If All You See…

By William Teach June 7, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is an area flooding from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is House of Eratosthenes, with a post on the terrorists out believing us.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

State Which Relies On Fossil Fueled Tourism Defies Trump On Paris Climate Agreement Or Something

By William Teach June 7, 2017 – 10:30 am

The primary revenue source for Hawaii is tourism, accounting for roughly 21% of the revenue, which requires people to take mostly fossil fueled flights to the state. Then you have the notion that a goodly chunk of food, building supplies, and other materials are brought in on fossil fueled planes and ships. The military, which uses a lot of FF, provides more revenue. Then, people taking fossil fueled helicopter, boat, car, and bus trips (parts are brought in on FF ships and planes).  And then this

Hawaii defies Donald Trump by backing Paris climate change deal

Hawaii has become the first US state to formally adopt pledges in the Paris Agreement to drastically tackle climate change.

The volcanic island state’s Governor David Ige has signed two landmark laws supporting “the commitments and goals” of the accord.

It makes Hawaii the first state to defy President Donald Trump, who pulled the US out of the treaty signed by 148 other countries.

The first law to come into force is Senate Bill 559, which states that “not only is climate change real, but it is the overriding challenge of the 21st century”.

The bill continues: “Regardless of federal action, the legislature supports the goals of the Paris Agreement to combat climate change and its effects on environments, economies, and communities around the world.”

It commits Hawaii to cutting greenhouse gas emissions by publishing emission contribution levels every five years, promoting “environmental integrity”, conserving forests, wetlands and nature preserves and incentivising companies to be more carbon-neutral

The second law is about creating a certification scheme (good word for it) for farmers to be carbon neutral. All in all, it’s pretty much the norm, a lot of spreading awareness and pledging to be Warmists, rather than really doing something concrete (BTW, all the concrete used for buildings in Hawaii has a high carbon footprint).

Regardless, how is this “defiance?” It doesn’t seem that Trump could care in the least whether a state does this. I guess everything is defiance and resistance and such in the Age Of Trump.

It is amusing that Lefties are suddenly enthused by Federalism and the the 10th Amendment. But, if they really cared, they’d tell all the tourists they can only come if they take trips on non-fossil fueled sailing ships. Hawaii’s real carbon footprint is pretty high as it is.

Read: State Which Relies On Fossil Fueled Tourism Defies Trump On Paris Climate Agreement Or Something »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Columbus, Ohio Passes Ordinance Prohibiting Police From Arresting Illegals For Being Illegal

By William Teach June 7, 2017 – 7:39 am

Remember when Democrats argued in the wake of Arizona’s SB1070 immigration law that when it comes to immigration, all must follow federal law? Those were the days

(Breitbart) The city council of Columbus, Ohio, voted on Monday to make it against the law to arrest anyone based on their illegal immigration status. The city also doubled-down and made it illegal to deny someone services because they are an illegal alien. City officials deny that Columbus is a “sanctuary city.”

The Columbus Dispatch reported that the Columbus City Council voted to adopt an executive order issued by Mayor Andrew J. Ginther in early February.

That executive order reads

  1. It shall be policy of the City of Columbus to actively support, to the greatest extent practicable, the placement or settlement in this jurisdiction of aliens eligible to be admitted to the United States as refugees. City staff are hereby authorized and directed to cooperate to the greatest extent practicable with federal and state officials in such placement or settlement.
  2. No city department or employee may use city moneys, equipment, or personnel for the sole purpose of detecting or apprehending persons based on suspected immigration status, unless in response to a court order. In furtherance of this policy, no city office or employee shall request information about or otherwise investigate or assist in the investigation of a person’s immigration status unless a warrant exists, a criminal violation was reported, or an arrest was made.
  3. No city department or employee shall deny equal access to city services based on immigration status unless required by law or court order. Such denial of access shall include, but shall not be limited to, soliciting immigration status in any application for city services; predicating the provision of services on the immigration status of any person; or delaying the provision of services based solely on immigration status.
  4. It shall be the policy of the City of Columbus to vigorously oppose any effort to require the use of local taxpayer resources for the enforcement of federal immigration policy.”

Notice in number two, they will cooperate only with a court order. You can bet they won’t cooperate with ICE detainers. But, hey, don’t say they’re a sanctuary city

Although the policy prevents the City or employees from using any city property for detecting or apprehending those illegally in the country, or “the use of local taxpayer resources for the enforcement of federal immigration policy,” city officials do not declare Columbus a “sanctuary city,” reported the Dispatch. “[T]hey don’t want the city a target for President Donald Trump, who has threatened federal funding for cities that adopt the label,” the article written Monday afternoon about the ordinance and city officials reported.

Whether or not they declare it, they are a sanctuary jurisdiction, a place that requires law enforcement and the justice system to ignore people who are unlawfully present in the United States in contradiction to federal law.

Seriously, questioning people is always a bad idea, you know?

Read: Columbus, Ohio Passes Ordinance Prohibiting Police From Arresting Illegals For Being Illegal »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Liberal World | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Whiny People Seek Reprieve Over Trump Blocking Them On Twitter

By William Teach June 7, 2017 – 7:21 am

This might be one the most First World Problems ever

Twitter Users Blocked by Trump Seek Reprieve, Citing First Amendment

Lawyers for Twitter users blocked by President Trump after they criticized or mocked him are asking him to reverse the moves, arguing that the Constitution bars him from blocking people on the social media service.

The request raises novel legal issues stemming from Mr. Trump’s use of his Twitter account, @realDonaldTrump, to make statements about public policy. In a letter sent to Mr. Trump on Tuesday, lawyers for several users he has blocked argued that his account was a “public forum” from which the government may not constitutionally exclude people because it disagrees with views they have expressed.

“This Twitter account operates as a ‘designated public forum’ for First Amendment purposes, and accordingly the viewpoint-based blocking of our clients is unconstitutional,” the letter said. “We ask that you unblock them and any others who have been blocked for similar reasons.”

The letter implies that if the Trump administration does not comply, a lawsuit may follow. The blocked Twitter users are represented by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, whose executive director, Jameel Jaffer, said in a statement that Mr. Trump did not have a right to exclude his critics from engaging with his posts.

The NY Times actually had a Room For Debate between two professors of law on the subject back in November, and they came to two different conclusions. Overall, though, this is just whiny whining in the 1st World. Consider, for one thing, that people are starving in places around the world. Consider that people are homeless here in America. Consider that America’s dent is massive.

Then consider that people are complaining that they can’t read Trump’s tweets. Sigh

In reality, they can read them any time they want. Just log out of Twitter. You don’t see me complaining that Rep. Keith Ellison blocked me, along with 2 other minor reps I can’t remember. Where were all the people complaining and filing for reprieves when Obama blocked a few people, such as Cloyd River (deeper in the article) and meninist. Heck, it was reported that Twitter had tools to stop “trolls” that were only available to Obama.

Seriously, though, these are things people are worried (or, is that Worried?) about.

More from Jim Treacher at Daily Caller, who points to something else in the NY Times article above

One of the Twitter users the letter said Mr. Trump had blocked is Holly O’Reilly, whose account is @AynRandPaulRyan.

Jim notes that, guess this, he’s blocked by Holly

I’ve never interacted with this person in my life. I’d never even heard of her before yesterday. And yet the woman who made the pages of the New York Times because Trump blocked her… had blocked me. Apparently she used some sort of block list, because a lot of other people who follow me on Twitter are discovering they’ve been blocked by her too.

She has every right to do so, of course. I never would’ve cared, or even noticed, if she hadn’t made a spectacle of herself in the Newspaper of Record by howling about Trump doing the exact same thing to her.

I’m not sure who the heck she is, but, she’s blocked me, as well.

Huh.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Whiny People Seek Reprieve Over Trump Blocking Them On Twitter »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Joe Scarborough Melts Down In Interview With EPA Head Scott Pruitt

By William Teach June 6, 2017 – 5:13 pm

I’d actually been watching Morning Joe for a while now, as I may have mentioned. I got a little tired of the Trump love from Fox and Friends, plus all the repetitive fluff. But, I’ve given up on Joe over the past month, because it is non-stop moonbattery, conspiracy theories (I’ll watch Ancient Aliens or something similar for that. It’s more fun), and Russia Russia Russia. I did actually catch this exchange this morning, as I pressed 45 (MSNBC) instead of 46 (Animal Planet) on the remote

(Mediaite)  EPA chief and noted climate change skeptic, Scott Pruitt, came in for a tense interview on Morning Joe, Tuesday. Things got heated when Joe Scarborough interjected a question, demanding an answer to what has become the journalistic equivalent of the Maltese Falcon — Does Donald Trump believe in climate change?

“Mr. Pruitt, it’s a simple question. Have you ever talked to the president about whether he believes climate change is real? Does he still believe it was a hoax launched in China? Wouldn’t you like to know?”

“I think what’s important, Joe, is the president has said when you make decisions on environmental decisions internationally that we put America’s interests first.”

Joe kept going down the lemming hole on this unimportant issue, as well as noting that Paris was voluntary in terms of the goals (Joe used to be a conservative who would have been opposed to the Paris Climate agreement), and

Pruitt jumped on Scarborough’s suggestion that Paris would have been voluntary, with the director saying that was not the case. After blowing some proverbial coal smoke on set, an exasperated Scarborough cut him off.

And then meltdown

“I’m sorry, I’m sorry. I got to stop. I want to stop it. This interview has to stop in it’s tracks until I just get a yes/no answer from you on whether you think it’s important that Americans find out whether their president believes that climate change is a conspiracy theory based out of China.”

Pruitt smacked Joe and others on set around for a bit after that. He should have asked Joe when they would broadcast by candlelight, considering the big carbon footprint for all the lights and cameras and backgrounds and such.

Read: Joe Scarborough Melts Down In Interview With EPA Head Scott Pruitt »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 6, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a great wildspace that’s perfect for wind turbines, far away from view of the big cities, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Right Scoop, with a post on an ISIS attack in Australia.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Goracle: “I Don’t Have A Private Jet”

By William Teach June 6, 2017 – 10:30 am

And he lives as much of a carbon free lifestyle as he can, you guys! During an interview with Jake Tapper, Tapper was good enough to give Al Gore a chance to bloviate (video at the link)

(Real Clear Politics) TAPPER: President Trump has gone after you directly when talking about this issue of climate change.

I want you to — I want to give you an opportunity to respond to something he said…

TRUMP: Al Gore wants to eliminate the combustion engine, essentially, and flies around the world on jets and pushes plans that would help create China, make it stronger…

TAPPER: This is a criticism we hear from conservatives all the time when talking about people like you or Elon Musk or Leonardo DiCaprio, that you, yourself, have a large carbon footprint.

GORE: Yes.

Well, I don’t have a private jet. And what carbon emissions come from my trips on Southwest Airlines are offset. I live a carbon-free lifestyle, to the maximum extent possible.

Notice the weasel language. He doesn’t have a private jet. So, he doesn’t own one. Sure. But, he takes them a lot

Al has been caught numerous times flying on private jets. And, yes, he does sometimes fly commercial (it’s still fossil fueled), but has admitted he also takes private jets.

(Watts Up With That?) Al Gore’s carbon footprint has been a running joke for years – his eye watering home electricity bill, his beachfront mansion, his willingness to fly long distances, to lecture the rest of us about the environmental dangers of flying, the way he made a vast personal profit by selling his TV station to oil interests. You have to almost admire Al Gore’s apparent enthusiasm, for trampling the environmental sensibilities of his green admirers.

Owning multiple homes with lots of bathrooms and pools isn’t exactly living the “green” life. Instead of driving the speed limit, Gore just pays speeding tickets in the form of carbon offsets, which most likely link back to the companies he owns, invests in, and sits on the boards, so, some of that money comes back to him. Instead of practicing what he preaches. And, he’s made himself very rich pushing the climate scam BS.

Read: Goracle: “I Don’t Have A Private Jet” »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Ontario Makes Disapproval Of Children’s Gender Confusion Child Abuse

By William Teach June 6, 2017 – 7:01 am

Isn’t it awesome that a government has decided to side with a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of people who are, for the most part, mentally ill?

(Daily Caller) Ontario passed a law Thursday that gives the government the right to take away children from families that don’t accept their kid’s chosen “gender identity.”

Parents who oppose or criticize the LGBT agenda will be considered potential “child abusers” and may have their children taken away by the state, according to the new bill. If the parents are ruled to be abusers by failing to wholeheartedly support their child’s gender choice, that child “can be removed from that environment and placed into protection where the abuse stops.”

Bill 89, also known as “The Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017,” received Royal Assent and was passed in Ontario by a vote of 63 to 23.

The old law allowed parents to “direct the child’s education and religious upbringing” but now says a parent must influence a child’s education and upbringing “in accordance with the child’s or young person’s creed, community identity and cultural identity.”

Why are they doing this? They’re nuts. The law could even stop people from fostering and/or adopting kids if they disagree with the LGBTQ agenda

Of course, let’s never forget that these unhinged radical leftists will gladly throw the same LGBTQ folks, along with women, under the bus in order to patronize and protect Islamic extremists.

American Lens goes on to note (using an article from Gender Trender) that Canada is looking to legalize gender confusion nationally with Bill C-16, which “would establish a government recognized class of people based on their personal feeling that sex stereotypes form an integral and desired component of their legal identity.” This would be a part of the criminal code, so, it should turn out great, right?

Perhaps it is time to stop tolerating this insanity and ruining kids’ lives by allowing them to perpetuate fantasies that they’re the other sex, which is encouraged by insane leftists with political agendas.

Read: Ontario Makes Disapproval Of Children’s Gender Confusion Child Abuse »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Unhinged Tools | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Federal Judge Is “Humiliated” For Having To Actually Uphold Immigration Law

By William Teach June 6, 2017 – 6:41 am

It must be a total bummer having to uphold the laws. There is a solution. Quit

(Breitbart) Judges are humiliated and dehumanized whenever they must enforce the nation’s immigration laws, according to a senior judge on the far-left Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The judge’s cry of outrage came when he could not block the orderly repatriation of an illegal immigrant who has two drunk driving convictions, plus a U.S. wife and three children.

“We are unable to prevent [Andres] Magana Ortiz’s removal, yet it is contrary to the values of this nation and its legal system,” complained Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who wishes to extend citizens’ rights to illegal foreign migrants. He said:

We are compelled to deny Mr. Magana Ortiz’s request for a stay of removal because we do not have the authority to grant it. We are not, however, compelled to find the government’s action in this case fair or just. …

The government’s decision to remove Magana Ortiz diminishes not only our country but our courts, which are supposedly dedicated to the pursuit of justice. Magana Ortiz and his family are in truth not the only victims. Among the others are judges who, forced to participate in such inhumane acts, suffer a loss of dignity and humanity as well. I concur as a judge, but as a citizen I do not.

If Judge Reinhardt is so upset by having to enforce federal immigration law, he can resign. The federal government is specifically tasked with protecting the nation from foreign invasion, which includes those who come to this country illegally as well as overstay their visas. The majority of countries in the world, including Mexico, refuse to tolerate those who are unlawfully present, and many, including Mexico, have harsher penalties.

One might not think drunk driving is a serious offense, however, doing such puts many other people at risk, not just yourself. Hence the reason we are treated to a constant litany of television, radio, and other medium ad placements on the subject. Hence why police often run large projects going after drunk drivers (they run what’s called Operation Eagle across the state of North Carolina at least once per year to crack down). It’s quite fair and just to remove someone who is unlawfully present in the U.S. who has multiple drunk driving convictions on their record.

Apparently, the judge is more worried about his squishy, misplaced feelings than in providing the lawful protection to United States citizens and legally allowed guests.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Federal Judge Is “Humiliated” For Having To Actually Uphold Immigration Law »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Great Legislative Ideas To Fight Hotcoldwetdry We Can All Agree On

By William Teach June 5, 2017 – 4:34 pm

Glenn Reynolds, of Instapundit fame, who’s fond of writing “I’ll believe it’s a crisis when the people who tell me it’s a crisis act like it’s a crisis”, offers up an interesting opinion piece at the USA Today

To fight climate change, start with Leonardo DiCaprio’s private jet lifestyle
Even though Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, there’s plenty Congress can do.

It starts off by noting the hypocrisy of the Warmists, which is worth the read, and gets to legislative offerings

First, we need to tax the “blue zones.” That is, we need to impose steep taxes on property in coastal areas that will be flooded by the sea-level increases that global warming is supposed to bring. By discouraging people from living or building there now, we’ll save ourselves from big problems in the future. Sure it’ll drive down property values, but those values should go down — they’re values for property that’s going to be flooded anyway, remember?

Second, we need to ban taxpayer-funded air travel to conferences. State legislatures could ban reimbursement for travel outside their states; Congress could require that no federal grant money be spent on air travel to conferences and similar events. A lot of academic conferences would fail, but that’s a small price to pay for saving the planet.  And besides, it will encourage the development of Internet-based conference alternatives. A whole new industry might result: Green jobs!

Third, we need to ban private jet travel. At first I thought about just taxing it heavily, but with the planet at stake, that might not be enough. It’s nice that John Travolta can have his own Boeing 707, or that Leonardo DiCaprio can jet around the world speaking against climate change, but the carbon emissions involved set a bad example that outweighs anything he might say. So no more private jets. Bigshots will just have to fly commercial like everyone else, the way they did in the 1950s. (And sorry, Leo, but massive yachts have to go, too). Politicians, too, should have to fly commercial. No more government-funded “executive jets” for them.

He also offers a fourth suggestion, a 25% tax on homes that are twice the size of the average American home. These are all common sense reforms, for which Republican lawmakers in Congress should submit legislation. It would be hilarious when the Democrats object to these solutions to fight ‘climate change.’ They could call it the “Practice What You Preach Act Of 2017.” And I’m sure there are plenty of other things they could institute that would essentially affect mostly just the Warmists.

Read: Great Legislative Ideas To Fight Hotcoldwetdry We Can All Agree On »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove