…is the uniform of the notion of an endless climate war, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Liberals being shocked that Ocare is having issues.
Read: If All You See… »
…is the uniform of the notion of an endless climate war, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Liberals being shocked that Ocare is having issues.
Read: If All You See… »
Because why not? A cool newish technology that is growing in usage, where you can get a viewer that works really well for $20-30, so, hey, let’s throw Hotcoldwetdry in the mix!
How Virtual Reality Can Help Us Feel the Pain of Climate Change
It’s hard to comprehend the concept of oceans getting more acidic. Unless you become the coral.It’s not easy to get people exercised about ocean acidification. Yes, it’s a nasty consequence of climate change, a potential death sentence for oysters, clams, sea urchins and, most of all, coral. But it’s slow-motion extermination, out of sight of most humans, and that makes it difficult for us to feel much of a connection—let alone any responsibility—for the calamitous process.
Researchers at Stanford, however, believe a good way to help people become more aware of their impact on nature may lie in a particularly unnatural experience—virtual reality (VR) immersion. (snip)
The key was to have people become the coral.

Of course, there are all sorts of teachable moments. Not mentioned is the one about people taking fossil fueled trips to zoos and museums and aquariums and film festivals in fossil fueled vehicles to be whined at about ‘climate change’.
Read: Good News: Virtual Reality Will Totally Let Us Feel Climate Change’s Pain »
This is one of the lead opinion pieces in the NY Times today, and is proof that those highlighting that girls and women are being negatively affected by the transgender push, especially in schools. Writer Alexandra Brodsky seems a bit upset
Don’t Use Girls as Props to Fight Trans Rights
Last month, a Minnesota federal court received a complaint about rampant gender discrimination in one of the state’s school districts. The lawsuit claimed that girls were subject to harassment, barred from participating in athletics, and forced to transfer schools rather than tolerate a hostile environment.
It seems like the sort of case that feminist warriors, like my colleagues at the National Women’s Law Center, might bring. But the plaintiffs’ lawyers come from the Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative nonprofit organization that is elsewhere suing the federal government to stop it from protecting transgender students’ rights. The discrimination noted in the lawsuit stemmed from the presence of a transgender girl in the girls’ locker room.
See, the problem here (one of them) for Social Justice Warrior Alexandra is who is protecting these female children, not that they were exposed to a deviant, nor that they were having their privacy violated on multiple occasions. One would think that female groups would rush to the aid of these girls. Unfortunately, the Progressives have decided that the so-called rights of the gender confused are More Important than those of females, much as they’d deemed that radical Islam must be protected over the rights of women.
In the Minnesota lawsuit, Privacy Matters v. U.S. Department of Education, the A.D.F. attempts to tell a tale of gender-bending terror. Instead, the complaint reads, heartbreakingly, as the story of a transgender girl acting like any other girl — dancing in the locker room, expressing insecurities about her body — in the face of rejection by her peers.
And Ms. Brodsky will lie to make her case. It was a whole lot different than she describes, and her peers? Yeah, they were real girls, who didn’t appreciate all that this boy pretending to be a girl was doing.
The lawsuit celebrates the “fundamental right of bodily privacy,†which, the complaint argues, “is deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition and has long been recognized in the United States Constitution.â€
Can you not read the sneering in that, especially in light of the preceding paragraphs? Suddenly, privacy rights for all people, especially women, must be dismissed in favor of letting the gender confused, and those pretending, do whatever they want
The focus on privacy marks a shift in anti-trans strategy. Earlier efforts, like North Carolina’s House Bill 2, which limited bathroom access, relied on a dangerous myth that prohibiting discrimination against transgender people would allow predatory men to enter women’s restrooms. That approach is giving way to a new focus on privacy — narrowly defined to include only non-transgender women and girls.
See? Privacy for real females is silly! And, damnitall, how dare those big meanies on the Right mention privacy! Only liberals are allowed to do this, and only when it comes to abortion on demand!
The claim depends on the belief that transgender girls are actually boys.
They are boys. It’s great how liberals tell us that they are the party of Science, yet fail basic biology.
The organization bringing the suit sees no problem in the girls’ locker room if there are no transgender girls present. But the fake-feminist privacy argument is apparently more tolerable to liberal minds — and perhaps more dangerous for that reason.
Privacy rights are now fake? How about that.
When schools fail to value female athletes, or punish girls for “unladylike†outfits, they reinforce narrow visions of what makes a good woman. The same thing happens when they tell a girl she has to change in a different locker room solely because she is transgender.
Not a girl. Boy. And real girls? Meet the liberals big bus.
Read: NY Times Is Rather Upset That Girls Are Used To Fight The Gender Confused Push »
This is the question that is starting to grow. I’m seeing people say that if Hillary wins, there should be a revolt. One thing you cannot say about Trump supporters is that they are not insanely passionate about electing Trump. And most Republicans are very disturbed that Hillary might win (well, will probably win, a problem that could have been avoided if A) a good candidate had been selected during the GOP primaries, or B) Trump was a good campaigner that stuck to the issues and did the things necessary to win). And we get this
(Think Progress) Joe Walsh, who was a United States congressman from 2011 until 2013, declared on Wednesday afternoon that he will take up arms if Donald Trump is not elected to the presidency.
He tweeted this
On November 8th, I'm voting for Trump.
On November 9th, if Trump loses, I'm grabbing my musket.
You in?
— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) October 26, 2016
Soopermexican is less than impressed. The thing is, this is showing up more and more on Twitter and in comments at websites from blogs to major news outlets. And then we have this from the Daily Caller, an interesting introspection
History Professor Warns America: 2016 Election Could Prompt Civil War [VIDEO]
A professor who specializes in the Civil War appeared on a special edition of “The Jim Bakker Show†last week to warn America that the 2016 presidential election could lead to another secessionist melee.
“I’m a civil war historian,†the Montreat College professor, William Forstchen, explained by way of introduction.
The U.S. election of 1860 “is the closest I can parallel this to,†Forstchen said.
“And we all know what the price was,†the professor then said. “When we went to a civil war, they killed 660,000 young men because we became so divided.â€
He went on to say how important it was to vote regardless, as the House and Senate are important. Then
Forstchen failed to explain how the results of the 2016 election will hasten — or prevent — a civil war. He also did not specifically mention or endorse any candidates for office.
And he was followed by Baptist pastor Carl Gallups, who seems to be rather a nutjob, as he believes the creation of Israel made the prophecy clock start ticking, thinks the Sandy Hook shooting never happened, and that neither Cruz nor Rubio would be eligible to be president due to the circumstances of their birth.
The Daily Caller places this under the tag of “nutty professors.” They are. But, this sentiment of armed rebellion, secession, and even civil war has been growing. Usually, those who are going crazy and are super passionate during general elections are the Democrat voters. In this case, the Trump supporters. Should we be concerned if Trump loses? That’s the question. Usually, the answer would be “this is just some nutters yammering and being blowhards”, so, no worries, but, as much as I’ve seen it, I’m not so sure about the answer.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
I wonder how enthused the NY Times Editorial Board members would be if the states they reside in initiated a carbon tax, which would hit them personally as well as their employer?
Washington State’s Ambitious Carbon Tax Proposal
Anybody hoping for a robust national discussion about climate change this election year has been sorely disappointed. But one state, Washington, has been having just such a debate, thanks to an ambitious ballot proposal that would impose a tax on carbon emissions.
The proposal, Initiative 732, started as a long-shot campaign by an economist and standup comedian, Yoram Bauman, but it has gained public support and become a viable effort. It would impose a tax on greenhouse gas emissions generated by fossil fuels like petroleum, gas and coal. The tax would start at $15 per metric ton next year, increase to $25 a ton in 2018 and then rise gradually over a few decades until it hits $100 a ton in 2016 dollars. (A typical passenger car emits about five metric tons of carbon dioxide in a year.) The money raised by the tax would go to lowering the state sales tax, effectively eliminating a business tax on manufacturers and giving up to $1,500 in tax credits to low-income residents.
They won’t admit it, but the reason Progressives love this type of carbon tax is because citizens will see their cost of living skyrocket, then see the helpful hand of government give them some money to offset the rise. Not enough to fully offset, mind you. Enough to make them more dependent on government, with government spinning a yarn that it wasn’t the fault of the carbon tax, but, those evil fossil fuels companies and such.
Of course, Warmist forces will say “eh, it’s not a lot of money. $125 in 2018 to Save The Planet? No biggie.” Of course, this ignores that every business seeing a rise will pass the costs on to the consumer.
Climate scientists and economists have long said that one of the best ways to fight climate change is to put a price on greenhouse gas emissions and raise that price over time, which would encourage the switch to cleaner energy sources, like solar and wind. The initiative’s approach is based on a carbon tax that British Columbia put in place in 2008. Ireland and Sweden also have such taxes.
Of course, greenhouse gases have increased in B.C. since 2010, as the great recession started to end. The B.C. gross domestic product has lagged behind the rest of Canada. The cost of living has gone up. Sweden? Do they even have an economy anymore? Ireland does well, though, because of their super-low corporate taxes.
Interestingly, the Washington State Democratic Party came out against Initiative 732, as did many Democratic voting organizations, mostly because it dares lower sales, personal, and corporate taxes. Apparently, they just want to hose citizens.
The last poll taken, back in July, has it as 52% for, 39% against, and 8% not sure. Hey, if the citizens of Washington want this, that’s on them. And there’s no whining when they get results they didn’t think would happen. Like higher costs of living, lower GDP, higher fuel and food costs, decreased employment, companies leaving the state, and so forth.
Read: NY Times Is Super Enthused By A Carbon Tax….In Washington State »
…is the need to live like Native Americans from 1,000 years ago, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny, with a post on the latest from Florida.
Read: If All You See… »
Obamacare is going downhill, just as predicted. Democrats know it, which is why they’re trying to get Republicans to fix it
https://twitter.com/CounterMoonbat/status/790686313485770753
Because the worst is yet to come
(NY Post) Still ahead: Budget crises in the states that accepted temporary federal bribes to massively expand their Medicaid rolls. More premium hikes on the exchanges, as ever fewer healthy people sign up for coverage — prompting even lower enrollment, and more price hikes, in a sharp “death spiral.â€
The “Cadillac tax†will kick in soon, too — so if your union has won great health coverage at the bargaining table, that plan will pay a penalty to Uncle Sam.
The legal challenges aren’t done yet, either.
The entire thing is unsustainable, so
Now ObamaCare is collapsing, and presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton vows to “fix†it with new spending and even more Washington control of the market. If she gets Democratic majorities in Congress, she’ll keep that promise — and the madness will grow.
The Democrats next action is to implement a public option, which they’re already calling for, as insurers limit their Exchange offerings, if not drop out altogether, as we’ve seen happening. This is not a bug of Ocare, it’s a feature. And the next stage is a full single payer system. Ocare was just a step in the direction.
Or, maybe it’s because you refuse to spread awareness of ‘climate change’. Or don’t want to give up their money and liberty to government. This is the kind of thing we’re getting from Scientific American these days (which has been moving in the direction of utter politicization, much like Nature)
Dreaded Polar Vortex May Be Shifting
The polar vortex in recent years has brought the kind of miserable cold to northern states that made it hard to breathe outside. We’re probably in for more of the same.
In other words, “winter”. But, there’s no such thing as natural winter in Warmist World
That’s the finding of a new study published yesterday in the journal Nature that finds that as the Arctic warms, it is shifting the polar vortex to Europe. That in turn will bring more bursts of frigid cold to North America.
Those temperature drops could lead to miserable days in February and March, the research finds. Conversely, those drops in temperature could offset some of global warming’s effect in those regions, said Martyn Chipperfield, professor of atmospheric chemistry at the University of Leeds and a co-author of the paper.
“Climate change can lead to extremes; it’s not like a regular change, everyone to the same extent at all times and places,†he said. “Despite the overall warming, you can get in places like the Northeastern U.S. extreme cold events. That’s consistent with climate change and global warming.â€
See? Winter cold and snow and ice and stuff is not unnatural anymore, all because you refuse to give up meat and pay carbon taxes.
Still, don’t expect prolonged periods of cold every winter, Chipperfield said. Climate change increases periods of extreme weather, but that doesn’t mean every winter will bring the effects of the polar vortex, he said.
“You can get regional occurrences of cold temperatures despite what we think is an overall move to a warmer climate,†he said, adding, “Climate change can lead to more extreme events, not just a shift in the average.â€
More and more, the yammering from Warmists exposes that this really is a cult, not a scientific endeavor.
Read: The Polar Vortex Is Going To Get Worse, And It’s Your Fault For Driving A Fossil Fueled Vehicle »
I actually had a funny little NY Times Editorial Board piece on Hotcoldwetdry teed up, but, this one is bugging the hell out of me
(NBC News)Â With two weeks until Election Day, Mike Pence has squared up his message for Republicans: “Come home.”
The GOP vice presidential candidate repeated the line seven times at a campaign rally on Monday afternoon.
“I want to submit to all of you, it’s time to reach out to all of our Republican and conservative friends and say with one voice: ‘It’s time to come home and elect Donald Trump as the next president of the United States,'” Pence emphatically told a crowd of several hundred supporters at a Salisbury, North Carolina, campaign stop.
Pence asserted that their ticket has “won over independents” and “many southern Democrats,” yet in recent weeks, Trump has lost the support of a litany of Republican lawmakers, effectively fracturing the party amid depressed poll numbers.
See here’s the problem: he’s not asking for our votes, he’s deeming the way we should vote. Throughout this whole Trump fiasco, I’ve mentioned this numerous times, namely, that Trump won’t ask for our votes. He’s come out with some good plans and such, ones which would be great if not attached to the name Trump.*
But politicians still need to ask for our votes. I don’t mean by name, but asking groups for their votes. Trump and company have asked Bernie fans for their votes. Blacks. Democrats. Other groups. But, not conservatives, and not really Republicans. He’s said he didn’t need our votes.
So, this “come home” schtick has annoyed me more and more as the day wore on, politically. Perhaps Pence should come home and get back to his conservative roots.
*This was meant more as a backhanded compliment towards Trump. He has released some excellent plans, such as the one from Gettysburg and his SCOTUS picks. If, say, the plans and such were attached to Rubio, Cruz, or some other Republican, #NeverTrump would be super thrilled. They’d say that, while some were more pie in the sky, which we get during elections, the plans and such were great. But, because they come from Trump, they are ignored.
Read: Mike Pence to GOP: ‘It’s Time to Come Home’ Or Something »