Washington Post: How Dare Exxon-Mobile Stand On Their First Amendment Rights!

By William Teach June 26, 2016 – 7:41 am

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! »

Posted in Global Warming, Unhinged Tools | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 25, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…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… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Man With Largest Carbon Footprint In World: Earth Will Soon Be Underwater If Poor People Get Energy

By William Teach June 25, 2016 – 12:36 pm

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)  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.”

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 »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Barry Obama, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Bipartisan House Group Drafts “Compromise” Watch List Gun Ban Bill Or Something

By William Teach June 25, 2016 – 7:42 am

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 »

Posted in Constitution | 26 Comments | Trackback URL

DNC Committee Adopts Measure To Replace Workers With Robots

By William Teach June 25, 2016 – 7:11 am

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

  • Reduce the workforce. This can occur either through terminations, or simply not replacing staff when they leave
  • Replace full time workers with part time workers, providing coverage for peak times while running with a lean full time staff
  • Limiting hours for full timers
  • Replacing workers with automation

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 »

Posted in Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

BrExit Is Totally Bad For Climate Change Or Something

By William Teach June 24, 2016 – 5:47 pm

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 »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 24, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…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… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Climate Change Makes Fires So Hot Now That They Melt Stoves

By William Teach June 24, 2016 – 10:30 am

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 »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

In Scotland, Trump Hails Britain Leaving The EU

By William Teach June 24, 2016 – 7:46 am

In case you missed it, Brits voted to leave the European Union, what was called BrExit, by a margin of 51.9% to 48.1%. The UK Telegraph has an interesting breakdown of the vote by UK nation and area.

Now, many wondered why Donald Trump would take a few days in the middle of a campaign to head over to Scotland to re-open his golf course. Perhaps he was counting on using the vote, especially if Leave won, as a means to push his campaign

(Reuters) U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump thrust himself into the heart of Britain’s internal struggle on Friday, saying Britons had retaken control of their country by voting to leave the European Union.

In Scotland to reopen a golf resort, the wealthy New York businessman stopped to take questions from reporters after arriving in his signature helicopter at Turnberry near his clubhouse resort, a Scottish flag blowing in the wind.

Asked about Thursday’s down-to-the-wire British vote, Trump said: “They took back control of their country. It’s a great thing.” He said people all over the world were angry, adding: “They’re angry over borders, they’re angry over people coming into the country and taking over.”

In a written statement Trump, 70, said Americans would have a chance “to re-declare their independence” and “reject today’s rule by the global elite” when they vote on Nov. 8 for a U.S. president to succeed President Barack Obama, a Democrat who had urged Britons to stay in the EU.

Right now, Trump is also taking more questions, which I’m watching live. He’s actually doing a good job, giving clear, concise answers before moving on to other questions, and he’s taking quite a few. He even managed, thanks to a question, to take a jab at Obama over Obama stating that BrExit could move the U.K. to the back of the queue on US trade deals. Trump made sure to say this would not happen with his administration.

He’s making some great points on the unfettered and barely controlled immigration from other countries, especially those with Islamist background, causing major issues within the host countries.

Many in the media are rather shocked that Trump would use the occasion to pimp his golf course and hotel interests. He was just asked if it was appropriate for him to be in Scotland. He said “yeah, because I support my children” and moved on.

Meanwhile, The NY Times’ Jim Yardley makes a good point

From Brussels to Berlin to Washington, leaders of the Western democratic world awoke Friday morning to a blunt, once-unthinkable rebuke delivered by the flinty citizens of a small island nation in the North Atlantic. Populist anger against the established political order had finally boiled over. (snip)

Even as the European Union began to grapple with a new and potentially destabilizing period of political uncertainty, the British vote also will inevitably be seized upon as further evidence of deepening public unease with the global economic order. Globalization and economic liberalization have produced winners and losers — and the big “Leave” vote in economically stagnant regions of Britain suggests that many of those who have lost out are fed up.

Time and again, the European Union has navigated political crises during the past decade with a whack-a-mole response that has maintained the status quo and the bloc’s lumbering forward momentum toward greater integration — without directly confronting the roiling public discontent beneath the surface.

There are now moves in France and Holland to hold referendum’s like Britain’s. Perhaps people are tired of having everything dictated to them by elected and un-elected elites.

Read: In Scotland, Trump Hails Britain Leaving The EU »

Posted in Donald Trump, Europe | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Dozens Of Congressional Dems Involved In Anti-Gun Sit In Own Firearms

By William Teach June 24, 2016 – 6:55 am

One has to wonder, if these same Democrats involved in the toddler-ocracy were suddenly placed on one of the secretive lists with virtually no way to get off via Due Process, would they turn in their firearms? Would they have a similar fit if they were disarmed? Would they mad if they were being stalked and were denied the purchase of a firearm? And, since they all think that guns are evil and lead to more shootings, will they say whether they have given up their own weapons?

(Heat Street) Congressional Democrats ended their 25-hour sit-in on the House floor this afternoon, failing to force a vote on two pieces of gun legislation. The controversial sit-in included 26 Democratic lawmakers who themselves own guns, Heat Street learned after examining 2013 USA Today data on congressional firearms ownership. The participants also included 12 more Democrats in Congress who either didn’t respond to USA Today’s gun survey or declined to say whether or not they possessed a firearm.

Granted, that was a survey from 2013, and things can certainly have changed for the ownership since then. But, it’s doubtful.

You also have to know that many of the Democrats who refused to answer probably own a firearm. And others who surely lied about not owning a firearm. That’s what Democrats do. Not all, of course, because even some Republicans noted that it was none of anyone’s “damned business”. There were a few that were proud, such as Joe Manchin, who stated in the USA Today article “Why would anybody not own a gun?”

Among those who participated and complained include Keith Ellison, Mike Thompson, and John Carney. You also had whining from Dem Senators, such as Harry Reid, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Tammy Baldwin. All gun owners.

Interestingly, Congress Critters are allowed to carry in their offices, but, the weapons must be unloaded and secured for the corridors. Furthermore, CCs are not subject to the laws of Washington, D.C. They can act as if they are in their home state.

Meanwhile, this is supposedly just the start of the guerrilla actions for the Dems in attempting to violate multiple Amendments in the Bill of Rights. And other things

(Politico) Already rank-and-file Democrats, energized by nationwide publicity and praise they received for occupying the House floor over demands for a gun vote, are saying they’ll likely use the same strategy again.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), for example, thinks a sit-in demonstration could force Republican leadership’s hands on what she called “economic justice issues,” like the minimum wage. And Rep. Maxine Waters of California said at the end of the protest Thursday that she would be ready to seize the House floor again over the gun matter when lawmakers return from their July 4 recess.

“It’s a new day in Washington; it’s a new way to fight,” said Democratic Caucus Vice Chairman Joe Crowley on the House floor in the wee hours of Thursday morning. The New York lawmaker elaborated in an interview on the House steps a few hours later: “The American people want and expect the House to do something, and they’re not just going to take silence anymore. We’re going to get in the way until we see action.”

Refer back to the “toddler-ocracy” link at the top of this post.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: Dozens Of Congressional Dems Involved In Anti-Gun Sit In Own Firearms »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 14 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove