. When it comes to climate change, there now appears to be “an appetite for someone who has credibility and a long track record and, most importantly, a vision statement. It’s changed to show an opening in a Democratic primary, I believe.”

His own state has rejected a carbon tax multiple times, including during the 2018 elections. Even the left leaning people in Washington are only interested in Doing Something in theory, not in the real world.

If there is a new Democratic president come 2021, he or she will get pulled in all sorts of policy directions. Inslee says he has one priority: global warming. It’s not theoretical, or a cause just for tree huggers anymore. Putting off dealing with it for a year or two or kicking it to some new bipartisan commission won’t work, he says. He plans to focus on the threat that climate change poses to the environment and national security—the mega-storms and fires causing millions in damages, the weather changes that will cause mass migrations, the droughts that will devastate farmers in America and around the world.

I actually look forward to Jay running on this platform, as it will highlight just how much people do not really care. They say they care, but, as we all know, whenever a poll is held on the Things That Voters Care About, ‘climate change’ comes in last or next to last. Seriously, what will Jay campaign on? Raising your taxes? Increasing your cost of living via ‘climate change’ taxes, fees, and other other measures? Reducing the availability of reliable, affordable energy? Jacking up the price of gasoline? Jacking up the price of homes? Forcing people to give up their liberty and choice? All while he runs around the country campaigning in fossil fueled vehicles? Good luck with that.

Perhaps Jay should look at the riots in France.

Read: Washington Governor Jay Inslee Is Running For President Because ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Mitt Romney Joins The Resistance With TDS Op-Ed

By William Teach January 2, 2019 – 7:46 am

MItt Romney has done what John McCain did: gone truly Resistance to Donald Trump, showing his Trump Derangement Syndrome. Yet, both refused to attack the policies of Barack Obama or the man himself during their general elections as well as after they lost because they were being the “nice” guy while Obama, his surrogates, and the media attacked them.

Trump’s character falls short, writes incoming senator Mitt Romney. ‘A president should unite us.’

The Trump presidency made a deep descent in December. The departures of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, the appointment of senior persons of lesser experience, the abandonment of allies who fight beside us, and the president’s thoughtless claim that America has long been a “sucker” in world affairs all defined his presidency down.

It is well known that Donald Trump was not my choice for the Republican presidential nomination. After he became the nominee, I hoped his campaign would refrain from resentment and name-calling. It did not. When he won the election, I hoped he would rise to the occasion. His early appointments of Rex Tillerson, Jeff Sessions, Nikki Haley, Gary Cohn, H.R. McMaster, Kelly and Mattis were encouraging. But, on balance, his conduct over the past two years, particularly his actions this month, is evidence that the president has not risen to the mantle of the office.

It is not that all of the president’s policies have been misguided. He was right to align U.S. corporate taxes with those of global competitors, to strip out excessive regulations, to crack down on China’s unfair trade practices, to reform criminal justice and to appoint conservative judges. These are policies mainstream Republicans have promoted for years. But policies and appointments are only a part of a presidency.

To a great degree, a presidency shapes the public character of the nation. A president should unite us and inspire us to follow “our better angels.” A president should demonstrate the essential qualities of honesty and integrity, and elevate the national discourse with comity and mutual respect. As a nation, we have been blessed with presidents who have called on the greatness of the American spirit. With the nation so divided, resentful and angry, presidential leadership in qualities of character is indispensable. And it is in this province where the incumbent’s shortfall has been most glaring.

Romney continues to attack Trump on a personal level, again and again and again throughout the piece, which must have made the uber-leftists who run the Washington Post super giddy to publish. But, much like with Jeff Flake and the rest of the unhinged #NeverTrumpers, Romney wants to be a doormat for the Democrats and the leftist media, rather than fighting back as well as fighting for Republican policies

Furthermore, I will act as I would with any president, in or out of my party: I will support policies that I believe are in the best interest of the country and my state, and oppose those that are not. I do not intend to comment on every tweet or fault. But I will speak out against significant statements or actions that are divisive, racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, dishonest or destructive to democratic institutions.

Seriously, can anyone remember Romney write an opinion piece taking on Barack Obama and his divisiveness? His dishonesty? His destruction of “democratic institutions”? How about targeting Republicans via the IRS? He wouldn’t do it during the general election, and he wouldn’t do it after he lost.

People like Mitt are thinking about the Old Way of doing things, where Republicans can be attacked non-stop while Democrats must never be touched. Where Republicans must work with Dems while Dems have no need to work with the GOP. Yes, there are certainly times when Trump needs to reign it in, leave it alone, step away from the Twitter, but, he hearkens back to a time when Politics was rough and tumble, where people would defend their policies and themselves forcefully. This is something the Republican base had been asking for, Republicans who would fight back.

Read: Mitt Romney Joins The Resistance With TDS Op-Ed »

Posted in Democrat Lite, GOP | 10 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove