Bummer: A Tiny Increase In Global Temperatures Is Making People Crazy!

By William Teach May 17, 2017 – 11:02 am

How did humanity possibly survive during all the previous Holocene warm periods?

Climate Change May Be Taking a Toll on Your Mental Health

The world’s rising temperatures don’t just cause glaciers to melt, coral reefs to bleach and forests to burn: It can tip a person from mentally healthy to mentally ill. A growing body of research shows that climate change is taking a significant toll on mental health, according to a new report from the world’s largest association of psychologists, the American Psychological Association (APA).

“I found this topic really interesting because this wasn’t something I was hearing people talk about and this wasn’t well acknowledged as an effect of climate change,” said Susan Clayton, the lead author of the report and professor of psychology at the College of Wooster in Ohio.

Co-authored by the D.C.-based environmental nonprofit ecoAmerica, the report is based more than 250 relevant scientific studies. Incidentally, the 69-page review was released on March 29, the day after Trump issued executive orders that rolled back Obama-era regulations designed to mitigate global warming.

Remember how there was a warm period called the Dark Ages? Oh, wait, that was a cool period during the Holocene. In fact, some of the best enlightened periods during the Holocene have occurred during, get this, the warm periods.

But, what is this all really about?

The APA report finds that “ecoanxiety”—the feeling of impending environmental doom—is happening on a global scale. And because of that, it is time to expand awareness of and action on climate’s effect on mental health.

At its root, this is about people making themselves nuts over a minimal 1.4F increase in over 150 years. They’re listening to doomsaying from the media and the top Warmists (who refuse to practice what they preach, of course) and losing their minds. Wrap everything else around this in the article, it essentially the equivalent of people doing PCP every day and blaming the dealer because you go nuts. These Warmists are making themselves wackadoodle.

Read: Bummer: A Tiny Increase In Global Temperatures Is Making People Crazy! »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Get This: Trump, Republicans Blamed For Huge Obamacare Cost Spikes

By William Teach May 17, 2017 – 8:07 am

Apparently, premiums skyrocketing for Obamacare insurance plans is something new

The costs of Trump’s sabotage of Obamacare already are showing up in rate hikes

The easiest prediction to make about the healthcare business was that the efforts by Congress and the Trump Administration to sabotage the Affordable Care Act would produce a flood of rate hikes by insurers for 2018.

Oh, hey, remember when people predicted Ocare would be expensive, that people would lose their plans and doctors they liked, that premiums would spike and the deductibles would make the plans unusable? Or how about that the co-ops would collapse and that insurers would leave the Exchanges when they started losing money hand over fist? It wasn’t Republicans who voted for this, and it was Team Obama administering this turd of a law.

We are now standing on the edge of the water. Early rate requests have come in from insurers in five states, according to ace ACA-tracker Charles Gaba, who calculates the weighted average rate request increase in those states at about 30% (that is, weighted for the enrollment of each insurer).

Many are blaming the doubt and confusion sown by Congress and the White House for one-third or more of their requested increases over 2017 rates.

“Uncertainty is already clearly leading to significantly higher rate hike requests than would otherwise be asked for,” Gaba observes.

Well, certainly, you cannot discount that the uncertainty is doing that, but, the main culprit is that the system is set up to fail. What caused all those high rate hikes in the pre-Trump years once the Ocare insurance markets started?

The Trump effect includes continued uncertainty about whether the feds will make cost sharing reduction payments. These are subsidies payable directly to insurers that cover deductibles and co-pays for approximately 6 million families with incomes below 250% of the poverty line.

House Republicans have sued to stop the payments on grounds that the Affordable Care Act provided for the subsidies but didn’t appropriate funds for them. Trump hasn’t said whether he will continue the Obama policy of paying them until and unless a court decisively rules against them. Instead, he’s even threatened to withhold them as a bargaining chip to force Democrats to negotiate an Obamacare repeal.

So, it’s the fault of Trump and the GOP that the Democrats screwed up and forgot to create a funding method for those massive subsidies?

This continues on and on and on, in an article that is a thinly veiled opinion piece residing in the business section, where a rationale is manufactured to Blame Trump and Republicans for the fundamental failures built into Obamacare. Democrats are like kids who break a lamp then blame their sibling.

With control of both houses of Congress and the White House, the GOP is “it” on healthcare policy now. If the individual market collapse, they’ll get the blame.

It was designed to collapse. It’s not a bug, it’s a feature. Ocare was simply a means to move towards single payer, once that same market collapsed.

Read: Get This: Trump, Republicans Blamed For Huge Obamacare Cost Spikes »

Posted in Healthcare, Wonky Media | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Media Wonders When Republicans Will Turn On Trump Or Something

By William Teach May 17, 2017 – 7:53 am

Let’s face it, Trump is going through a rough patch, one that has been, let’s also face it, been magnified a thousand fold by a news sector that has exposed its partisanship even more than when they were rooting for Obama and trying to get Bush. This is a media that seemed determined to avoid Obama’s many scandals, powergrabs, Constitutional assaults, and gaffes (awesome list of all here). Let’s start with the LA Times, by Excitable Lisa Mascaro. This is not in the opinion section, BTW

Not the tweets, the Russian issue or Comey’s firing: So what will it take for Republicans to break with Trump?

They fume privately at President Trump’s coziness with the Russians. They wince almost every time he tweets. They talk among themselves about what might have been with a different Republican in the White House.

Yet even as each new crisis seems like it might be the event that moves GOP lawmakers away from Trump, key Republican leaders and rank-and-file members circle the White House, protecting the president from attack and shifting the blame to Democrats and the media. (snip)

Whether the latest allegations will prove to be the tipping point for more GOP lawmakers remains to be seen, but initial reactions suggested many were standing behind the president.

But more to the point, if Republicans were to break ranks with the White House and begin to question Trump’s ability to govern, what would happen next?

Any acknowledgement by Republicans that Trump’s actions are unacceptable would lead to inevitable questions about what exactly Congress planned to do about it. And Republicans don’t appear ready to answer that.

Most Republicans are standing behind Trump, some, especially Centrists, are attempting to burn the circled wagons.

Then we have Laura Barron-Lopez at the fever swamp known as the Huffington Post

Republicans Show No Signs They’re Ready To Break With Trump As Scandals Pile Up

….

There’s no denying that months of bombshells have hampered the GOP’s agenda, creating distractions and making elected officials a little slower to offer public support. But rather than distancing themselves from Trump, Republicans are gently expressing tempered criticisms and the occasional admonishment, doing little in the way of constraining the administration or conducting effective oversight.

That leaves open the question of whether there will come a point when Republicans would actually bolt from the president.

Well, if

  • running guns into Mexico in a scheme that left hundreds of Mexicans, including children, dead, and saw at least two American Border Agent’s murdered, didn’t cause Democrats to turn from Obama
  • if crafting a deal that will legitimately allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons in the near future while also give Iran hundreds of billions which will be used for terrorism did not cause Dems to turn from Obama
  • if weaponizing the IRS to target citizens didn’t cause Dems to turn from Obama
  • if lying to the American people regarding Obamacare didn’t caused Dems to turn from Obama
  • if spying on reporters didn’t caused the Dem supporting news media to drop support for Obama
  • if spying on Americans, including members of Congress, didn’t cause Dems to turn on Obama….

That list could go on and on and on.

Here’s Dan Baltz at the Washington Post

As Trump’s woes mount, congressional Republicans arrive at a moment of reckoning

As President Trump has lurched from one crisis to another, Republicans have chosen a strategy of compartmentalization over confrontation, preferring to look away in hopes that the storm would pass. Now, after a pair of stunning revelations about the president, that approach may have run aground. For the GOP, this has become a moment of reckoning.

Nobody circles the wagons like Democrats. If only Republicans were able to stay on message half as well. Most of Trump’s “scandals” – let’s not forget that so much of this same media said that Obama’s 8 years were pretty much scandal free – are really gaffes, poor optics, and poor messaging that have been turned into mountains by a media that is the #Resistance.

If Democrats, and the mostly Democratic Party voting news outlets, could continue providing 100% backing of Obama when he did nothing about the VA scandal and having his Attorney General meet with the husband of the target of an FBI criminal investigation, then Republicans can stand behind Trump for these minor, tiny gaffes.

Oh, hey, remember when Obama and his admin blurted out classified intel on the Bin Laden raid, which led to the deaths of Seal Team 6 members?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Media Wonders When Republicans Will Turn On Trump Or Something »

Posted in Unhinged Tools | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Gloria Steinem: More Abortions Are Needed To Stop ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach May 16, 2017 – 4:33 pm

She’s not the first member of the Cult of Climastrology to link children and abortion with anthropogenic climate change (for reference, that’s what I am referring to when you see it as ‘climate change’), and certainly won’t be the last

(CBN News) Gloria Steinem, the 83-year-old icon of the modern feminist movement, says the primary cause of global warming is the lack of ready access to abortion around the world.

In an interview with the fashion and beauty website, Refinery29, Steinem was asked if climate change is a feminist issue.

“Are you kidding me? Listen, what causes climate deprivation is population. If we had not been systematically forcing women to have children they don’t want or can’t care for over the 500 years of patriarchy, we wouldn’t have the climate problems that we have. That’s the fundamental cause of climate change,” Steinem said.

Might it not make better sense to promote safe sex here in the 1st World, rather than saying “sure, irresponsible sex is totally OK, you can just abort the baby”? I say in the 1st World, because the primary focus of these Warmists and feminists in the 2nd and 3rd world’s is birth control. It’s almost like they do not want black and brown people to even become pregnant. Kinda racist/bigoted/discriminatory, eh? They do push abortion for those who manage to become pregnant in those areas as a secondary option.

Read: Gloria Steinem: More Abortions Are Needed To Stop ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming, Unhinged Tools | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Hands Rising From The Water In Venice To Show ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach May 16, 2017 – 1:00 pm

Here we go again

(The Weather Network) To raise awareness about the impact of climate change Italian artist Lorenzo Quinn unveiled an enormous sculpture on Saturday at the Ca’ Sagredo Hotel in Venice.

Support features two 5,000-pound hands that emerge from the Grand Canal and grasp the walls of the famous hotel, according to Mashable.

“Reflecting on the two sides of human nature, the creative and the destructive, as well as the capacity for humans to act and make an impact on history and the environment, Quinn addresses the ability for humans to make a change and re-balance the world around them — environmentally, economically, socially,” a Halcyon Gallery press release reads.

You can see many more of the photos at Bored Panda. But, really, this is just more doomsaying. There are the same old predictions that ‘climate change’ could cause Venice to sink into the seas in 100 years. There are doomy maps. Seriously, it is horrible, the seas have risen 110 millimeters during the 20th Century!!!!!!! But, um

Venice subsided about 120 mm in the 20th century due to natural processes and groundwater extraction, in addition to a sea level rise of about 110 mm at the same time, Teatini said in a statement. Bock and his colleagues calculate that the city and surrounding land could sink by about 80 mm (3.2 inches) relative to the sea in the next 20 years if the current rate holds steady.

Sea rise is utterly natural during a Holocene Warm Period. 110mm is a 4.33 inches, so, even below the normal warm period average of 6-8 inches per century, though, when we’re talking the Mediterranean region, warm periods also lead to quicker evaporation. The bigger problem is the subsistence, some of which was, yes, caused by Mankind doing groundwater extraction. Venice is also tilting towards the east (see beginning of that article). It is being affected by plate tectonics. Sea rise from anthropogenic climate change is just hysterics being hysterical over a barely existent problem. Does Venice have a problem? Sure. It’s been happening for a long, long time, well before the invention of fossil fueled vehicles.

Read: Hands Rising From The Water In Venice To Show ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on Hands Rising From The Water In Venice To Show ‘Climate Change’ Or Something | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 16, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a sea that has gotten rougher from a few parts per million of carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Right Scoop, with a post on why Supergirl is no longer watchable (I’ve never seen it).

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

NPR Is Suddenly Very Concerned Over People Being Charged For Not Getting Health Insurance

By William Teach May 16, 2017 – 7:28 am

The same people who were pretty darned supportive of the mandate in Obamacare, which included penalties/fees/taxes for Citizens who failed to have insurance for 60 straight days in a year are now upset that the GOP health bill does something similar

GOP Health Bill Penalizes Patients Who Let Insurance Lapse

Before he was diagnosed with head and neck cancer in 2015, Anthony Kinsey often went without health insurance. He is a contract lawyer working for staffing agencies on short-term projects in the Washington, D.C., area and sometimes the 90-day waiting period for coverage through a staffing agency proved longer than the duration of his project — if health coverage was offered at all.

When Kinsey, now 57, learned he had cancer, he was able to sign up for a plan with a $629 monthly premium because the agency he was working for offered group coverage that became effective almost immediately. The plan covered the $62,000 surgery to cut out the diseased bone and tissue on the left side of his face, as well as chemotherapy and radiation. His share of the treatment cost was $1,800.

If the GOP health plan recently approved by the House becomes law, people like Kinsey who have health problems might not fare so well trying to buy insurance after a lapse.

The Republican bill would still require insurers to offer coverage to everyone, including people who have pre-existing medical conditions, such as diabetes, asthma or even cancer. But it would allow states to opt out of the federal health law’s prohibition against charging sick people more than healthy ones.

In those states, if people have a break in coverage of more than 63 days, insurers could charge them any price for approximately a year when the consumers next apply for coverage — effectively putting health insurance out of reach for many sick people, analysts say. After a year, they would be charged a regular rate again.

So, this is a mandate with a penalty. In reality, they would be charged a 30% surcharge for 1 year, not whatever insurers want to charge them, when discussing the penalty. I thought Liberals liked the idea of a mandate with a penalty/fine/tax? They fought hard to keep the one in Obamacare.

The problem with the GOP mandate, as well as the Ocare mandate, is that there are no waivers. If you lose you job, which means you lose your insurance, and are out of work for that time period (60 days for Ocare, 63 for GOP plan), you’ll be penalized. COBRA coverage is not cheap, and people who lost a job are worried about their money lasting. Then they get a new job, and usually aren’t eligible for company health insurance for 90 days. Heck, if you leave one job on Friday and start a new on on Monday, you’ll be out of health insurance for over 60/63 days. There should be waivers for situations. We aren’t talking about people saying “I’ll take my chances” and then want insurance when something happens.

It is hilarous, though, that Liberals are attempting to say that requiring people to maintain continuous coverage, and getting penalized if they don’t, is now problematic when it wasn’t before.

Read: NPR Is Suddenly Very Concerned Over People Being Charged For Not Getting Health Insurance »

Posted in Healthcare, Liberal World | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

California Government Run By Democratic Party Has A Pay Gap Issue

By William Teach May 16, 2017 – 7:00 am

It’s always great when the people who constantly bang the drum about an issue are the worst offenders, is it not? From ‘climate change’ to taking money from Wall Street to dark money to not paying $15 an hour (and failing to pay OT and even the minimum wage) to so much more, and this

(LA Times) When California updated its equal pay law in 2015, there was no shortage of fanfare. Women’s rights groups called it one of the toughest in the country. Gov. Jerry Brown, in a symbolic flourish, signed the new measure at a Richmond park named after feminist icon Rosie the Riveter.

But a state report released last fall underscored how far California has to go before its rhetoric matches reality when it comes to paying state workers. According to its findings, there is a 20.5% disparity in pay between female and male state employees — a wider gap than in the federal civil service and the private sector in California and nationwide.

Got that? Worse. And Government is going to continue to make changes to fix this. Supposedly

As lawmakers plumb deeper into the pay gap debate, the challenge before them becomes more daunting. While the mantra “equal pay for equal work” sounds straightforward, experts say lagging female earnings are rooted in unconscious bias and persistent undervaluing of jobs held by women — phenomena not easily solved by legislation.

So, wait, Democrats are a huge majority in the public sector, and they are sexists? How ’bout them apples! The report states that the pay gap won’t be fixed till, get this, 2044.

Assemblyman Jim Cooper (D-Elk Grove) has offered one solution: Make sure California’s equal pay laws apply to the public sector. He’s pushing a bill that would make public employers subject to existing law, including a 2015 update that expanded its purview to “substantially similar” work, not just identical jobs.

“If it’s good enough for the private sector, it should also be good enough for the public sector,” Cooper said.

That’s weird. It doesn’t? And here come the excuses

“The issue that presents itself here is not as much one of disparate pay, but an unequal distribution of gender throughout the classification system,” said Joe DeAnda, spokesman for the California Department of Human Resources.

Women tend to work in sectors with lower salary ranges, such as administrative support or social work, while men tend to hold jobs with higher pay — particularly public safety jobs such as California Highway Patrol officer or firefighter. More than 61% of men in state government make more than $70,000, according to the Human Resources Department, while just 39% of women do.

Maia Downs, who works in Monterey Park as a state adoption specialist finding homes for neglected or abused children, said the salary range for her profession, which requires a graduate degree and is dominated by women, is significantly lower than those for jobs predominantly held by men.

“It’s sanctioned discrimination,” said Downs of the low salary ranges for female-dominated positions.

That sounds familiar to the debate, does it not? Firefighters and police officers, male dominated jobs, tend to be more valuable than things like an adoption specialist, because they are rather more dangerous. Women often go into professions which have always had lower pay, and aren’t going to change.

But, hey, California could change this easily. It could pass a law that all jobs should be paid the same in state government based on, say, time on the job. So, a female with a Women’s Studies degree working as a social studies advisor and on the job for 10 years would make the same as a SWAT member on the job for 10 years. Seems fair, right?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: California Government Run By Democratic Party Has A Pay Gap Issue »

Posted in Democrats, Liberal World | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

White House To Go Blue In Honor Of Peace Officers Memorial Day Tonight

By William Teach May 15, 2017 – 4:33 pm

This is not going over well in Progressive World

(The Hill)  President Trump announced Monday that he’ll light the White House blue to honor police officers for Monday’s Peace Officer Memorial Day.

The president signed a proclamation Monday declaring the day “Peace Officer Memorial Day” and the upcoming week “Police Week.” At the signing ceremony, Trump said that he would also request that American flags fly at half-mast to memorialize fallen officers, according to a pool report.

“During Peace Officers Memorial Day and Police Week, we honor the men and women of law enforcement who have been killed or disabled in the course of serving our communities. Police officers are the thin blue line whose sacrifices protect and serve us every day, and we pledge to support them as they risk their lives to safeguard ours,” Trump said in the text of the proclamation.

Awesome! This is what it looked like when he lit the WH blue for World Autism Awareness Week

Read: White House To Go Blue In Honor Of Peace Officers Memorial Day Tonight »

Posted in Awesome | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 15, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is an ocean turning green from too much carbon pollution caused algae, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Weasel Zippers, with a post on Mother’s Day being attacked because it is “gendered.”

Her butt hair is going to stick to that wax.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 11 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove