If All You See…

…is an ocean that is turning to acid due to Other People driving fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Zilla Of The Resistance, with a post on what to do when Moonbat protesters block your car.

Read: If All You See… »

LA Times: The Pause Was Real, And Totally Confirms Human Caused Hotcoldwetdry

We know that there are well over 70 excuses for the Pause, a period where the warming was, depending on the source used, either net zero during that time or statistically insignificant. It really got to the point where no one was bothering to keep track, especially when so many were just the same excuses in new clothes. The real consensus was that 95% of the models were wrong, per actual observations. So, of course

Detailed look at the global warming ‘hiatus’ again confirms that humans are changing the climate

For years, the global warming ‘hiatus’ from 1998 to 2012 puzzled scientists and fueled skeptics looking to cast doubt on the very idea that Earth’s temperature has been on the rise, largely because of human-produced greenhouse gas emissions such as carbon dioxide — and that significant policy changes would need to be made to keep that rise in check.

Recent papers have begun to chip away at the idea of the slowdown. Now, a new analysis in the journal Nature brings together many of those arguments to show that the hiatus may not have been quite what it seemed.

“A combination of changes in forcing, uptake of heat by the oceans, natural variability and incomplete observational coverage reconciles models and data,” the researchers from the Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science in Switzerland wrote. “Combined with stronger recent warming trends in newer datasets, we are now more confident than ever that human influence is dominant in long-term warming.”

Got that? Their data is incomplete and there’s natural variability. Oh, and the oceans ate their warming. So, that means you are at fault for refusing to pay lots of fees and taxes and give up your freedom to big government. One of the findings

Climate change models did not perfectly characterize all the right complicating factors — how much solar radiation there was in a given year, for example, or the extent of the cooling effect from volcanic activity and human-produced aerosols. When those estimates are updated to reflect what actually happened, the models get much closer to reality.

So, the models stink, yet, the Cult of Climastrology was making prognostications of utter doom using them. Interestingly, there is virtually nothing that actually makes the case that all the warming was caused by Mankind’s output of greenhouse gases, especially CO2. The paper, and this LA Times article, simply mention that there was warming, it paused for a bit, then it supposedly restarted. The debate is not on warming, it is on causation. And the Cult cannot prove it has been caused and will continue to be caused mostly/solely by the works of Man.

And speaking of the Pause

Read: LA Times: The Pause Was Real, And Totally Confirms Human Caused Hotcoldwetdry »

What’s The Cost Of Illegal Immigration In The People’s Republik Of California?

California’s Democratic Party lawmakers continue their push to make the entire state a sanctuary jurisdiction, with a claim that illegals help their economy

(Sacramento Bee) As California Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León and other Democratic lawmakers gain national attention for the effort to make California the first state to declare it self a “sanctuary” for undocumented immigrants, a new report assesses the economic contributions of immigrants every year.

The 2.7 million undocumented immigrants who call California home contribute about $3 billion in taxes to the state’s economy each year, according to the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy, a nonprofit tax research organization.

Of that, nearly $30 million in property and sales tax revenue goes to Sacramento County.

But that could be changing under the Trump administration, and the president’s promised immigration crackdown. Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly have said being in the U.S. without proper authorization is a crime, leading some undocumented people to retreat back into the shadows, immigration advocates have said.

The headline of the article is about whether illegals cost or save money. There’s a brief link to the Federation For American Immigration Reform, with a blurb about how they say illegals cost money, but, no figures are offered by the article. You can find all sorts of articles at FAIR, such as how much illegals cost for Social Security, the costs for law enforcement, the human smuggling, and so much more. Let’s look at costs specific for California from National Economics Editorial

In light of Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigrants, it’s worth looking at the facts—how many illegal immigrants are there, and what do they cost America?

Lots. Almost $150 billion a year.

But this article focuses specifically on California, which is home to an estimated 27% of America’s illegal aliens.

You can read the full report on illegal immigrants in America here; I cover economics, crime, culture, and morality.

Illegal immigrants and their children cost California at least $30.29 billion a year in net costs—$7,352 per alien.

For context: given that California’s state budget is $171 billion, this means that illegal immigration would cost 17.7% of this spending (although much of the costs are absorbed locally).

So, if we believe the numbers from both California Democrats and NEE, then those who are unlawfully present in the United States are actually costing California a net negative $27.29 billion per year.

And, let’s not forget all the crime committed by illegal aliens. The ones who drive without insurance, leaving legal residents to pay for the repairs and injuries caused by illegals. All the illegals who are jamming up California’s jails. The time having to be wasted by law enforcement and the legal justice system because the illegals are unlawfully present in the country instead of being back in their own countries. The New Boston Post editorial board is running an article about the lies told by an illegal alien organizer, and how that person deemed everyone who wasn’t 100% behind illegals was a racist, and notes

Brockton is one of the poorest cities in Massachusetts. When legal residents of Brockton experience long lines at emergency rooms because some illegal immigrants are using the emergency room for minor medical matters; when they can’t get a modest-paying job because some illegal immigrants are willing to do the work either for less money or without following government regulations or both; when their contracting business is consistently underbid by some illegal immigrants who don’t bother with worker’s compensation insurance; when they have to pay fines for traffic violations but illegal immigrants don’t; when they might go to jail if they present false identification but some illegal immigrants skate; when they are victims of crimes committed by people who don’t have a right to be here …

That’s happening in California, as well. Emergency rooms have been shut down because of illegal aliens using them as doctor’s offices, and the ERs couldn’t afford to stay open. It’s not just the money: it’s all the other stuff, too boot.

Read: What’s The Cost Of Illegal Immigration In The People’s Republik Of California? »

Fake News: Woman Convicted Of Laughing During Sessions Confirmation Hearings Or Something

This is one of those big, big, big “or something’s”. Take a look at some headlines

That’s just a sampling of all the unhinged headlines from Democrat outlets, both straight news ones and liberal activists ones. Some hedge their bets a little bit, so they can say “no, the headline didn’t really say that”, but it’s the implication. Let’s look at that last one from the NY Times

A jury on Wednesday convicted three Code Pink activists on charges related to a protest at the confirmation hearing of Jeff Sessions for attorney general — including a Virginia woman who said all she did was break out in laughter.

Each of the three protesters faces up to 12 months in jail, $2,000 in fines, or both, depending on the outcome of a June 21 sentencing hearing.

She says all she did was laugh loudly, and expected to get shushed by security. They, instead, escorted her out

Prosecutors described her actions differently.

Ms. Fairooz had “let out a loud burst of laughter, followed by a second louder burst of laughter,” the U.S. attorney’s office said in the filing. The police then tried to “quietly escort” Ms. Fairooz from the room, but she “grew loud and more disruptive, eventually halting the confirmation hearing,” the court papers argued.

Ms. Fairooz was found guilty of the two charges she faced: one of disorderly and disruptive conduct and a charge of parading or demonstrating on Capitol grounds, according to her lawyer, Samuel A. Bogash.

What’s the Times forgot to mention was, via the first on the clickity click leftist clickbait headline list from the Huffington Post

Several jurors who spoke with HuffPost after the verdict emphasized that they were focused on Fairooz’s actions after a rookie Capitol Police officer approached Fairooz when she laughed at Sen. Richard Shelby’s (R-Ala.) claim that Sessions had a clear, well-documented and “extensive record of treating all Americans equally under the law.” A group of jurors spoke to HuffPost on the condition of anonymity.

“She did not get convicted for laughing. It was her actions as she was being asked to leave,” the jury foreperson said.

Many of the other clickity click stories mention that same thing. Disruptions like this

https://twitter.com/JoePerticone/status/818836159564484608

The headlines sent Liberals into their Typical Apoplexy.

https://twitter.com/TheH2/status/859893196716986368

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Fake News: Woman Convicted Of Laughing During Sessions Confirmation Hearings Or Something »

FBI Director Comey: Why, Yes, Huma Did Forward Classified Documents To Anthony Weiner

Yeah, so, this happened during Comey’s Congressional visit

(CNN) FBI Director James Comey revealed Wednesday that Hillary Clinton emails containing classified information were “somehow” being forwarded to former congressman Anthony Weiner by his wife and top Clinton aide, Huma Abedin.

Comey provided new details to Congress about how Clinton’s emails ended up on Weiner’s computer as the FBI director strongly defended his decision to alert Congress just days before the 2016 election about his agency’s investigation into emails potentially related to Clinton’s personal server. (snip)

In separate exchange with Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana, Comey said Abedin appeared to have had a regular practice of forwarding emails to Weiner for him “to print out for her so she could then deliver them to the secretary of state.”

But there was no indication that Abedin “had a sense that what she was doing was in violation of the law” Comey added, and investigators couldn’t prove any sort of criminal intent.

Um, according to actual law, it doesn’t matter, as Powerline notes

Comey restated his view that intentional wrongdoing is required to charge a crime here and that the FBI examined the new emails for evidence of consciousness of intentional wrongdoing. As Andy McCarthy recently explained again in this context, Comey is painfully (intentionally?) wrong on this point. Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin et al. should not be out free in what used to be called polite society lecturing the rest of us. Comey’s testimony today serves as a painful reminder of an unresolved Clinton scandal of the first order.

Let’s also remember that Hillary, Huma, and Anthony should all have been crystal clear on the rules of how to handle classified information. They had to sign numerous documents on the subject, and listen to numerous government security briefers. It’s not something they could have avoided knowing, unless they are complete idiots. Even if they were doing their best Three Monkeys impression, it wouldn’t matter: more than a few members of the armed forces and intelligence agencies have been prosecuted for much less, while claiming they didn’t know.

If you or I had done anything remotely similar, we’d be in jail for a long, long time. And, let’s be clear: if a Republican had done something similar, Democrats would be calling for that person(s) to be jailed. And they would be 100% correct.

Read: FBI Director Comey: Why, Yes, Huma Did Forward Classified Documents To Anthony Weiner »

If All You See…

…is a sea rising from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is America’s Watchtower, with a post on who would be proud of the budget deal.

Read: If All You See… »

Has The Momentum Turned Against The Paris Climate Agreement In White House?

Real, or just hazy, nebulous tea leave reading by Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post?

In the Trump White House, the momentum has turned against the Paris climate agreement

Foes of the United States remaining in the Paris climate agreement have gained the upper hand in the ongoing White House debate over whether to pull out, according to participants in the discussions and those briefed on the deliberations, though President Trump has yet to make a final decision on what to do.

Senior administration officials have met twice since Thursday to discuss whether the United States should abandon the U.N. accord struck in December 2015, under which the United States has pledged to cut its greenhouse gas emissions 26 percent to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. The president’s aides remain divided over the international and domestic legal implications of remaining party to the agreement, which has provided a critical political opening for those pushing for an exit. (snip)

At a rally with supporters Saturday, Trump said he would make a “big decision” on Paris within the next two weeks and vowed to end “a broken system of global plunder at American expense.”

Mr. Trump made the promise to pull the U.S. out of the agreement that was only signed by Mr. Obama, but not even sent to the U.S. Senate for ratification. It was specifically drafted in a manner to avoid submission to the duly elected lawmakers. So far, all we’ve received is inconsistent messaging as to whether he will keep that campaign promise or not. It shouldn’t be this hard.

As the NY Times notes, this could all come down to a single phrase (somewhat mentioned in the WP article)

The debate within the Trump administration over what to do about the Paris climate agreement has reached a critical phase, according to people familiar with the internal negotiations. The decision could hinge on the interpretation of a single phrase in a single provision of a document that took years to write.

The question is whether to walk away from the agreement sealed by the Obama administration and nearly 200 other nations at the end of 2015 — as Donald J. Trump promised as a presidential candidate to do — or to weaken the nation’s commitment under the deal to reducing greenhouse gases while remaining in the accord.

The provision at issue, Article 4.11, states that a nation “may at any time adjust its existing nationally determined contribution with a view to enhancing its level of ambition.” The question is whether the ability to “adjust” is like a ratchet, allowing progress only in one direction — upward — or if it permits a country to weaken its commitment without violating the terms of the deal.

This is the influence of the liberals working for Trump, especially his daughter and son-in-law, along with his own NYC liberal tendencies. If he refuses to pull out, how will those on the Trump Train respond? This isn’t some minor promise.

Read: Has The Momentum Turned Against The Paris Climate Agreement In White House? »

Baltimore Sun: What’s Up With Illegal Aliens Being Treated Differently Than Those Legally Present?

On the bright side, illegal aliens are mostly not responsible for the massive spike in crimes, shootings, stabbings, and murders in Charm City. What with all that crime, one can understand that the police would have illegals as lower rungs on the ladder. But, they still go after people who violate traffic laws, do they not? Of course, the number of police working for Baltimore has gone down down down since the city decided to demonize the police and embrace #BlackLivesMatter. Then we have this

Illegal immigrants get off easy in Baltimore

Baltimore’s State’s Attorney’s Office now has two sets of rules: one for citizens and legal immigrants, and one for illegal immigrants. In an April 27 memorandum, Marilyn Mosby’s office “instructed prosecutors to think twice before charging illegal immigrants with minor, non-violent crimes in response to stepped up immigration enforcement by the Trump administration

This follows assurances from Commissioner Kevin Davis of the Baltimore Police Department (BPD) to the city’s immigrant community that officers don’t “care about your immigration status.”

Ambivalence toward the federal government is not new in Baltimore. These actions take that ambivalence to a new level that is inconsistent with requests Mayor Catherine Pugh has made of the Trump Administration. In December, Mayor Pugh met with newly elected President Donald Trump at the Army-Navy game to request infrastructure funding from the incoming administration. She subsequently has asked for federal help with housing and education, and sought the FBI’s assistance in tackling the city’s high crime rate. (snip)

The city’s high crime rate and its admitted dependence on federal help in responding to it make the positions of the BPD and the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office with respect to illegal immigrant criminals all the more inexplicable. Why would the Trump administration agree to the city’s request for more federal criminal assistance if the police and prosecutors go easy on illegal immigrant criminals? Unlike the funding in the federal case addressing the president’s executive order on sanctuary cities, the assistance requested by Mayor Pugh is purely prospective, and the president could simply say “no” without legal ramifications.

It’s one thing to prioritize law enforcement in a Democratic Party controlled city that has a “biggly” crime issue. It’s something entirely else to heavily suggest that prosecutors not charge already caught illegals with the crimes they committed in order to avoid federal authorities catching wind and coming to pick the illegals up. It’s also against their oaths of office, not to mention Maryland and federal law.

This would be blatant discrimination in legal system decisions. While the legal citizen/resident may be charged with, say, DUI, the illegal alien will be let go with no penalties. Besides being utterly inappropriate and, at best, legally shady and violations of the Maryland Bar, along with state and federal statutes, it could lead to lawsuits, as has happened before in Charm City over discriminatory charging tactics.

Read: Baltimore Sun: What’s Up With Illegal Aliens Being Treated Differently Than Those Legally Present? »

NY Times, Washington Post Are Thrilled That Trump Mentioned Raising Gas Tax

Polls on raising the gas tax are particularly negative, even among Democrats, but, when asked, Trump said “It’s something that I would certainly consider”. It didn’t mean he was serious: he and people in his administration typically say that or something similar when they are not prepared to really answer a question. But, this has made both the NY Times and Washington Post editorial boards giddy

Donald Trump’s Very Good Idea: Raise the Gas Tax

Every once in a while, President Trump says something that really makes sense, as when he suggested on Monday raising the federal gasoline tax to help pay for his infrastructure plan. Hold on to that thought, Mr. President. It’s a great idea.

The federal fuel tax — 18.4 cents per gallon for gasoline and 24.4 cents for diesel – was supposed to pay to fix and expand the country’s roads and transit systems, but Congress has refused to increase it since 1993. Between inflation and the higher fuel economy of cars, the tax is hardly up to the job. Highway-related tax revenue was only $37.4 billion in the 2015 fiscal year.

Three guesses to determine the main reason why gas tax revenue is down. That’s right, the government, at both the federal and state levels, has been pushing, and even mandating, that vehicles be more efficient. There’s a whole lot less V6 and V8 vehicles on the road, replaced with V4s that get excellent fuel economy and have decent acceleration (unlike a 4 cylinder in 1993, which drove like a turtle on Valium). Plus, the ever increasing number of hybrids and electric vehicles. V6s and V8s usually now have cylinders that shut down at highway speeds to get better fuel economy. And, let’s not forget how hard the previous administration pushed to make this happen, and mandated it happen.

Better fuel economy equals less gas purchased equals lower tax revenue.

Small wonder then that many of the country’s roads and transit systems are somewhere between shoddy and falling apart. The American Society of Civil Engineers recently gave the country’s roads a grade of D and transit systems a D-. It said the poor state of the roads cost the country $160 billion in time and fuel in 2014. And the country’s transit systems have a $90 billion repair backlog, according to a government report published in January.

Perhaps if we weren’t pissing away taxpayer money on overpayments on contracts, projects such as shrimp on treadmills, and ‘climate change’ money to nations which then build airports. Among the many, many ways government wastes money. Waste is estimated anywhere between $125 billion to $1 trillion a year.

A higher gas tax is one way to help pay for Mr. Trump’s $1 trillion infrastructure plan without increasing the federal deficit. It would benefit Americans by shortening their commutes, creating jobs and reducing costs for car repairs. Businesses would be able to ship raw materials and goods faster. All of that would bolster economic growth, which is probably why, in addition to truckers, the United States Chamber of Commerce and AAA support an increase.

In reality, raising the gas tax would hurt the middle and lower classes, raise the cost of goods, and have a negative impact on the economy. Don’t like that link? How about the LA Times saying the same thing? Or liberal leaning Brookings Institute?

Oh, and it’s cute how the NYTEB is suddenly concerned about the deficit. Heck, we could recover $1.3 billion a year to use on transit by refusing to pay employees who are placed on leave for misconduct. $440 million each year wasted on unnecessary printing. Seriously, you can read about all the crazy ways government spends your money at both liberal and conservative sites, money not being used for core services like maintaining transportation.

Trump has a good tax idea. Here’s how to make it work.

HERE IS an upside to President Trump’s un­or­tho­dox style of communication: Sometimes he comes out with a good idea that a less mercurial national figure might avoid out of conventional political caution. So it was with his remark during an interview with Bloomberg News, to the effect that he “would certainly consider” increasing the federal excise tax on motor fuels to help pay for an increase in federal infrastructure spending. (snip)

Of course no one likes to pay more for fuel; policy should be adjusted to help mitigate the impact of this inevitably regressive levy on those who can least afford it. Still, at $ 2.38 per gallon, Tuesday’s nationwide average price of regular gasoline was less than what Americans paid 70 years ago, adjusted for inflation. The tax increase needed to cover currently planned Highway Trust Fund spending would be small — roughly a dime per gallon, according to a 2015 Congressional Budget Office report . Ideally, Congress and the Trump administration could agree to a significantly larger amount, then index it to inflation permanently to assure the trust fund’s long-term stability.

That would be just $1.70 more for a fillup for me. Every 2 weeks or so. But, the trucks which deliver goods would be paying that too. Charging the businesses more to deliver. Then the businesses raise their costs. And it all gets spread around. And we pay more all around.

We have to remember that states themselves have their own gas tax on top of the federal tax. North Carolina’s is one of the nations highest. We have relatively decent roads. Our economy is booming. But, that money is being spent here. Not spread around the country on wasteful projects (see: Obama’s “shovel ready jobs”). Los Federales should, really, lower the federal gas tax, or at least keep it the same, and let the states deal with maintaining their roads and bridges. People closer to the source who know better and can be held more accountable.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times, Washington Post Are Thrilled That Trump Mentioned Raising Gas Tax »

Excitable Paul Krugman Really Wants To Spend Lots Of Your Money On Hotcoldwetdry

Hes’ super thrilled to spend billions upon billions, even though he has no idea what the money would accomplish (via Twitchy)

Gird your loins, and click the “more” tag

Read More »

Read: Excitable Paul Krugman Really Wants To Spend Lots Of Your Money On Hotcoldwetdry »

Pirate's Cove