If All You See…

By William Teach February 28, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fossil fueled tank involved in carbon pollution created war, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is NoTricksZone, with a post on new papers linking the modern climate with natural variability.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Dems Bright Idea: Bring Illegal Aliens To Trump Address To Congress

By William Teach February 28, 2017 – 10:56 am

This could be a very bad idea (via Twitchy)

Uh huh

When President Donald Trump makes his first address to a joint session of Congress Tuesday night, at least four undocumented immigrants whose temporary legal status could be revoked will be in the House watching him speak.

Aaima Sayed, a Muslim-American whose parents brought her to the U.S. when she was three years old, has been invited as a guest of the second-highest ranking Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois. (snip)

New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Colorado Rep. Jared Polis, and Wisconsin Rep. Mark Pocan—all Democrats—also plan to bring DACA recipients to the address.

Many have suggested detaining the illegals right there and then. Nah. Here’s a better idea

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/836376529848451072

More specifically, under (A)(1)(a)(iv):

(Anyone who) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law;

This provides for fines and imprisonment for up to 5 years. And, yes, a process would have to be followed, starting with impeachment of the member. It would set a precedent, which would have Democrats at Moonbat Level 10, but, they should learn that breaking the law is not allowed.

Read: Dems Bright Idea: Bring Illegal Aliens To Trump Address To Congress »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, What’s The Real Goal Of Trump’s Immigration Orders?

By William Teach February 28, 2017 – 7:18 am

The Los Angeles Times takes a shot at providing the answer, and you’ll be shocked

The real goal of Trump’s executive orders: Reduce the number of immigrants in the U.S.

Shocking! Reducing the number of immigrants!

Behind President Trump’s efforts to step up deportations and block travel from seven mostly Muslim countries lies a goal that reaches far beyond any immediate terrorism threat: a desire to reshape American demographics for the long term and keep out people who Trump and senior aides believe will not assimilate.

In pursuit of that goal, Trump in his first weeks in office has launched the most dramatic effort in decades to reduce the country’s foreign-born population and set in motion what could become a generational shift in the ethnic makeup of the U.S.

Trump and top aides have become increasingly public about their underlying pursuit, pointing to Europe as an example of what they believe is a dangerous path that Western nations have taken. Trump believes European governments have foolishly allowed Muslims with extreme views to settle in their countries, sowing seeds for unrest and recruitment by terrorist groups.

Even though the LA Times is projecting, well, guessing, it’s a good guess. Why would we want to allow in people who do not assimilate, and, in actuality, bring their 3rd world extremist beliefs and implement them in our nations, as we have seen again and again in Europe? Muslim nations do not want these extremists: why would we?

Two days after Trump imposed the ban, a senior administration official told reporters at the White House that the order was part of a larger strategy to develop an immigration system that selects immigrants the White House believes will make “positive contributions” to the country.

Sounds like a wise idea.

That change has alarmed right-wing nationalists like Miller and Bannon, who see Trump’s administration as an opportunity to change those migration trends for decades to come.

The two men see the country’s long-term security and wage growth entwined with reducing the number of foreign-born people allowed to visit, immigrate and work in the U.S.

Other nations do exactly the same, such as Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. Why shouldn’t the United States be allowed to control those who come in while picking and choosing those who will make our country better?

Read: Say, What’s The Real Goal Of Trump’s Immigration Orders? »

Posted in Current Affairs | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Begins Plan To Do Away With Clean Water Or Something

By William Teach February 28, 2017 – 7:00 am

Is it any wonder that President Trump is at war with the majority of the U.S. media when they run headlines like this one at the NY Times?

Trump Plans to Begin E.P.A. Rollback With Order on Clean Water

The headline and article at the Washington Post, among others, isn’t any better. What’s it all about?

President Trump is expected to sign an executive order on Tuesday aimed at rolling back one of former President Barack Obama’s major environmental regulations to protect American waterways, but it will have almost no immediate legal effect, according to two people familiar with the White House plans.

The order will essentially give Mr. Trump a megaphone to direct his new Environmental Protection Agency administrator, Scott Pruitt, to begin the complicated legal process of rewriting the sweeping 2015 rule known as Waters of the United States. But that effort could take longer than a single presidential term, legal experts said.

An advance copy of the order was viewed by The New York Times on Monday. It is the first of two announcements expected to direct Mr. Pruitt to begin dismantling the major pillars of Mr. Obama’s environmental legacy.

In the coming week, Mr. Trump is also expected to sign a similar order instructing Mr. Pruitt to begin the process of withdrawing and revising Mr. Obama’s signature 2015 climate-change regulation, aimed at curbing emissions of planet-warming greenhouse gases from coal-fired power plants.

Because both of those rules were finalized under existing laws long before Mr. Obama left office, they cannot be simply undone with a stroke of the president’s pen, legal experts in both the Obama and Trump White Houses have said.

Neither rule took that long to enact. In fact, both Obama rules are under court orders, as the Obama administration was sued over these rules. Neither of them are in effect

That could take several years. To follow the law, Mr. Pruitt will have to withdraw the current Obama administration water regulation and craft a new version of the rule, along with a justification as to why it would be legally superior to the earlier one. That would be subject to a public comment period before it is finalized, and it could face new lawsuits afterward.

There are several ways that the Waters Of The United States and Clean Power Plan can be deleted. First, Congress can pass a law doing away with all or part of either. In fact, there’s already legislation out there to do just that with the Waters rule.

Second, Pruitt can simply follow the rulemaking process, essentially in reverse. The rationale? That there’s no need for the rules to start with. That the federal government should have no power over tiny streams and ponds and such that do not leave the state. There are lots of reasons.

Trump can also refuse to defend both the Waters and Clean Power Plan in court.

It does say something about federal rules that it is supposedly so difficult to get rid of them, and it’s not something good.

Trump should announce the beginning of another rule: the Clean Credentialed Media Plan. In this, the US media would need to reduce their “carbon footprint” in their operations. I wonder how many media outlets would react to having these rules on themselves?

Regardless, doing away with either rule will not have an effect on clean air, land, or water.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Trump Begins Plan To Do Away With Clean Water Or Something »

Posted in Global Warming, Government | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Talking To Your Air Conditioner Can Help Alleviate ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach February 27, 2017 – 7:00 pm

That is, if the Cult of Climastrology will let you have one, or at least one that works worth a damn

How talking to air conditioners could help prevent blackouts

For South Australia, it was a cruelly ironic one-two punch – a burst of the extreme heat conditions that are so much more likely because of climate change, and a power cut linked to a simultaneous drop in wind that hobbled the renewable energy systems introduced to minimise global warming in the first place. (big snip)

The telecommunications expert envisions an Internet of Things (IoT) integrated energy grid that provides live weather updates, monitors power shortfalls, predicts demand, and reacts accordingly – even utilising smart meters to adjust an entire state’s air conditioners to reduce power consumption.

“What you need in these emergencies is a manageable system, not just a matter of switching power on and off to entire areas, but having all this in place you could manage air cons in people’s homes in such a way that it doesn’t overload the network,” he says.

What they’re discussing is not actually talking to your AC, but allowing the energy companies, which are heavily regulated by the government, to control all aspects of your power consumption. It’s back to the whole “smart grid” idea, which would leave your home vulnerable to all sorts of things, including hacking into your home controllers to the power company remotely shutting off your power. They can also do things like change the temperature of your home via your heating and AC systems.

How much do you want them in your home? Oh, right, we have to solve Hotcoldwetdry. When Liberals start giving up their own control of power in their homes, the rest of us might consider it.

Read: Talking To Your Air Conditioner Can Help Alleviate ‘Climate Change’ »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach February 27, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a roadway being destroyed by carbon pollution, but, hey, people shouldn’t be driving fossil fueled vehicles anyway, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Chicks On The Right, with a post on how to be Offended by anything.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

‘Climate Change’ To Make Vancouver Like San Diego Or Something

By William Teach February 27, 2017 – 10:42 am

From the Department of Everyone Panic at the University Of Climastrology

Climate change predicted to transform Vancouver into San Diego, but at a heavy cost

Goodbye Vancouver, hello San Diego.

A major climate-change study predicts temperatures in Metro Vancouver will exceed those of present-day Southern California in the coming decades.

Frost and ice will become virtually a thing of the past, heating bills will drop, and farm crops will flourish virtually year-round in the Fraser Valley.

That’s the good news.

On the down side — and there is plenty of it — the region can expect: air-conditioning costs to soar; worsening smog and associated health problems; increased forest fires and water shortages; summer droughts followed by severe fall rain events; and an influx of invasive species threatening forests and agriculture.

A new 70-page study, Climate Projections for Metro Vancouver, predicts changes in temperature and precipitation that will affect everything from sewage pipes to ski hills in the 2050s — just 33 years distant — and 2080s. Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium, based at the University of Victoria, assisted in the report.

The average temperature for San Diego is 63.65F. Vancouver’s is 51.8. That’s a long way to go in just a few decades, but, hey, what’s a bit of scaremongering amongst Warmists?

Even if the temperatures increase by over 12 F, if the rainfall increases as the study suggests, if there are different species coming into Vancouver, if there are more bugs, how do other cities with the same issues survive? Because they aren’t Warmist snowflakes.

Good news, though: they are going to do lots and lots of taxpayer funded studies, culminating in policy prescriptions that cover everything, from building codes, to vehicles, to the economy, to how people are allowed to go about their daily lives. The same old same old.

Read: ‘Climate Change’ To Make Vancouver Like San Diego Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

California Considers Moving To Single Payer Health System

By William Teach February 27, 2017 – 8:09 am

California is a state that miscalculated costs for the state run Medicaid program by $1.9 billion. The state is reckoned to have a $1.6 billion deficit, and Governor Jerry Brown wants to reduce the state budget by $3 billion because of these problems. The inflow of tax money is down. Jobs are leaving. Costs for businesses are up. Costs for citizens are up. The state is the 4th highest in the nation for cost of living. Covered California, the name for the Obamacare plan for the state, has the same problems as everywhere else: ever increasing premiums and deductibles, people can’t afford to use the insurance, doctors aren’t taking it, there are long waits for those doctors that do, and the state is constantly having to give the program more and more money. And, remember this?

Well, let’s make sure we double down on failure

With Obamacare in jeopardy, California considers going it alone with ‘single-payer’ system

With President Trump now vowing to put forward a replacement for the Affordable Care Act in March, some California politicians and healthcare advocates are once again promoting the idea of a state-run “single-payer” system that operates like Medicare.

Backers say the uncertainty surrounding Trump’s promise to repeal Obamacare presents California with a chance to rethink how healthcare is delivered to its 39 million residents.

“Why wouldn’t we take this as an opportunity to create what we want in California?” Dr. Mitch Katz, head of L.A. County’s health department, said at a conference in December. He mentioned a single-payer system as a possible solution.

Other suggestions for how California can capitalize on the threat to Obamacare include creating a public option, a state-run health plan to sell on the state’s insurance exchange, and mimicking how Massachusetts provided universal healthcare.

In fact

State Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) introduced a bill Friday that would make California the first state to adopt single-payer, also called “Medicare for all.” Canada has such a system.

What might this look like?

Previous proposals in California suggested financing the agency by pooling the state’s current funding for Medicaid, Medicare and other health programs and then taxing employees 4% of their income and employers 7% of payroll.

Hey, it’s their state, let them do what they want, if we believe in States Rights. It would be a great way to show just how much Leftism would fail. They should do it quickly. Just don’t expect the Republican Congress nor President Trump to bail them out.

Read: California Considers Moving To Single Payer Health System »

Posted in Healthcare | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Outraged That Trump Hasn’t Released Infrastructure Plan

By William Teach February 27, 2017 – 7:35 am

Is it any wonder that President Trump continues to fight with the Credentialed Media when they continue to assault him in a way they would never do to a Democrat? All Republicans know that they are damned if they do damned if they don’t when it comes to the majority of media outlets which will act as surrogates of the Democratic Party. Most Republicans choose to not fight back. Obviously, Trump has taken a different path. And why not, when we get schlock like this?

Missing: Donald Trump’s Infrastructure Plan

Which of Donald Trump’s many campaign promises would bring real benefits to the economy? Which would almost certainly win support even among people who voted against him? And which seems to have disappeared completely from the White House radar?

The answer to all three questions is Mr. Trump’s pledge to put his self-described talents as a builder to work by spending $1 trillion on restoring the country’s crumbling bridges, potholed roads, rust-bucket trains and shabby-not-chic airports. More than a month into his presidency, no such plan has emerged, and there are no signs that one is coming anytime soon.

Trump hasn’t even been in office for a month an a half, and the NY Times Editorial Board is assaulting him for not releasing a plan yet. Seriously.

Part of this could be attributed to the less-than-blinding speed with which Mr. Trump has assembled his administration.

It’s actually been faster than most. Yet, there are still many, many positions to be filled. Just like with Obama. And Bush. And Clinton. And Bush. And Reagan. Etc. Heck, some positions under Obama were never even filled. Perhaps there are just way too many positions which are political within the federal government, and, heck, just too many positions to start with?

Regardless, the guy has been in office a whopping 38 days.

But evidence suggests that the plan is on hold for the foreseeable future; Republican sources told the news organization Axios last week that the White House wouldn’t unveil an infrastructure proposal until 2018.

No, that’s not evidence of anything, except fevered minds which look for any excuse to attack the president.

A big infrastructure package involving direct government spending would, politically and economically, be a slam-dunk compared with other misguided investments and policies, like building a border wall or cutting taxes for the wealthy. Experts say that the United States needs a huge increase in spending on public works after years of neglect and to prepare for the increased threat from climate change. The American Society of Civil Engineers gives the country’s infrastructure a grade of D+ and says that $3.6 trillion in spending is required by 2020.

If only we’d had some sort of infrastructure project over the last eight years. Oh, right, right. If only the Obama administration hadn’t pissed away hundreds of billions on pork laden projects which weren’t shovel ready, barely and rarely addressed the actual issues, and weren’t simply ways to repay campaign contributors. Wasn’t Sheriff Joe Biden supposed to monitor the projects? How’d that work out?

Though the circumstances are not the same, Mr. Trump’s indolence and Congress’s palpable lack of initiative sit in sharp contrast to the speed with which President Obama and congressional Democrats were able to engineer a nearly $1 trillion economic stimulus bill in 2009, a task completed in less than six weeks. At the current pace, Mr. Trump’s American greatness project may never get off the ground, remaining no more than a slogan on red hats, a testament to the emptiness of his populist promises to help the forgotten workers.

That’s about all Obama did in that time period. The promised jobs never materialized. Poverty increased. Green energy jobs haven’t increased. No one really cares about electric cars. The cost of the jobs created was somewhere between $196k and $562K per job. Disgraceful. Overall, it was a failure. Perhaps Team Obama and the Democrat controlled Congress should have take a bit more time to craft legislation rather than rush it through on flawed economic forecasts.

By all measures, the economy actually came out of recession before the Stimulus projects even started.

Anyhow, perhaps Trump and his team are taking their time to put together a plan that makes sense. One that works. One that is targeted, unlike the Stimulus, which attempted to cure every ill. One that fixes problems for the long term. Trump is a guy who understands what a billion dollars is. What it means. Where it comes from. To Obama and the Democrats, it’s just a number, because Other People are paying for it, and Other People will take care of the interest on what was borrowed.

But, for the NY Times Editorial Board to have a snit fit like this so soon shows their utter partisanship, and gives yet another reason why Trump shouldn’t trust the media.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Outraged That Trump Hasn’t Released Infrastructure Plan »

Posted in Democrat Lite, Unhinged Tools | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Permanent California Drought: Shasta Dam Releases Water For First Time In 20 Years

By William Teach February 26, 2017 – 4:36 pm

Well, obviously, this wet condition is caused by ‘climate change’ just like the Permanent Drought

(LA Times) For the first time in almost two decades, water was released Thursday from the topmost gates of the dam impounding Lake Shasta, California’s largest reservoir, marking another milestone in what is shaping up to be the state’s wettest year on record.

The release lasted only 15 minutes and was only a test to confirm that the gates were functioning properly in case they need to be used at a later time, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. The gates operated as expected, the bureau’s spokesman Louis Moore said.

With the reservoir at 135% of its historical average for this time of year and nearly 93% of its capacity, dam engineers were releasing billions of gallons of water to make room for incoming flows from the surrounding foothills and Sierra Nevada, according to the bureau.

And, it should continue, because there has been lots of rain and you still have the snowpack which will melt in spring and summer.

Read: Permanent California Drought: Shasta Dam Releases Water For First Time In 20 Years »

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