Surprise: Some People Liked Their Pre-Obamacare Insurance

By William Teach March 31, 2017 – 1:30 pm

You know, the plans that Obama and the Dems promised repeatedly that they could keep. Somehow, this story made it into publication by CNN

Before Obamacare, some liked their health care plans better

Stacey and Eddie Albert lead pretty healthy lives. She’s a nutritionist. He’s a personal trainer. They rarely go to the doctor, other than their annual physicals.

For years, they were covered by Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey. In 2013, they paid about $360 a month for a plan that met their needs.

That all changed the following year, when Obamacare took effect. Their premium shot up to around $650 a month for a policy that came with pediatric dental coverage and maternity services — benefits they didn’t use or want since they don’t have kids. They ended up dropping the plan after several months and even went a year without coverage for the first time in the decade they’ve been together, exactly the opposite of what Obamacare was supposed to do.

And this is what happened to millions and millions of people

Those skinny plans suited some Americans just fine. Many didn’t even know the limits of the pre-Obamacare plans because they never used enough services to become aware of them.

“They made the Affordable Care Act so ridiculously overbuilt that it’s killing people like me who pay for it,” said Tom Buxton, 59, of Littleton, Colorado. “I don’t need two doctor visits a year unless I want them. That should be my choice. I didn’t go to the doctor for five years.”

One size fits all

“The bottom line is the fact that the coverage of all these plans is basically the same for me,” he said. “However, the cost of Obamacare is substantially higher.”

How the heck did this make it through the Progressive censors at CNN?

Read: Surprise: Some People Liked Their Pre-Obamacare Insurance »

Posted in Healthcare | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 31, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is carbon pollution created snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on California prosecuting pro-lifers.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Good News: The Carbon Footprint Of Crime Has Fallen!

By William Teach March 31, 2017 – 7:06 am

No, really, this is Important Stuff, you guys! Via Watts Up With That?, Anthony Watts explains

From the “Who freaking cares about the carbon footprint of criminals?” department comes this inane study that only a fully invested warmist could give a rats posterior about. With statements like this: “to ignore these carbon emissions risks crime prevention strategies being unsustainable.” one wonders if the author of the study really understands that the real goal of crime prevention strategies is to reduce crime, not a carbon footprint or to be “sustainable”.

We now must include ‘climate change’ craziness in law enforcement or something

The carbon footprint of crime has fallen, study finds

A study led by an Engineering Doctorate student at the University of Surrey has found that the carbon footprint of crime over the last 20 years has fallen.

The study, published in the British Journal of Criminology, applied estimates of the carbon footprint of criminal offences to police-recorded crime and self-reported victimisation survey data, to estimate the carbon footprint of crime in England and Wales between 1995 and 2015.

The study was conducted by Helen Skudder at the University of Surrey and supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), the Home Office, and Secured by Design Police Crime Prevention Initiatives Limited.

The carbon footprint of acquisitive and violent crime was estimated at around 7 million tonnes CO2e in 1995, falling to below 3 million tonnes CO2e by 2015. This represents a substantial carbon drop of 62% and a total cumulative reduction of 54 million tonnes CO2e over this period.

Well, hey, perhaps criminals started using hybrid vehicles as getaway cars and using low emission shoes or something.

Research lead Helen Skudder said: “All public bodies, organisations and businesses must reduce their carbon emissions wherever possible, so to ignore these carbon emissions risks crime prevention strategies being unsustainable. Our study has shown that the carbon emissions have fallen further than the rate of crime, with a 48% carbon drop observed alongside a 30% crime drop.”

What’s most important to Warmists is the reduction in the carbon footprint, not the reduction in crime.

The relationship between the drop in crime and drop in carbon footprint is complex. A 30% drop in police-recorded crime between 1995 and 2015 resulted in a 48% reduction of carbon emissions. This clearly demonstrates that there is not a straightforward relationship between the number of offences and the resulting carbon footprint. This study adds to previous research on the carbon footprint of crime, and the results presented in the paper are an important contribution towards a growing connection between crime prevention and sustainability agendas.

Wait, there have been previous studies? We could have written this one off as someone just writing a paper to punk a board to get a degree, but, this is apparently a Real Thing. A thing that shows some people should spend less time in University and more time working a real job.

Commentor Latitude notes at Watts Up With That?

Funniest part……crime is highest…where people believe this

True.

Read: Good News: The Carbon Footprint Of Crime Has Fallen! »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Police Investigate A Fake Anti-Illegal Alien Protest

By William Teach March 31, 2017 – 6:46 am

Wrongthink must be investigated, you know

(NY Daily News) Police at the University of Central Florida are investigating a viral Facebook event intended to teach people how to find and report undocumented immigrants — but the event’s creator claims the social media effort was just a “joke.”

“Help dirty illegals meet their fate at the hands of La Migra!” a post for the event reads.

The Facebook page for the gathering, organized by members of an “underground” group at the school, bills it as their “first major attempt to report immigrants to the ICE, INS and DHS!”

Organizers promised “an in-depth tutorial” that will “teach you how to report to each network, and how to find illegals via social media.”

The event was originally scheduled to be held on Sunday at Bar Louie, just across the street from the Orlando school. A second event, however, later replaced the first and placed the gathering at the White House on Saturday.

But the event’s unidentified creator told the Orlando Sentinel that the whole thing was a hoax.

So, the entire thing was fake. Even if it wasn’t, this would be a Constitutionally allowed gathering of people who are attempting to uphold the immigration laws of the United States. But, Wrongthink

UCF police spokeswoman Courtney Gilmartin said the university is investigating the event and that the Orange County Sheriff’s Office has been notified.

“Diversity and inclusivity are woven into the fabric of UCF,” she said in a statement. “The university is committed to continuing to uphold these values and being a place where all students can learn and grow.”

What violation of Law are they investigating? Are they investigating because the post was mean? It doesn’t get more Liberal World than this, with the Sheriff’s office being notified due to Wrongthink.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Police Investigate A Fake Anti-Illegal Alien Protest »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Liberal World, Unhinged Tools | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

NC General Assembly Gives Final Approval On HB2 Replacement

By William Teach March 30, 2017 – 2:46 pm

There have been lots of trials and tribulations with the attempted repeal of HB2, the so-called bathroom bill, which was passed in response to the Charlotte city council passing a law requiring private businesses to allow men pretending to be women to enter the bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms of little girls. Democrats, including Rory Cooper, both before and after he was elected governor, have worked hard to spike an repeal. But, hey, that’s politics. Now

(WRAL) After more than an hour of impassioned, sometimes angry, debate over legislation that would repeal a controversial state law that limits LGBT rights and transgender bathroom access, the House approved the compromise measure Thursday by a 70-48 vote.

The Senate voted 32-16 in favor of the proposal earlier in the day, so it now heads to Gov. Roy Cooper, who supports the deal, for his signature.

It seems as if Governor Cooper will sign this bill. Many Democrats and Republicans were very much against it. But, what does it do?

Bathroom access: House Bill 2 requires all multiple-occupancy bathrooms, locker rooms and changing rooms overseen by state agencies, cities, counties and school districts be designated for use by a single gender based on what’s listed on a person’s birth certificate. House Bill 142 says only the General Assembly can establish access rules for public bathrooms.

Nondiscrimination ordinances: House Bill 2 established a statewide nondiscrimination policy for employment and public accommodations based on “race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex or handicap,” leaving out protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity, and it barred cities and counties from going beyond the state policy. House Bill 142 repeals the statewide policy and blocks all local nondiscrimination ordinances until Dec. 1, 2020, but places no restrictions on them after that date.

Local contracts: House Bill 2 prohibited local governments from setting rules for private contractors regarding minimum wage and worker benefits. As part of its repeal provision, House Bill 142 does away with this and doesn’t replace it.

Overall, it doesn’t look like HB142 changes much at all, other than the local contracts portion. It still blocks municipalities from requiring private entities to allow fake women to invade the private domains of real females. And, while it removes the part about using the bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms that conform to biological identity (you know, actual science), it does say that only the GA can establish policy, so, in the absence of guidance, government cannot force their weirdo policies on citizens.

Now, what the GA needs to do is pass a law that all NCAA games must have bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers that are mixed sex. And for all the companies that were caterwauling about HB2. Force them to practice what they preach.

Read: NC General Assembly Gives Final Approval On HB2 Replacement »

Posted in NC News | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 30, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful carbon neutral bike which will reverse the earth’s permanent drought, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Chicks On The Right, with a post on “hobbyhorsing.” Yeah, you gotta read it.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Supposedly To Announce More Requested Climate Budget Cuts

By William Teach March 30, 2017 – 10:34 am

Will Republicans in Congress cooperate? You can bet Democrats are going to go ape

(Daily Caller) President Donald Trump is looking to cut another $140 million in funding from government-funded global warming science programs, according to Space.com.

Trump will ask Congress to cut $90 million in funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) weather satellite programs and another $50 million from NASA global warming science programs.

The programs slashed include: NOAA’s Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite R (GOES-R), Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS), and  Earth Observing Nanosatellite-Microwave (EON-MW). These programs all study earth’s climate and measure global warming.

On the one hand, it’s a bad idea to remove the funding, because these satellite programs can show the reality of what is actually happening with the Earth’s climate in direct contradiction to Warmist talking points. On the other hand, the Warmists who work in these programs modify the data to support their un-scientific beliefs.

Regardless, Warmists are very upset when their taxpayer funded cult jobs go away.

Read: Trump Supposedly To Announce More Requested Climate Budget Cuts »

Posted in Global Warming | 55 Comments | Trackback URL

Sanctuary City Seattle Sues Trump Over His Sanctuary Cities Threat

By William Teach March 30, 2017 – 8:22 am

On the one hand, Seattle is doing all it can to take firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens. On the other, it’s doing all it can to protect criminal illegal aliens. And the illegal alien population is way up in Washington state, where they are doing all they can to protect the criminals

(Reuters) The city of Seattle sued U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration on Wednesday over its executive order seeking to withhold federal funds from “sanctuary cities,” arguing it amounted to unconstitutional federal coercion.

Seattle Mayor Ed Murray told reporters the Constitution forbade the federal government from pressuring cities, “yet that is exactly what the president’s order does. Once again, this new administration has decided to bully.”

“Things like grants helping us with child sex trafficking are not connected to immigration,” Murray said, adding: “It is time for cities to stand up and ask the courts to put an end to the anxiety in our cities and the chaos in our system.”

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions threatened on Monday to strip Justice Department grants from cities and other local governments that choose to shield illegal immigrants from deportation efforts.

There would be no need to bully cities if they cooperated with federal law, law which is based on the Constitutional provision that they protect the United States from invasion, as well as set immigration standards.

Let’s consider: Democrats were in Moonbat Level 10 over Arizona’s SB1070, which strengthened immigration standards based on federal law. Democrats stated that only the federal government can set the standards, and that states and cities must follow federal law. So, how can they possibly complain when the federal government is telling cities, counties, and states to follow federal law? Oh, right, hypocrisy. My bad.

Responding to the Seattle lawsuit, a U.S. Justice Department representative said in a statement: “Failure to deport aliens who are convicted of criminal offenses makes our nation less safe by putting dangerous criminals back on our streets.”

Yes, it does. On the first two declined detainer reports from ICE, multiple illegals with convictions for assault, domestic assault, and serious drug crimes were released from jails in Washington state. Several of them were from King County, the county Seattle is in.

Murray said the goal of Seattle’s lawsuit was to have the courts declare that federal authorities “cannot force our local police officials to be involved in federal immigration activities.”

It’s really not that hard or much work. When they have an illegal, of which the majority that are in custody are there because they’ve committed a crime, they simply call ICE, and hold the illegal for 48 hours. That’s it. It’s an amazing statement, in that Seattle is claiming that it’s law enforcement shouldn’t be involved with law enforcement. That law enforcement at the local level doesn’t have to enforce federal law.

Read: Sanctuary City Seattle Sues Trump Over His Sanctuary Cities Threat »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

DOE Climate Department Banned From Use Of “Climate Change” Or Something

By William Teach March 30, 2017 – 7:52 am

Here we go. A big story using an anonymous source is making a claim, which is sending Cult of Climastrology members into apoplexy, claiming fascism and stuff

(Politico) A supervisor at the Energy Department’s international climate office told staff this week not to use the phrases “climate change,” “emissions reduction” or “Paris Agreement” in written memos, briefings or other written communication, sources have told POLITICO.

Employees of DOE’s Office of International Climate and Clean Energy learned of the ban at a meeting Tuesday, the same day President Donald Trump signed an executive order at EPA headquarters to reverse most of former President Barack Obama’s climate regulatory initiatives. Officials at the State Department and in other DOE offices said they had not been given a banned words list, but they had started avoiding climate-related terms in their memos and briefings given the new administration’s direction on climate change.

The supervisor is not named. The sources are not named.

The office has regular contact with officials from foreign countries, which may have led to the more aggressive action on language than in other offices, a source said. At the meeting, senior officials told staff the words would cause a “visceral reaction” with Energy Secretary Rick Perry, his immediate staff, and the cadre of White House advisers at the top of the department.

The senior officials are not named. There is zero proof this occurred. Yet, that hasn’t stopped The Hill, AOL News, Newsy, Axios, The Week, and NY Magazine, among others, from repeating the no proof provided allegation. From repeating what is essentially content free gossip. Many of the articles even forget to mention Politico’s next paragraph, which cancels the entire story

A DOE spokeswoman denied there had been a new directive. “No words or phrases have been banned for this office or anyone in the department,” said DOE spokeswoman Lindsey Geisler.

In actuality, it seems more as if the Warmists in the department are getting their own green on the outside red on the inside panties in a wad

Another DOE source in a different office said that although there had been no formal instructions about climate-related language in their office there was a general sense that it’s better to avoid certain hot-button terms in favor of words like “jobs” and “infrastructure.”

A State Department official reported a similar mood.

“We have definitively not received anything on banned words, not even orally,” the State official said. “But people are doing a lot of reading into tea leaves. People are taking their own initiatives to not use certain words based on hints from transition people. Everyone is encouraged to finding different ways of talking about things. There’s a sense that you’d better find a way to delink” from the previous administration’s talking points.

There’s even a wonderful freakout quote from the Sierra Club on the story, a story based on gossip and formally stated by the DOE that it’s fake. A story that seems more like the Warmists having hissy fits over their own feelings and making things up.

But, hey, you know, “news”.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: DOE Climate Department Banned From Use Of “Climate Change” Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming, Journalistic Malpractice | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Raiders Have A Plan If Fans Abandon Team That Abandoned Them

By William Teach March 29, 2017 – 7:28 pm

Let’s talk about something different. This article about the Raiders moving has been bugging me all day, but, alas, Real Lifeâ„¢ interfered

Raiders could reportedly play in San Antonio or with 49ers if Oakland fans bail

It appears that the Raiders are already making contingency plans in case their divorce with the city of Oakland gets messy.

After the team’s move to Las Vegas was approved Monday , Raiders owner Mark Davis said he would like to keep the Raiders in Oakland while the team’s new stadium in Vegas is being built.

“We have two more years of lease options for Oakland right now,” Davis said. “If the fans would like us to stay there, we’d love to be there for that and possibly talk to them about extending it for maybe 2019 as well and try to bring a championship back to Oakland.”

Is it just me, or does it seem as if the Raiders are blaming the fans and trying to shame them in case they abandon going to games over the next two seasons? The Raiders are leaving. Why would any Oakland Raiders fan even consider paying money to attend games? Why spend money on merchandise? Why would fans not bail? Their team abandoned them.

Overall, it seems as if the NFL hates much of its fan base. You have three teams moving to new cities. The Rams and Chargers pee’d all over their fan base, and are moving to a city that was unable to support NFL previously. Then the NFL approved the Raiders moving. Adding insult to injury. It’s a pretty shoddy way to treat the fans, especially with all the craziness last year.

They can’t actually expect the Rams, Chargers, and Raiders local fan bases to stay with the teams, can they? I know if my NJ Devils moved out of NJ, I wouldn’t be a fan of them anymore. I may live in North Carolina, but they’ve been my team since growing up in NJ and them coming in 1984. Wouldn’t be the same.

Now, if it was the Dodgers and they moved to Wichita? Perhaps. Always been my team, but, I’ve never lived there. But, I would expect local Dodgers fans to turn their backs on the Devils.

Oh, and those who will be fans in Las Vegas? Just remember, the Raiders blew off their fans in Oakland twice now, and in Los Angeles once. You could be next.

And, yes, it’s a business. This business requires fans, though. Die hard local fans. They have the money.

Read: Raiders Have A Plan If Fans Abandon Team That Abandoned Them »

Posted in Sports | 7 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove