Vox: Trump Advisor Makes It Tougher To Repeal Ocare Or Something

By William Teach January 5, 2017 – 7:06 am

Excitable Ezra Klein does his best to Voxsplain a comment by Kellanne Conway, but, utterly whiffs while simultaneously admitting that Obama lied his mom jeans posterior off

Trump’s “if you like your insurance, you can keep it” moment
One of Trump’s top advisers just made repealing Obamacare much, much harder.

Right there in the headline we see it: Obama lied. Let’s continue

On Monday, Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway was on Morning Joe and was asked about Obamacare. Her recitation of her boss’s position likely filled congressional Republicans with dread.

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/816380454848720896

Outside of the Leftist Bubble, it’s an innocuous comment which is saying “we want people to have health insurance.” Obama specifically stated that if you like your health insurance, you can keep it.” People couldn’t. And what they obtained to replace it was not as good and more expensive.

This raises one of the central unanswered questions about Donald Trump. We know he wants to repeal Obamacare. But why does he want to repeal it? And how much of a political price is he willing to pay to repeal it?

Congressional Republicans are willing to pay a huge political price to repeal Obamacare, just as congressional Democrats paid a political price for enacting it. They’re willing to pay this price because they think repealing Obamacare is important; for years, they have heard, and said, that Obamacare is socialism, it’s a job killer, it’s a government takeover, it’s endless debt, it’s the ruination of the best health care system in the world, it’s free stuff that will create a dependent underclass permanently loyal to the Democratic Party.

Yes, taking health insurance from tens of millions of people will be unpopular, but it needs to be done. Sacrifices must be made.

Except, every plan Republicans have crafted has made sure that people will have the same, if not better, health insurance. They’ve taken into account the associated costs and coverages, and worked to make sure they stay the same if not get better. They watched this fiasco, and plan to slow walk replacement so people are not harmed.

Interestingly, Klein as much as admits that Obamacare caused a lot of pain and problems for citizens.

Or it’s possible Trump will go along with his HHS pick and his party on this one and pass a law that rips health insurance from tens of millions of people and throws state health systems into chaos. But if he does that, then this clip of Conway, and his own words on 60 Minutes, is going to haunt him.

As it stands now, the systems are in chaos. Most insurers have dropped out. In quite a few areas, there is only one provider offering insurance. Premiums are skyrocketing, as are deductibles. Many people who have insurance cannot afford to use it. Jobs are being stifled because of the law. You know the hit parade. And it was all based on lies. The people seem to agree, as the collapse of the Democratic Party at the federal, state, and local levels began immediately after the passage of Ocare.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Vox: Trump Advisor Makes It Tougher To Repeal Ocare Or Something »

Posted in Healthcare, Liberal World | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

White Mentally Disabled Man Tortured In Chicago, Four In Custody

By William Teach January 5, 2017 – 6:47 am

I wonder if the Southern Poverty Law Center, which has been keeping track of so-called hate crimes since Trump won election, will blame this on Trump and his supporters. I wonder if Mr. Obama will make a statement about this. I wonder if the media will cover it properly

(Fox 32 Chicago) Chicago investigators are questioning four African-Americans after a Facebook Live video shows a group of people torturing a white mentally disabled man while someone yelled “F*** Trump!” and “F*** white people!”

Chicago police were made aware of the video Tuesday afternoon. A young African American woman streamed the video live on Facebook showing at least four people holding the young white man hostage.

In the video, the victim is repeatedly kicked and hit, his scalp is cut, all while he is tied up with his mouth taped shut.
***
The victim is … believed to have been held hostage and tortured in an apartment in the 3400 block of West Lexington on the West Side, Guglielmi said.

As Powerline’s John Hinderaker notes, this vicious crime is being whitewashed. The AP’s report makes no mention of the race of the attackers. Unless you watch the video report, you’d have no idea of the race of the attackers at the CBS Chicago report. The Chicago Tribune happily mentions that the victim is white, but fails to mention the race of the animals who tortured him.

I look around the national media players, and this is not a top story. Imagine if this was 4 white people torturing a disabled black man, yelling “f*** black people” and F*** Hillary!”

As Hinderaker notes

The Left’s insane hatred of Donald Trump has spun out of control, and there have been far too many instances of this sort of depraved violence. I don’t want to hear another damn word about “hate crimes” against minorities supposedly inspired by Donald Trump’s campaign or election, not unless they equal this level of depravity.

A goodly chunk of the “hate crimes” committed since the election have turned out to be hoaxes perpetrated by Trump haters. Here’s a real hate crime, committed by more Trump haters. And we’ve seen this type of Black militancy rising which is accompanied by White hatred since Ferguson. Perhaps Mr. Obama would like to address this before he leaves office.

Read: White Mentally Disabled Man Tortured In Chicago, Four In Custody »

Posted in Liberal World | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists: Say, That Warming Hiatus Actually Never Happened

By William Teach January 4, 2017 – 2:53 pm

Interestingly, many, many lead climate scientists have stated that the Great Pause was, in fact, happening. But, it proves inconvenient for the Cult of Climastrology. Hence, they have come up with well over 70 excuses for it. Now we get this

NOAA challenged the global warming ‘pause.’ Now new research says the agency was right

It may have been the most controversial climate change study in years.

In the summer of 2015, a team of federal scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration published a blockbuster paper in Science that appeared to wipe away one of global warming doubters’ favorite arguments. The skeptics had for years suggested that following the then-record warm year of 1998 and throughout the beginning of the 21st century, global warming had slowed down or “paused.” But the 2015 paper, led by NOAA’s Thomas Karl, employed an update to the agency’s influential temperature dataset, and in particular to its record of the planet’s ocean temperatures, to suggest that really, the recent period was perfectly consistent with the much longer warming trend. (snip)

That controversy is likely to be stirred anew in the wake of a new study, published Wednesday in Science Advances, that finds the NOAA scientists did the right thing in adjusting their dataset. In particular, the new research suggests that the NOAA scientists correctly adjusted their record of ocean temperatures in light of known biases in some observing systems — and indeed, that keepers of other top global temperature datasets should do likewise.

Essentially, what they did was create data out of nowhere adjust the ocean data upwards quite a bit to conform to their preconceived beliefs while leaving the land data alone. In essence, it was the “oceans ate my warming” argument on steroids.

This highly technical switch, in turn, had the effect of increasing the overall warming of the oceans in the new dataset — and helping to wipe out claims that there’d been any recent slowdown in the rate of climate change.

I remember reading about this in grade school science. If the data doesn’t conform to the hypothesis, then the data is wrong, and must be changed.

Read: Warmists: Say, That Warming Hiatus Actually Never Happened »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 4, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle making it hard for Other People to only buy local, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on crazy people.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Canadians Enjoying Their New Carbon Tax About As Much As You’d Expect

By William Teach January 4, 2017 – 10:30 am

When governments play social justice/climate justice games with citizen’s lives, things tend not to go well

Gas prices are rising: Here’s how it will make living in Canada more expensive

Canadians living in Alberta and Ontario saw gas prices spike in the New Year due to carbon pricing.

But don’t expect the price hikes to stop there.

“I think 2017 is probably going to be more expensive than the past two to three years, and not just for gasoline but also for diesel,” gasoline analyst Dan McTeague told Global News Tuesday. (snip)

An increase in fuel costs will also take a bite out of the budgets of non-drivers. Here’s a look at the various ways higher fuel prices will impact Canadians.

As you can expect, prices for just about everything will rise. And as prices rise, consumer spending will decrease. It’ll reduce people taking vacations. It will create a lot of problems for people out in the rural areas.

(Lethbridge Herald) Alberta’s carbon tax is now a reality, with the levy being implemented as of Jan. 1. The effects of the tax showed up immediately with prices at the pumps taking a sizable jump. The amount of the carbon levy added to gasoline was 4.5 cents per litre, but locally that hike followed a six-cent increase at some gas stations just before the new year, meaning the price at some pumps in Lethbridge is 10.5 cents per litre higher than it was last week, suggesting there are other factors involved than just the carbon tax.

It remains to be seen how that will affect the cost of other goods and services as the trickle-down effect takes place. The predictions in that regard are wide-ranging. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation estimated a carbon tax would mean an annual hit of $2,500 to the average household’s wallet. Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall has said the additional costs would be $1,250 per year. A Maclean’s magazine article in October noted Alberta government estimates were suggesting indirect costs of $100 to $200 per year for the average household. The Trudeau government, which had been pressuring provinces to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions or the feds would do it for them, hasn’t offered much in the way of projected costs to Canadian households.

When it comes to things like this, you can always expect the government assessment to be way to low when reality hits.

(Daily Herald Tribune) The government has said it’s using the carbon tax as a way of changing Albertans’ behaviour “by encouraging individuals and businesses to become more energy efficient.” Premier Rachel Notley drew fire last month after suggesting that some people might decide to walk or take a bus if gas becomes too expensive.

This rubbed Terry Vigen the wrong way.

“If you’re in the country and you gotta go to work and it’s 30 below? She’s out to lunch.”

Government should stop messing with people’s lives for their social experiments.

Vigen noted Australia’s failed experiment with its own unpopular carbon tax, which it eventually repealed. The same thing might happen here, he suggested.

He makes a good point. The parties that passed the carbon taxes in Australia were blown out in the following elections. In Queensland 2012, Labor lost so many seats they weren’t even a recognized political party. But, hey, Leftists, keep pushing for these types of policies for Everyone Else. You don’t even want to pay them yourselves.

Read: Canadians Enjoying Their New Carbon Tax About As Much As You’d Expect »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Sore Loser Symphony: Dems Look To Keep Trump Off 2020 Ballots

By William Teach January 4, 2017 – 8:18 am

It’s not even fun wackadoodle, like the Obama Birther movement. But, then, Democrats a crazy enough to yell at horses

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/797854636816338945

BTW, she was arrested for punching said horse. Anyhow

Blue-state lawmakers want to keep Trump off 2020 ballot unless he releases tax returns

Lawmakers in several deep-blue states want to require presidential candidates to release their tax returns in order to appear on the ballot in those states, a sharp rebuke of President-elect Donald Trump’s ongoing refusal to make his tax records public.

A pair of Maryland Democrats on Tuesday announced they would introduce a bill mandating the release of five years of tax returns, mirroring similar proposals in New York, Massachusetts, California and Maine.

If approved, the proposals could keep Trump from appearing on some ballots in 2020 if he continues breaking with the decades-long tradition of financial transparency and decides to seek a second term.

The state lawmakers say they want to enshrine into law what’s been a long-standing norm among presidential contenders: the public release of tax returns detailing sources of income, business interests and charitable giving.

And, yes, this might well be Constitutional, since this is about who can be on the ballot, as conditions like submitting signatures and paying a fee are allowable.

Senate Minority Leader J.B. Jennings (R-Baltimore County) said it should be up to voters to decide if they don’t want a president who hasn’t disclosed tax returns.

“To me, it just looks like sour grapes over the election,” said Jennings. “We don’t reveal our tax returns as legislators. Why are you doing it for the president and not every other office too?”

Because

Read: Sore Loser Symphony: Dems Look To Keep Trump Off 2020 Ballots »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats, Elections | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

On Obamacare Repeal, Republicans Use Same Game Used To Pass It

By William Teach January 4, 2017 – 8:01 am

This has liberals very freaked out, but, as David French notes, what comes around goes around, because, as Vox notes, Democrats cannot stop it

(Vox) The new Congress was sworn in on Tuesday, and the first thing it did was prepare to repeal Obamacare.

Senate Budget Committee Chair Michael Enzi (R-WY) introduced a budget resolution Tuesday that includes “reconciliation instructions” that enable Congress to repeal Obamacare with a simple Senate majority. Passing a budget resolution that includes those instructions will mean that the legislation can pass through the budget reconciliation process, in which bills cannot be filibustered.

That means Republicans will only need 50 of their 52 members in the Senate, and a bare majority in the House, to pass legislation repealing the Affordable Care Act. According to the Wall Street Journal, the budget resolution could be passed by both houses as early as next week.

Vox’s Dylan Matthews disingenuously forgets how Obamacare was actually passed, but, that’s what Liberals do

The idea that Republicans could junk Obamacare with a simple majority vote may sound baffling, given that Barack Obama famously had to wrangle together all 60 Senate Democrats in late 2009 to push the law through in the first place.

It was initially passed with 60, but, remember, they lost that vote when Scott Brown won, and instead of working with Republicans, they went with the highly partisan roadway, and pulled shenanigans leading to reconciliation.

What makes this possible is that Republicans aren’t actually going to repeal all of Obamacare, as my colleague Sarah Kliff has explained. But they’re going to repeal enough of it to reverse almost all of the coverage gains made under it.

Some things will be left intact, such as coverage for kids up to 26 and the pre-existing conditions rider. You can expect a serious amount of caterwauling from Democrats. Let’s consider just why Obamacare needs to be repealed and replaced

Repealing Obamacare affects everyone
Obamacare touches just about everyone.

…

“The ACA made changes in every part of the health care system,” said Larry Levitt, senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, of the Affordable Care Act. “Virtually everyone has been touched by the ACA.”

As we see from the headline, subhead, and third paragraph, this horrendous bill touches really everyone. The original intent was to make sure that the 40-45 million Americans without health insurance were able to get it. Then what gets passed, followed by all the rule making since, involves the federal government heavily in not just our health insurance, but our health care. Our business. And doesn’t really make it better. Nor less expensive.

Change is coming. Democrats need to get that through their minds. And, hey, I thought Liberals said they liked change? That said, Republicans need to be very careful to make sure the system stays calm as it transitions.

Done.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: On Obamacare Repeal, Republicans Use Same Game Used To Pass It »

Posted in Healthcare | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 3, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle in the wonderful progressive community of California, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Political Clown Parade, with a post on visitors to the White House.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

Idling Your Car During Climate Change Cold Days Is Bad For Climate Change

By William Teach January 3, 2017 – 10:23 am

Is it really necessary to idle a vehicle on a cold day? More importantly, are you dooming the planet when you do?

(Patch) Across the U.S., people with remote car starters sit in their kitchens sipping coffee while their car warms up in the driveway.

It’s a commonly-held belief that engines need to warm up before you hop in the car on days when the temperature drops below freezing. In fact, a 2009 study from Vanderbilt University found that most Americans think a car should idle for at least five minutes before its driven.

But that commonly held belief is wrong. And here’s why.

It comes down to vehicles using fuel injection now instead of carburetors, but, really, is it bad to let the oil and lubricants warm up? Not too mention warming up the engine so that hot air blows out, making the vehicle comfy, and being able to help get ice off the windows (that’s a big problem for me, living so close to the Neuse River)? Well, yeah, of course, we’re talking about the Cult of Climastrology

Every 10 minutes your car runs, it releases one pound of carbon dioxide, according to the Environmental Defense Fund. This greenhouse gas is the biggest contributor to global warming.

Breathing in carbon dioxide is also bad for your health, especially for children, the elderly and anyone with asthma. Breathing car exhaust has been linked to increased rates of cancer, heart and lung disease, asthma and allergies, according to The Madison Energy Group.

Interesting. That makes it appear as if the CO2 is at fault, rather than other pollutants. And uses a link which provides a 404 response.

Read: Idling Your Car During Climate Change Cold Days Is Bad For Climate Change »

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

Big Green Was A Big Loser In 2016

By William Teach January 3, 2017 – 8:04 am

There were many Big Losers in 2016. The media. Obama. Democrats. And, let’s face it, American Conservatism. The Washington Times’ Stephen Moore claims that Big Green was the biggest loser of 2016

The day after the presidential elections the executive director of the Sierra Club glumly called the Donald Trump victory “deeply disturbing for the nation and the planet.” Well, yes, if you’re a climate change alarmist who hates fossil fuels, you’re in for a bad four and maybe eight years.

Greenpeace executive director Annie Leonard was even more apocalyptic saying: “I never thought I’d have to write this. The election of Donald Trump as president has been devastating There’s no question, Donald Trump’s climate denial is staggering. He wants to shut down the EPA, cancel the Paris Climate Agreement, stop funding clean energy research and drill baby drill.” Ah, but if this is so crazy, why did he win?

The short answer is that Americans went to the polls and rejected environmental extremism among other things. The biggest loser on election night was the Big Green movement in America dedicated to the anti-prosperity proposition that to save the planet from extinction we have deindustrialize the U.S. and throw millions and millions of our fellow citizens out of their jobs. Voters turned thumbs down on the climate change lobby and rightly so. (snip)

In so many ways climate change was one of the primary issues that allowed Donald Trump to crash through the blue wall of the industrial Midwest. The Democrats’ preposterous opposition to building the Keystone XL pipeline which could create as many as 10,000 high-paying construction, welding, pipefitting, electrician jobs is emblematic of how the party that is supposed to represent union workers turned their backs on their own members and their families.

Climate change was a rather silent issue, being barely discussed during election season by the politicians. It didn’t make the news that much. Yet, people thought about it, and what the policies of Democrats had been and would be. Job killing, economy damaging, cost of living increasing, and governmental power increasing. And they voted against that in the places that mattered. If all those extra Hillary voters in California and Oregon and Washington want those policies, let them pass them and live under them.

The surprise of this election is that Democrats were surprised by the mass voter rejection of the radical climate change agenda. Every poll for the last five years at least has shown that climate change barely registers as a leading concern of American voters. Jobs and the economy were always issues number one and two, and global warming was usually close to last on the list. A 2015 Fox News poll found that only 3 percent of Americans believed that climate change was “the most important issue facing America today.” That means 97 percent disagreed with Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernard Sanders and Tom Steyer that global warming was the greatest threat to America. This didn’t stop Hillary Clinton from telling West Virginians that she would put every coal miner out of a job. Then she wonders why she got crushed in this unionized historically reliable Democratic state.

Moore goes on to note that the Democrats will only rise when they get rid of the climate change extremists in their party and start listening to the working Americans again. But that’s not who Democrats are anymore. They are elitists whose every policy is about increasing the size and dominance of Government, about spreading the tendrils of government into the lives of citizens. They do not want to give up that power.

Read: Big Green Was A Big Loser In 2016 »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove