…is a horrible fossil fueled airplane, which Everyone Else should be restricted from using, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Coyote Blog, with a post on whether Brexit was about racism or tea kettles.
It’s Brits week!
Read: If All You See… »
Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America, the first Sunday of summer! This pinup is by Baron Von Lind, with a wee bit of help.
What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15
As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets†calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me
Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!
Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.
Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »
Over the years, Progressives have had a love-hate relationship with Free Speech. They love it for themselves, and despise it for anyone who dares have a divergent viewpoint and actually speaks up. The same could be said of the Fourth Amendment, in which people shall be “secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects…” Quite frankly, their not big fans of the original Bill of Rights at all, except in the cases where it helps themselves, then they are all about screaming about their Rights. And the Washington Post’s Robert Post is very vexed over Exxon Mobile
Exxon-Mobil is abusing the first amendment
Global warming is perhaps the single most significant threat facing the future of humanity on this planet. It is likely to wreak havoc on the economy, including, most especially, on the stocks of companies that sell hydrocarbon energy products. If large oil companies have deliberately misinformed investors about their knowledge of global warming, they may have committed serious commercial fraud.
The operative word is “if”. See, here’s the thing: you have to prove fraud, and you cannot legally do it on a fishing expedition, using the power of the Government to violate 1st and 4th protections. Heck, 5th Amendment, as well, since Government is violating due process.
But, first you have to prove that the assertion that Mankind is mostly/solely responsible for the Modern Warm Period, and will create massive harm in the future, is real. Is scientifically proven.
Of course, Post brings up, as Warmists like to do, the tobacco lawsuits. Was there fraud? Sure. It was easily proven that tobacco was bad for people, especially with all the chemicals put in cigarettes. Anthropogenic climate change has not been proven to any degree. Yammering that the science is settled is not proof. Circumstantial evidence is not proof. Saying that because CO2 has risen and man drives fossil fueled vehicles, therefore it is Mankind’s fault is not proof.
The obvious point, which remarkably bears repeating, is that there are circumstances when scientific theories must remain open and subject to challenge, and there are circumstances when the government must act to protect the integrity of the market, even if it requires determining the truth or falsity of those theories. Public debate must be protected, but fraud must also be suppressed. Fraud is especially egregious because it is committed when a seller does not himself believe the hokum he foists on an unwitting public.
You cannot have robust debate, nor public debate, when one side attempts to use the power of government to shut down other viewpoints. Even within the scientific community, including the IPCC, there has been much uncertainty. Since that is the case, how can one prove fraud when the Cult of Climastrology cannot even prove that their Beliefs are 100% verifiable? They don’t care, because this is political, not scientific. It is a witch hunt, going after a company they love to hate.
It may be that after investigation the attorneys general do not find evidence that ExxonMobil has committed fraud. I do not prejudge the question. The investigation is now entering its discovery phase, which means it is gathering evidence to determine whether fraud has actually been committed.
But, there must be evidence of fraud prior to any investigation, and this is a fishing expedition. You see the position of the Warmist: no prejudging, which means “damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead” in trampling Constitutional protections in favor of cultish beliefs.
It is grossly irresponsible to invoke the First Amendment in such contexts. But we are witnessing an increasing tendency to use the First Amendment to unravel ordinary business regulations. This is heartbreaking at a time when we need a strong First Amendment for more important democratic purposes than using a constitutional noose to strangle basic economic regulation.
Damn that pesky Free Speech clause! How dare anyone use it in a way that Leftists disapprove! They’re involved in Wrongthink! They must be stopped!
The tobacco companies knew their products were dangerous. Climate change? 95% of the models failed. Doesn’t sound like science to me, more like a difference of opinion. One thing you can always count on Liberals for is their belief that THEIR priorities require that others give up their Rights.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Washington Post: How Dare Exxon-Mobile Stand On Their First Amendment Rights! »
…is an evil water intensive golf course, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The Jawa Report, with a post on Hillary cc’ing the Muslim Brotherhood on the Benghazi lie.
Read: If All You See… »
Barack Obama, a man with a monsterous sized carbon footprint, took a long fossil fueled trip to Seattle for some fundraisers. This required a break from living the highlife in a large residence which uses quite a bit of energy. So, he jumped on a fossil fueled helicopter to the airport, took a FF jumbo jet, accompanied by a backup jumbo jet and several fighter jets, then jumped in a FF limo, accompanied by well over a dozen other FF vehicles. And scheduled an “official” event so he didn’t have to offer reimbursement for the use of Air Force 1
(Breitbart) Â President Barack Obama joined Mark Zuckerberg on Facebook Live to talk about entrepreneurship, but he also warned that as more economies grew around the world, their energy needs would destroy the planet as a result of climate change.
“There are entire continents, sub-Saharan Africa or the Indian sub-continent where people are developing rapidly, they’re getting connected,†he said. “They’re going to need electricity, they’re going to need energy, but if they duplicate the ways that we produce energy here, or have in the past, then the entire planet is under water.â€
In other words, he doesn’t want those icky Black and dark skinned people in the 3rd World to have all the advantages of low cost, reliable, dependable energy like he has. He also ignores that the sea rise in the 20th Century was exactly average, at 7 inches, when we should have expected double that, at a minimum. Furthermore, sea rise is not accelerating. Nor is it unusual during Holocene warm periods.
And then Obama will reverse the whole trip to Seattle to head back to D.C., leaving around 935am PT.
Read: Man With Largest Carbon Footprint In World: Earth Will Soon Be Underwater If Poor People Get Energy »
It’s bipartisan, folks, just like the Collins bill!
(ABC News) Hoping to cut through the gridlock around gun control, a bipartisan group of House members introduced a gun control compromise Friday identical to the measure proposed by Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, after the Orlando nightclub shooting.
The proposal from Reps. Seth Moulton, D-Massachusetts, Carlos Curbelo, R-Florida, Scott Rigell, R-Virginia, and Bob Dold, R-Illinois, would prevent people on the federal government’s no-fly and Selectee lists from buying guns, and provide a mechanism to appeal a denial.
“Simple reforms like this are demanded by the American people,” Moulton said in a news conference.
Identical to the Collins bill. Remember that. No article that I can find, including from the VOA, Reuters, and Washington Post, actually describe the mechanism for appeal. How it works, which courts, etc. Supposedly, the AG would have the burden of proof.
Of course, the proof is in the text, and H.R. 5576 removes discovery, limits, if not does away, with the ability for the accused to see the secretive information that landed the citizen on one of these lists, and really does little to limit the reason why someone ended up on the list. And the lawyer fees? They shall be “reasonable”, which doesn’t mean “all.”
Katie Pavlich delved deep into the Collins bill itself, noting
2. After being stripped of their Second Amendment rights for landing on a No-Fly list, Americans can retroactively seek due process through appealing a denial in court. Further, attorney fees can be recovered so long as a a defendant wins their case against the U.S. government? After hours, days, weeks and potentially years spent buried in paperwork, government bureaucracy, missed work, stress and thousands of attorney’s fees to prove innocence? How generous….Americans can’t even get through the DMV in a timely fashion, not to mention getting through a court appeal with the federal government after being improperly placed on a secret list.
and
3. If classified information is involved in an appeal and must be protected, it will be impossible for a regular, every day American who is innocent but on the lists to make their case and quickly win an appeal.
Sounds great. Oh, and then there is this
But the lawmakers started working on the proposal before Democrats waged a 25-hour sit-in on the House floor for gun control votes, a tactic that exasperated Republicans and emboldened Democrats.
Which now means that the Democrats have scuttled any attempt to push through even a terrible but not as bad as most of the others “bipartisan” bill such as this one, because most Republicans have tuned out after the Democrat temper tantrum. So, perhaps Democrats did all the Americans who are in favor of their Constitutional rights a favor.
Read: Bipartisan House Group Drafts “Compromise” Watch List Gun Ban Bill Or Something »
The committee drafting the platform for the Democratic National Convention have hit upon a great idea, which would see their low wage peeps let go, turned to part timers, or replaced with robots
(The Hill) Democrats’ platform drafting committee took a first step toward giving Bernie Sanders a major concession, voting to adopt language in support of a $15 minimum wage.
The committee, which will continue drafting the party’s guiding document Saturday, also aligned itself with Sanders’s support for progressive ideas such as abolishing the death penalty and expanding Social Security, the Associated Press reported. The minimum wage language adopted echoes a common refrain by Sanders, who has called the current federal minimum of $7.25 a “starvation wage.”
What happens when the minimum wage is raised in most areas? Business owners can do one or more things
Who will this hurt? A goodly chunk of the Democrats base. It won’t hurt the big wig Democrat donors and supporters. But, this is one the populist measures Dems need to patronize the Bernie supporters and #FightFor15 folks.
It will help those who provide automation services, though. That industry would do great!
To be clear, the platform does have to be adopted by the full committee at the next meeting. It surely will.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: DNC Committee Adopts Measure To Replace Workers With Robots »
Why, yes, of course the Cult of Climastrology made sure to link ‘climate change’ to BrExit. They did it before the vote, and now that those looking for freedom and all the other things the Leave movement was about, the Warmists are still whining. Here’s Chris Mooney
Why an E.U. without Britain is bad news for the fight against climate change
It’s not just the upheaval in global financial markets.
Now that Britain has voted to leave the European Union, there may also be negative consequences for international climate change policy, a number of climate change advocates and analysts say.
Of course, as Mooney goes on to say, they really do not know what will happen. Will the U.K. kinda be a part of the EU’s climate goals? Will they go their own way? What they do know is this at the end
But hey, at least there’s one rather paradoxical (and, frankly, sad) potential upside for international climate policy. As Ed King of Climate Home noted, as an expected British economic downturn caused by the Brexit kicks in, “the resulting economic slump could lead to a fall in greenhouse gas emissions.†Roaring economies generally produce considerably more greenhouse gases than slowing ones.
So even as Britain’s departure throws international climate policy into turmoil, it might slightly lessen global emissions.
Interesting. Warmists are hoping for a financial downturn, which hurts actual people, as opposed to the computer generated ones that the computer says will be hurt by tiny amounts of CO2, in order to reduce greenhouse gas output. They do not care.
Oh, and lots of Warmists expect the UK to continue on and follow the EU rules about ‘climate change’ as if nothing has happened. Screw the people who wanted out. This is the Progressive version of democracy. They do not care about freedom and liberty, and they really do not care if people are hurt for their pet cult.
Read: BrExit Is Totally Bad For Climate Change Or Something »
…is horrible water intensive golf course, probably owned by that evil Denier Donald Trump, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Maggie’s Farm, with a post asking an un-PC question.
Read: If All You See… »
The first thing that caught my attention with this University Of Brokeifornia article was the headline, Why the climate change fight needs a new type of entrepreneur, figuring that writer Andy Murdock was going to argue for more Government intervention in creating new entrepreneurs. And it it does include that
Policies have proven to be effective to change behavior, and can provide opportunities for clean tech businesses to gain a competitive advantage. Soliculture, Carter’s own startup that sells solar greenhouse technology originally developed in her UC Santa Cruz lab, has benefited from the tax rebates available to consumers who invest in solar building projects.
Here’s Da Crazy, where, apparently, because Other People drive fossil fueled vehicles, fire is now hotter
“It’s only been in the last five years that we’ve seen the real impacts of climate change on our livelihood, and that’s going to cause the right situation for entrepreneurs to play a role in climate change mitigation,†said UC Santa Cruz physics professor and tech entrepreneur Sue Carter.
The impact of climate change couldn’t be more real to Carter. In 2015, her house burned to the ground in California’s massive Butte fire, during the worst wildfire year on record in the western U.S.
“It was so hot that even the wood burning stove was completely melted,†said Carter.
When climate change is a vague, distant concept, it’s easy to ignore. When your house burns to the ground, you pay attention. But where others might have just seen tragedy, as both a researcher and entrepreneur, Carter saw opportunity.
Read: Climate Change Makes Fires So Hot Now That They Melt Stoves »
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
