…is a fish made smaller because Someone Else used a hair dryer, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Pacific Pundit, with a post on what Antifa has planned for November 4th
Read: If All You See… »
…is a fish made smaller because Someone Else used a hair dryer, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Pacific Pundit, with a post on what Antifa has planned for November 4th
Read: If All You See… »
Don’t think hardcore Progressives are just coming after Confederate statues (and Christopher Columbus, Joan of Arc, Revolutionary War heroes, Washington, Jefferson, even FDR….but not KKK member Robert Byrd stuff). They seem interested in other things around the world
(Daily Mail) Â A statue of Captain Cook in Sydney’s Hyde Park has been fenced off after it was the target of a vandal who scrawled ‘change the date’ and ‘no pride in genocide’ across the monument.
Cones and tape now surround the monument of Captain Cook, which boasts an inscription saying the British explorer ‘discovered this territory, 1770’.
The fencing off of the statue on Tuesday comes after it was vandalised on Saturday morning.
The messages have been washed off the statue, but cones and tape separate it from the public.
Labour leader Bill Shorten has called for Hyde Park’s Captain Cook statue to be reformed.
Speaking at Hyde Park in Sydney’s centre on Monday, Mr Shorten joined a growing number of activists campaigning for the statue to acknowledge and pay respect to Aboriginal people – the country’s first Australians.
The words ‘change the date’ and ‘no pride in genocide’ were scrawled across the monument in spray paint – political slogans used by people who want the date of Australia Day changed.
Statues of Lachlan Macquarie and Queen Victoria were also defaced with spray paint.
Let’s face it, nothing will make these people happy. Unless it’s a statue to those nice people like Stalin, Mao, and Che.
Meanwhile, in Durham, NC, a Major in the Durham County Sheriff’s office is not a happy camper
A major in the Durham County Sheriff’s Office says county commissioners are setting a dangerous precedent by questioning the felony charges in the toppling of a Confederate statue.
“Should law enforcement determine the severity of charges for persons who destroy or deface monuments based upon the political leanings of county commissioners?†Maj. Paul Martin said in a statement.
“Is it alright (sic) for the left to destroy or deface a monument but not the right?†he continued. “Are statements concerning the severity of criminal charges by county commissioners an effort to obstruct justice since they control the budget for the sheriff as well as raises for the sheriff and all his personnel?â€
Several county commissioners are looking for leniency and even having the felony charges dropped against the criminals who tore down a statue in Durham. They control the purse strings for the Sheriff’s office. And the major is entirely correct: is there one standard of Justice for some and not for others? If some white supremacists took down a statue of Martin Luther King, Jr., would the same people call for full prosecution? Of course they would. Regardless of the motivations, vandalism is vandalism, as in incitement to riot. We are either a Nation of Law or a Nation of Men.
The heckler’s veto in action
(San Francisco Chronicle) In the aftermath of a right-wing rally Sunday that ended with anarchists chasing attendees from a downtown park, Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguin urged UC Berkeley on Monday to cancel conservatives’ plans for a Free Speech Week next month to avoid making the city the center of more violent unrest.
“I don’t want Berkeley being used as a punching bag,†said Arreguin, whose city has been the site of several showdowns this year between, on the one hand, the left and its fringe anarchist wing, and on the other, supporters of President Trump who at times have included white nationalists.
“I am concerned about these groups using large protests to create mayhem,†Arreguin said. “It’s something we have seen in Oakland and in Berkeley.â€
For the most part, the only people present on Sunday were…..Democratic Party voters. There were very few “right wing” protesters, and, really, should they have to worry about major violence and assault from people wearing masks while the police stand idly by and watch crimes occur? Furthermore, if the mayor is so worried about violence, perhaps he should work to protect those engaged in something that is guaranteed by both the federal and California Constitutions.
The mayor wants UC Berkeley to halt plans by a conservative campus group, the Berkeley Patriot, to host right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos during its scheduled Free Speech Week from Sept. 24-27. Berkeley’s right-vs.-left cage matches began with an appearance that Yiannopoulos was to have made in February at a campus hall, an event that was aborted when black-clad anarchists like those who broke up Sunday’s downtown rally stormed into Sproul Plaza, smashed windows and set bonfires.
Have you ever noticed that when a left wing speaker shows up on campus, there are no riots by large groups of right wingers wearing masks, carrying baseball bats, making threats, and so forth? It’s only when someone on the right shows up, because it’s the mayor’s voters who are violent. And he lets his police officers stand down. Every officer should be ashamed.
“I’m very concerned about Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter and some of these other right-wing speakers coming to the Berkeley campus, because it’s just a target for black bloc to come out and commit mayhem on the Berkeley campus and have that potentially spill out on the street,†Arreguin said, referring to militants who have also been called anti-fascists or antifa.
You have a police force, sir. Why not use them to protect people engaged in their Constitutionally protected Right to Free Speech? Instead of giving in to the violence from the Left that you just admitted to?
“I obviously believe in freedom of speech, but there is a line between freedom of speech and then posing a risk to public safety,†the mayor said. “That is where we have to really be very careful — that while protecting people’s free-speech rights, we are not putting our citizens in a potentially dangerous situation and costing the city hundreds of thousands of dollars fixing the windows of businesses.â€
Heckler’s Veto. Due to Democratic Party voter violence and threats.
Perhaps we should rename this the Democrat’s Veto.
Read: Berkeley Mayor Is So Into Free Speech That He Asks College To Cancel Free Speech Week »
Warmists have been waiting almost twelve years to write their full insane cult talking points regarding major hurricanes. They gave it a shot when Superstorm Sandy came on-shore, they gave it a shot during Hurricane Matthew last year, but, otherwise, there’s been a dearth of landfalling tropical storm systems since 2008, and no major hurricanes since October, 2005. They’re all screaming like a pig in slop. Here’s the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson, who fails to mention the vast amounts of fossil fuels and trees used to produce and distribute the WP
Hurricane Harvey previews our stormy future
Pay attention to what happened to Houston. It is rare to be given such a vivid look at our collective future.
Climate change cannot be definitively blamed for Hurricane Harvey, but it likely did make the storm more powerful. Global warming did not conjure the rains that flooded the nation’s fourth-largest city, but it likely did make them more torrential. The spectacle of rescue boats plying the streets of a major metropolis is something we surely will see again. The question is how often.
And this is how they’re doing it now. They’ve used the time between major hurricanes, the longest dry spell on record for the United States, to craft cult-points about “making it worse”. But, did a changing climate make Harvey worse? Worse than what? There were several big, strong hurricanes during periods of cooling, such as Camille in 1969. How about the biggest, the Labor Day 1935 hurricane? Did fossil fuels cause it?
The relationship between climate and weather is undeniable but never specific.
Actually, it is. Climate is simply the long term average of weather. Thanks for playing, Eugene.
Tropical cyclones do not batter Siberia’s arctic coast and heavy snowfalls do not blanket the beaches of Barbados because the climates are different. But no one blizzard or hurricane can be attributed to climate change beyond the shadow of a doubt — which opens anyone who raises the subject at a time like this to the accusation of “politicizing†a disaster.
You’re politicizing a disaster, Eugene, as your own writing in the 3rd paragraph obliterates everything else. But, as you’d expect, Eugene doesn’t give up. Let’s move on from Excitable Eugene, over to the NY Times, where we get articles comparing and contrasting Harvey to Katrina (someone had to go down that rabbit hole), yammering about a 500 year flood, then Excitable David Leonhardt, with
Harvey, The Storm That Humans Helped Cause
(lots of yammering, with a failure to actually offer scientific evidence that Mankind is mostly/solely responsible for ‘climate change)
Add up the evidence, and it overwhelmingly suggests that human activity has helped create the ferocity of Harvey. That message may be hard to hear — harder to hear, certainly, than stories of human kindness that is now mitigating the storm’s toll. But it’s the truth.
Beyond Harvey, the potential damage from climate change is terrifying. Disease, famine and flooding of biblical proportions are within the realm of possibility. Unfortunately, stories of potential misery have not been enough to stir this country to action. They haven’t led to a Manhattan Project for alternative energy or a national effort to reduce carbon emissions.
He offered no evidence. Just because the climate has changed, just like it has always done, and, more immediately, has done many, many times during the Holocene, doesn’t mean Mankind is to blame. These people are as bad as witches blaming the gods for bad weather.
And there are so many more, such as Eric Holthaus in Politico, yammering about Harvey Is What Climate Change Looks Like. When we had an almost 12 year dearth of major hurricanes not making landfall on the U.S., and almost no hurricanes since 2008, why is that not “what climate change looks like”?
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Hurricane Harvey Previews Our Stormy Future Or Something »
This one comes to us from north of the border, as Gerry Labelle, 2011 Progressive Conservative candidate for Sudbury writes in
Sudbury letter: Build statues for climate change heroes
While the Ontario Teachers Federation passed a motion to remove the name of Canada’s first prime minister from all public elementary schools in the province, a larger crisis looms that could easily make history either irrelevant or extinct.
OK, so that’s obviously a bit of hyperbole on my part, but it does fit to serve the reason for this article.
There is a looming crisis; it’s called climate change. It is the common enemy that should be uniting us.
Any politician who wants his or her name on a building or statue or any public institution needs to act now. Failing to take positive action would be the greatest failing of any leader. (snip to the end)
To our Canadian leaders, thank you, but you have to do more. If you single-handedly solve the climate change crisis, I will work to get the whole damn planet named after you.

How soon till the Warmists start wanting to replace the statues of all involved with Wrongthink, which now seems to include not just those linked to the Confederacy, but Washington, Jefferson, Joan Of Arc, a Revolutionary War Colonel, and so on, with “climate heroes?”
Read: Hey, Let’s Build Statues To Climate Change Heroes Or Something »
…is a horrible fossil fueled boat that will be needed when the world is flooded from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Right Scoop, with a post on some incredible photos from Harvey.
Read: If All You See… »
All the usual Climate Ghouls were mostly quiet with their ‘climate change’ yammering prior to Harvey making landfall. Perhaps they decided that it was the wrong time to trot out their talking points, which like the saying goes, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
But, now that Harvey has made landfall, and is dumping massive amounts of rain, the Cult of Climastrology members in the media and elsewhere are free to go Full Cult
Climate Change Might Make Intense Hurricanes Like Harvey More Common
Hurricane Harvey was the most intense hurricane to make landfall on the U.S. mainland in over a decade.
And because of climate change, hurricanes like Harvey are probably going to become more common.
It’s hard to pin a single weather event — like Harvey — on climate change. But predictive models show it could make future hurricanes stronger. (snip past all the normal talking points)
There might be a bit of good news, though. While stronger hurricanes are likely to become more common, some analysts predict there will also be fewer hurricanes overall.
Yes, Climaidiots Ethan Weston and Caitlin Baldwin went there. Harvey was one of the only hurricanes to make landfall in over a decade. It’s the first major one since October 2005. How is this “more common”? And then we have the “more intense by fewer” prognostication. These people.
(The Blaze) CNN anchor John Berman was talking with Bill Read, the former director of the National Hurricane Center, on Friday when he asked if the intense hurricane that was bearing down on Texas was a result of climate change.
“Is there a why to this? Why there is so much water associated with this storm?†Berman asked. “One thing we heard from scientists over the last 10 years is that climate change does impact the intensity of many of the storms that we see.â€
Read responded: “I’m not — I’m probably wouldn’t attribute what we’re looking at here. This is not an uncommon occurrence to see storms grow and intensify rapidly in the western Gulf of Mexico. That’s as long as we’ve been tracking them, that has occurred. The why for the big rain is the stationarity. That fact that the storm is going to come inland and not move…while it has happened in some cases, to have a really big storm come and stall like this is really rare.â€
It’s essentially what we call “weather”. Harvey is trapped between multiple high pressure systems with weak steering winds.
There are plenty of others, such as
Could a warming world played a part? Of course! But, that doesn’t mean it’s anthropogenic. Warm periods happen. Meteorologist Paul Gross mentions some of the Warmist talking points about more intense but fewer, before jumping in and saying Harvey had nothing to do with ‘climate change.’
Climatologist Judith Curry takes a look at the models and how they performed, before noting that Harvey is tied at #14 for the highest wind speeds and pressure and that “Anyone blaming Harvey on global warming doesn’t have a leg to stand on.” Furthermore, the warmist talking point about there being more moisture in the air from Hotcoldwetdry is wrong, as Harvey is simply picking up moisture from the Gulf.
Don’t expect the CoC to give up, though. They’ll be talking about it for weeks, and probably on the House and Senate floors.
Read: Surprise: Warmists Are Tying/Linking Hurricane Harvey To ‘Climate Change’ »
The media and Democrats are having a tough time finding a way to bash Mr. Trump and his response to Hurricane Harvey. Of course, if you take a peek through the Twitter timelines of a lot of Democrats, you’ll find zero mention of the storm About the only ones I’ve found are those from Texas and Chuck Schumer. The leftist running the MTV VMA’s couldn’t be bothered to mention the storm. But, we do have this from the NY Times with a little shot
Trump to Travel to Texas With Torrential Rain Still in the Forecast
President Trump on Sunday announced plans to travel to Texas on Tuesday, as millions of people there continued to battle catastrophic flooding and torrential rain that was expected to last for several more days.
The timing of a presidential visit, as the disaster was still unfolding, could put Mr. Trump in an awkward position of adding to the logistical headaches for state officials, though he may avoid the storm-ravaged parts of Texas. The White House emphasized that the president’s plans were tentative and could still change.
Trump can’t win. If he didn’t go, he’d be blasted. Since he is going, he catches flack for possibly causing headaches.
Mr. Trump did not wait long to start doling out praise. On Saturday, as relief efforts were just gearing up, the president tweeted to the administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Brock Long, “You are doing a great job — the world is watching! Be safe.â€
That echoed President George W. Bush’s premature endorsement of his FEMA chief, Michael Brown — “Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job†— after Hurricane Katrina inundated New Orleans in August 2005. The government’s relief effort, of course, was subsequently botched, and Mr. Bush’s attaboy came back to haunt him.
Ah, good, they’re trying to set it up to assign blame. Of course, in reality, it wasn’t fully the fault of Michael Brown: it was the horrendous pre-hurricane response from the Democrat mayor of New Orleans and Governor of Louisiana, and their post storm responses. These problems didn’t occur in the other states, such as Mississippi, who were hit hard. Remember, Katrina came ashore in Mississippi.
But, we do find a little bit of praise lower in the story
(Homeland Security Advisor) Mr. Bossert suggested that disaster relief, with its focus on rapid response and logistics, was well suited to Mr. Trump.
“This is right up President Trump’s alley,†he said. “His questions weren’t about geopolitical issues or about large political consequences. His questions were about, ‘Are you doing what it takes to help the people who are going to be affected by this storm?’â€
Say what you will about Trump, when it’s time to get things done, he seems to care less about politics than Getting Things Done. As a longtime businessman, he understands that.
But, don’t worry, Democrats will surely find a way to Blamestorm.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Trump To Head To Texas Tuesday »
Loony Guardian writer Kate Arnoff isn’t a big fan of capitalism, despite using services created by capitalism to let us know that she doesn’t like capitalism, and blames capitalism for Hurricane Harvey. Then there’s this from back on August 1st
Here's me on why there's no good reason for private electric utilities to exist https://t.co/lXeFq0ii9B
— Kate Aronoff (@KateAronoff) August 1, 2017
From the article
What’s clear now is that the electric utility sector is broken, and its biggest and most influential firms can’t be trusted to work in the public’s best interest. Massive transformations in the electric power sector are both desperately needed and eminently possible. Updating our outmoded grid system, for instance – making it easier for customers to sell back power to their power providers – could yield fairer rates for customers and hundreds of thousands of well-paid jobs. The only way to get there is to take investors’ endless thirst for short-term profits out of the equation.
Of course, America’s many publicly owned utilities are in need of massive reforms, too. The sector as a whole is beholden to a series of archaic regulations written before solar and wind generation was possible. But the kind of wholesale transformation science demands of it will be virtually impossible so long as a small handful of wealthy elites are calling the shots.
Dethroning the utility barons isn’t such a crazy idea. The Labour manifesto Jeremy Corbyn ran on in the last UK general election called for a “transition to a publicly owned, decentralised energy systemâ€. In the US, we have our own examples for how to put electric utilities back under democratic control. Some of them, like our New Deal-era rural electric cooperatives, already are. And towns and cities here and around the world are moving to make power provision more low-carbon and democratic.
I’ve long been noting that one of the purposes of the ‘climate change’ movement is to put control of the energy sector under the total control of the Government. It’s all part of the overall scheme of Progressivism, an authoritarian political model. If they control your energy, they’re well on their way to controlling you, especially when you combine that with all the other things they want to control, like healthcare.
There’s no need to stop at electric utilities, either. Since the financial crisis, people on both sides of the Atlantic feel out of control of their economic lives, saddled with both mounting debts and stagnant wages. All the while, the rich are getting richer.
That so many aspects of our economy are controlled by so few people represents as much of a crisis for the planet as it does for democracy. Putting it back into public hands is an opportunity to start mending both.
That’s right, she doesn’t want to stop at energy, everything else should be controlled by government, using a 1%er argument. There is a case to be made that too few people in control is problematic. Switching that control to Government and the few people in control there is not the answer. Nor does it increase democracy. It increases despotism. If a private entity becomes overbearing, there are recourses. What of when the government does this? It doesn’t go away. There’s virtually no one to stop it.
Read: Warmist Wants Private Energy Utilities Placed Under Control Of Government »