Bummer: Renewables Won’t Stop Climate Doom

Well, that puts a wrench in the monkey works

Renewables can’t deliver Paris climate goals: study

Expansion of renewable energy cannot by itself stave off catastrophic climate change, scientists warned Monday.

Even if solar and wind capacity continues to grow at breakneck speed, it will not be fast enough to cap global warming under two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), the target set down in the landmark 2015 Paris climate treaty, they reported in the journal Nature Climate Change.

“The rapid deployment of wind, solar and electric cars gives some hope,” lead author Glen Peters, a researcher at the Center for International Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo, Norway, told AFP.

“But at this stage, these technologies are not really displacing the growth in fossil fuels or conventional transportation.”

Can you guess whats’ really needed?

“Politician seem happy to support wind, solar and electric vehicles through subsidies. But they are not willing to put prices”—a carbon tax, for example—”on fossil fuels.”

Funny how it always comes down to a few things for these leftists, one of them being a big tax that will end up hurting the lower and middle classes.

Read: Bummer: Renewables Won’t Stop Climate Doom »

Poll: Majority Support Trump’s Temporary Ban

Um, oops?

From Rasmussen

Most voters approve of President Trump’s temporary halt to refugees and visitors from several Middle Eastern and African countries until the government can do a better job of keeping out individuals who are terrorist threats.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-three percent (33%) are opposed, while 10% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States until the government approves its ability to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban, and 11% are undecided. (snip)

The refugee ban is supported by 82% of Republicans and 59% of voters not affiliated with either major party. Democrats are opposed by a 53% to 34% margin. The numbers are nearly identical for the temporary ban on visas from these seven terrorist-plagued nations.

Perhaps those who approve of it would be willing to take the rapeugees, er, refugees, into their own homes and neighborhoods? They should talk to people in Europe for guidance first.

Along these same lines, the NY Times provides the names of companies who are putting these refugees, who probably do not even speak the language, over US citizens. The biggest among them making a splash is Starbucks, which has stated it will hire 10,000 refugees. I have a couple questions

  1. How many of the 18,000 already let in by Obama have they hired?
  2. If they haven’t hired any, why not?
  3. Why didn’t the NY Times ask Starbucks how many they hired?
  4. Will Starbucks make sure no pork products are served?
  5. Will Starbucks stop dogs from coming in stores?
  6. Will Starbucks require women, both employees and customers, to cover up so as not to incite being sexually assaulted, as they’ve been told in Europe?

Tech companies are big on being opposed to the temporary ban, because they love displacing their citizen workers and hiring foreigners at lower salaries. Of course, they tend to hire people who can speak the language and understand the tech, not those who can put bombs together.

Media and Telcom are rather neutral. It’s retail that’s more vocal. Nike, Coca Cola, Walmart, Target, and Proctor and Gamble are all mentioned. How many have hired the refugees? Or, do they prefer to be all talk and no actiom?

Among the automakers, Ford took the most outspoken stance, coming out against the executive order. Ford has its headquarters in Dearborn, Mich., a suburb of Detroit that has a large Muslim population.

In a joint statement, William Clay Ford Jr., Ford’s executive chairman, and Mark Fields, the company’s chief executive, said: “Respect for all people is a core value of Ford Motor Company, and we are proud of the rich diversity of our company here at home and around the world. That is why we do not support this policy or any other that goes against our values as a company.”

General Motors said it would support its employees who might be affected. Fiat Chrysler said it had no comment.

If they’re here, they aren’t affected. If they’re from those areas, why were they hired over Americans? Was GM and Ford planning on importing refugees with no skills and whom do not speak English to build cars? Does Ford respect women? How about the LGBT community? Because the refugees sure don’t, as we’ve seen from the things going on in Europe.

Read: Poll: Majority Support Trump’s Temporary Ban »

Liberals Seem Surprised That Private Sector Guy Acts Like Government Is The Private Sector

Love Trump or loathe him, he’s looking at this whole “government sector” thing like he would the private sector, just like you’d expect a guy who has worked in the private sector his whole life. And, things like massively defying the head of the organization has consequences.

It’s a great picture of Sally Yates looking stunned, wouldn’t you say? From the article

President Trump fired his acting attorney general on Monday night, removing her as the nation’s top law enforcement officer after she defiantly refused to defend his executive order closing the nation’s borders to refugees and people from predominantly Muslim countries.

In an escalating crisis for his 10-day-old administration, the president declared in a statement that Sally Q. Yates, who had served as deputy attorney general under President Barack Obama, had betrayed the administration by announcing that Justice Department lawyers would not defend Mr. Trump’s order against legal challenges.

Crisis? Really? Ms. Yates learned a valuable lesson: if you want to take this type of “principled” stand, you should resign. Like it or not, Trump is POTUS. And the rest of the federal employees, especially those in higher positions, where provided an abject lesson in what happens when you’re not part of the team. In the private sector, if you don’t like the things your boss does, you can discuss them with that person, and, if they won’t change to your satisfaction, you can either get along, or quit. Work somewhere else. It’s not your company.

Ms. Yates’s order was a remarkable rebuke by a government official to a sitting president, and it recalled the so-called Saturday Night Massacre in 1973, when President Richard M. Nixon fired his attorney general and deputy attorney general for refusing to dismiss the special prosecutor in the Watergate case.

First, she could have gone in and asked to talk with Mr. Trump or a main advisor. Instead, she played a dangerous game with her statement. And then, again, she learned what happens in the private sector. A sacking. Second, the situations mentioned are totally different. But, we know how objective the media is.

Ms. Yates said her determination in deciding not to defend the order was broader, however, and included questions not only about the order’s lawfulness, but also whether it was a “wise or just” policy. She also alluded to unspecified statements the White House had made before signing the order, which she factored into her review.

That’s not her job. Welcome to the private sector, Ms. Yates.

Interestingly, nowhere withing the article is it noted that Trump is utterly within his right to fire her.

Excitable Taylor Marsh is yammering on about the Saturday Night Massacre, and is calling the White House the Kremlin on the Potomac.

Above The Law writes that “So Ms. Yates gets to leave with her honor intact.” She would have had she resigned, not been canned.

Boing Boing is having a meltdown, as is Alan Colmes and The Atlantic. And Lawyers, Guns, And Money.

Ann Althouse picks out a great quote from the Times’ article: “These career bureaucrats have a problem with it?” Mr. Spicer said. “They should either get with the program or they can go.” Bingo.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Liberals Seem Surprised That Private Sector Guy Acts Like Government Is The Private Sector »

Update On Threaded Comments

Have spent a little time working on the comments, finally found the right combo using some info from here where the page doesn’t refresh and have the reply showing at the end. When you press reply, the AJAX kicks in and you can reply immediately below the initial comment. It’s set to nest 5 deep.

Still having issues with the mobile theme. I think there’s a little conflict between the caching plugin and the latest WordPress.

Anyhow, anyone see any issues?

Read: Update On Threaded Comments »

Supposedly, Trump Is Definitely Pulling Out Of Paris Climate Accord

You know, that HISTORIC super crazy awesome accord that will lower the world’s fever by, charitably, just .05C

From the link

A former climate change adviser to Donald Trump has said the US President will pull America out of the landmark Paris agreement and an executive order on the issue could come within “days”.

Myron Ebell, who took charge of Mr Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transition team, said the President was determined to undo policies pushed by Barack Obama to restrict greenhouse gas emissions.

He said the US would “clearly change its course on climate policy” under the new administration and claimed Mr Trump was “pretty clear that the problem or the crisis has been overblown and overstated”.

We can only hope that this will be done shortly. Still, it might be more fun to submit it to the Senate, and make the Democrats defend damaging our economy and hurting lower and middle class citizens. And making the Media Industrial Complex fall all over themselves with unhinged news and opinion pieces.

Read: Supposedly, Trump Is Definitely Pulling Out Of Paris Climate Accord »

If All You See…

…are evil condiment bottles brought in from far away, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Ice Age Now, with a post noting that school kids won’t know what onions look like.

Read: If All You See… »

Climate Thought Of The Day

Via Meso.

I know quite a few liberals are in apoplexy over the Canadian mosque shooting, looking to blame white people, Christians, gun owners, Trump and his “Muslim ban,” but, as we learn new information

(Fox News) One of two gunmen who shouted ‘Allahu akbar!’ as they opened fire at a mosque in Quebec City was of Moroccan origin, a witness and local media reported Monday, revealing the first details about the attackers in the massacre that killed six men.

The terror suspects were identified as Mohamed Khadir and Alexandre Bissonnette, the CBC reported. The two men were arrested soon after the shooting at the Quebec Islamic Cultural Centre Sunday night and were expected to appear in court later Monday, police told reporters.

The narrative is most likely collapsing. And, if you don’t trust Fox, how about the CBC, which reports the same?

I’m sure they were just worried about all the fossil fuels coming from Muslim nations causing climate change.

Read: Climate Thought Of The Day »

Fact Checker: Trump’s Refugee Policy Isn’t Really Like Obama’s Or Something

Glenn Kessler attempts to “fact check” a Trump statement, and highlights his partisanship and Trump Derangement Syndrome

Trump’s facile claim that his refugee policy is similar to Obama’s in 2011
There are several important differences between the two refugee policies.

“My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.”
—President Trump, statement on executive order, Jan. 29, 2017

In justifying his controversial executive order halting travelers from seven majority-Muslim countries, President Trump claimed that President Barack Obama did the same thing in 2011. But the comparison is a bit facile.

Here’s what happened in 2011.

Here’s what really happened. The Credentialed Media didn’t bother to investigate the issue for years. There were no unhinged and apoplectic opinion pieces and editorials. They were good little lapdogs. But, the idea here is to try and paint the orders as totally different, and that the Iraqi one was totally different.

The only news report that we could find that referred to a six-month ban was a 2013 ABC News article that included this line: “As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News — even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets.”

And that right there should put the Credentialed Media into a disgrace timeout. Before Kessler trotted out this “fact check,” he gave it a whirl on Twitter, and was beaten like a rented mule.

https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/825399784638971908

Boom.

Anyway, Kessler goes through his “argument”, leading up to

So what’s the difference with Trump’s action?

First, Obama responded to an actual threat — the discovery that two Iraqi refugees had been implicated in bomb-making in Iraq that had targeted U.S. troops. (Iraq, after all, had been a war zone.) Under congressional pressure, officials decided to reexamine all previous refugees and also impose new screening procedures, which led to a slowdown in processing new applications. Trump, by contrast, issued his executive order without any known triggering threat. (His staff has pointed to attacks unrelated to the countries named in his order.)

Apparently, Glenn is not familiar with all the goings on in Europe. All the rapes, sexual assaults, crimes, the spread of hardcore extremist Islam, etc and so on, along with several attacks and stopped attacks by the “refugees.”

Second, Obama did not announce there was a ban on visa applications. In fact, as seen in Napolitano’s answer to Collins, administration officials danced around that question. There was certainly a lot of news reporting that visa applications had been slowed to a trickle. But the Obama administration never said it was their policy to halt all applications. Even so, the delays did not go unnoticed, so there was a lot of critical news reporting at the time about the angst of Iraqis waiting for approval.

So, media incompetence is now a rationale to give Trump…..2 Pinocchios.

Third, Obama’s policy did not prevent all citizens of that country, including green-card holders, from traveling to the United States. Trump’s policy is much more sweeping, though officials have appeared to pull back from barring permanent U.S. residents.

That’s because it didn’t. Glenn should read the actual Executive Order.

And the media wonders why Trump won the election.

Read: Fact Checker: Trump’s Refugee Policy Isn’t Really Like Obama’s Or Something »

Washington Post: Say, We Should Treat Trump With Professionalism, Not Partisanship

Fred Hiatt, the Washington Post editorial page editor, has an idea, but, that boat has already sailed, and may not ever make it back to port

Trump considers the media his enemy. We shouldn’t treat him as ours.
Our answer must be professionalism, not partisanship.

It is not unprecedented for a White House to view the media as the enemy — the “opposition party,” as presidential adviser Stephen K. Bannon labeled us last week.

But it is vital that we not become that party.

Hiatt goes on to mention that people (meaning other Democrats and media folks) were saying that the media needed to fight back, stop covering his tweets, label everything Trump says a lie, stop interviewing him, don’t be part of the “propaganda.”

The answer to dishonest or partisan journalism cannot be more partisan journalism, which would only harm our credibility and make civil discourse even less possible. The response to administration insults cannot be to remake ourselves in the mold of their accusations.

Our answer must be professionalism: to do our jobs according to the highest standards, as always.

Really, they’re decades too late for that. You could charitably go back to the broadcast where Walter Cronkite said the Vietnam War was lost. Certainly, the media was pretty partisan during the Reagan administration. For the more modern era, we could look at when the media sat on revelations about Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. We saw how they treated George W. Bush, and then became lapdogs for the Obama administration. We know that, had Hillary been a Republican, the media coverage would have been much, much different. There would have be constant articles about the relevant laws, and calls for a special prosecutor.

Can the Credentialed Media even see professionalism without the Hubble telescope anymore? Sure, there are some who are good. Jake Tapper and Mark Knoller come to mind, along with Jamie Dupree. Most act more as Democratic Party activists than professional journalists, and we must remember the constant freakouts from the opinion pages, which were mostly quiet during the Obama years.

We on The Post’s editorial page spent the better part of the past two years warning the country not to elect Donald Trump. We said he was unfit by temperament and experience, misguided on many issues and a potential danger to democratic norms.

Now we find ourselves in the unusual position of hoping to be proved wrong.

In other words, they spent the last two years in perpetual freakout, and Hiatt is excusing this behavior. He only wants the news side to be professional.

I am not complacent. There is nothing normal or healthy about a White House counselor telling the media it should “keep its mouth shut” for a while, nor about a president obsessing over his ratings, taunting those he calls his “enemies” and branding journalists “among the most dishonest human beings on earth.” Such attitudes should be frightening to all Americans, not just those of us who work in the business.

Aaaaaand Hiatt has his own hissy fit.

Now, look, I’m personally still leery of Trump. I’m willing to give him time to see what he will do. But, as I keep arguing on Twitter and in comments at other sites, if you think Trump is winging it, if you think he doesn’t know what he’s doing, if you’re, to use a George Bush word, missunderestimating him, then you’ve already lost. We saw this during the primaries, the general election, and since Trump won. You can bet that Trump, as a long time businessman, has action plans out the wazoo. You know the old saying about the Pentagon having plans to attack Canada? You can bet that Trump has deep plans.

And one of the action plans is probably entitled “How To F*ck With The Media.” When Trumpites said that “the media was on the ballot”, I argued that they weren’t, that Trump needed to focus more on Hillary and Democrats. I was wrong.

We all know that the Media Industrial Complex treats Republicans different from Democrats. We all knew that they would treat Trump in a certain way. Most of us on the Right have been calling for elected Republicans and their people to fight back against the news media and the Democrats. They rarely did. Under Bush 43, they decided not to discuss the constant personal attacks, and, forgot to defend their own policies.

Well, under Trump, he’s set the tone to be combative. He and his people are free to attack back. There are times that they might go too far, but, what they end up doing is making the media look ultra-partisan. The media brings up the inauguration attendance in an attempt to weaken Trump. Team Trump fights back. Then the media starts whining about this issue, which they created, and wonders why we’re still talking about it (as they continue talking about it.)

As Glenn Reynolds noted, he’s playing them. He’s gaslighting them. GOP figures are damned if they do, damned if they don’t. So, rather than be cowed, they should fight back. Trump is fighting back. He has the Credentialed Media spinning in circles, acting like ankle biters.

As far as what Fred Hiatt wants, it won’t happen. Partisanship and activism is too embedded in the Credentialed Media, especially those in positions of power.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post: Say, We Should Treat Trump With Professionalism, Not Partisanship »

If All You See…

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

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post debunking most of the media claims on Trump’s “Muslim ban.”

It’s dark haired girls week!

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove