Democrats Introduce ‘Climate Change’ Bonds Bill, Say You’re Unpatriotic If You Do Not Buy Them

By William Teach April 28, 2016 – 8:09 am

It has zero chance of passing a Republican Congress, it will never even make it out of committee. This is a new one in regards to using Other People’s money, though

(The Hill) Two Senate Democrats have introduced a bill to create a new climate change adaptation fund to be paid for through new federal bonds.

The bond program — from Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) — would provide up to $200 million annually for a Commerce Department grant program to fund climate change adaptation work around the country.

Introducing the bill on Wednesday, Boxer and Durbin compared the climate change bond program to the war bonds sold by the federal government during the World Wars.

Except, those wars were real, based on real issues. If Barbara and Dick really cared, they’d stop traveling across the country using fossil fuels.

Boxer said the bonds would let Americans literally buy into federal climate change work.

In other words, they will be forced to buy those bonds when all is said and done, and their patriotism will be questioned if they don’t.

“It gives the American people the chance to adapt to what is coming while we fight to reduce the ravages,” she said at a press conference. “We already see the ravages have started.”

Ravages!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The fund would tap an expert committee — made up of bipartisan appointments — to vet projects designed to adapt to climate change, focusing on everything from droughts to flooding to severe weather events.

In other words, the weather. Things that have always happened, and will always happen.

Boxer is super excited

Funny how all this seems to enable more government. Because that is what it does. But, if you don’t want to buy climate bonds, you’re unpatriotic (you thought I was being over the top earlier in the post and in the headline, didn’t you)

The stupid, it burns!

Read: Democrats Introduce ‘Climate Change’ Bonds Bill, Say You’re Unpatriotic If You Do Not Buy Them »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Democrats, Global Warming | 23 Comments | Trackback URL

Ted Cruz Picks Carly Fiorina As Running Mate: Good Idea Or Bad One?

By William Teach April 28, 2016 – 7:52 am

Let’s face facts: there is really no path for Ted Cruz to obtain the requisite number of delegates to win the nomination prior to the Republican National Convention. He could certainly win on a 2nd, 3rd, etc ballot at the convention. But, what’s with this pick?

(Politico) Ted Cruz announced Wednesday that Carly Fiorina will be his vice presidential nominee if he’s the Republican Party’s pick for president.

If nominated, “I will run on a ticket with my vice-presidential nominee, Carly Fiorina,” the Texas senator said at an Indiana rally before the crowd began chanting “Carly.”

The two appeared together in an hour-long event in Indianapolis, with Cruz alternating between lauding Fiorina and maintaining that he has a path forward in the race despite suffering a series of losses over the last two weeks. Fiorina, who followed Cruz, shared stories about her own background and about Cruz, and even sang to his two young daughters from the stage, as she also railed against Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.

Fiorina, a former Hewlett-Packard CEO, has been among Cruz’s most loyal and active surrogates since she ended her own 2016 GOP presidential bid after a poor finish in New Hampshire in February.

Carly gave it a good run, but, could never catch any serious traction during the race, much like quite a few of the other 16 candidates playing a political version of survivor. She spoke well, and she was never shy in attacking, get this, Democrats. Her focus tended to be more on attacking Democrats, and especially Hillary, rather than treating other Republicans like the enemy. Heck, I just listened to her smack Barbara Boxer around in a coherent, effective manner regarding a snarky Boxer tweet.

But, is picking Carly a good idea? If you look at On The Issues, she’s a politician who says the things Conservatives love. Anti-illegal immigration, pro-2nd Amendment, pro-business, anti-Obamacare, pro-government reform, pro-energy. She’s rated as a “libertarian-leaning conservative.” More right-leaning than either Trump or his (lately unhinged) surrogate Sarah Palin.

But, let’s consider what Doug Ross wrote in researching Carly Fiorina. A few snippets

  • During her Senate run, she endorsed the California DREAM Act, which grants in-state tuition to illegal immigrants.
  • During her failed run at the Senate, the former HP CEO received plenty of heat about “hundreds of millions of dollars worth of HP printers that were sold to Iran — despite a U.S. ban on trade with that country.”
  • Her tenures at both Lucent and HP were complete debacles.
  • After the Garland, TX terror attack, Fiorina likened Pamela Geller and her group of free speech advocates to “white supremacists demonstrating” and asserted that free speech is “provocative” when it offends Islamists.

And this on climate change

In a series of interviews from 2008 (when she campaigned for John McCain) to 2010 (when she unsuccessfully ran for the Senate against Barbara Boxer), Fiorina parroted left wing talking points on carbon credits, wind and solar energy sources, and the damage humans are causing to the planet via global warming. As recently as this year, she asserted that climate change is man-made. During her Senate campaign, she also refused to endorse California’s Proposition 23, which would have suspended the economy-destroying AB32 global warming law.

Of course, as I’ve said many times, I do not care if you believe in anthropogenic climate change, I care if you plan to instituted polices that require compliance by citizens. She seems to like those policies.

Doug also links to this Erik Erickson piece from 2010

Carly’s conservative record was thin to nonexistent, and there were many troubling signs that she held liberal views. From her praise of Jesse Jackson, to her playing the race and gender cards against DeVore, to her support for the Wall Street bailouts, to her qualified support for the Obama stimulus, to her past support for taxation of sales on the Internet, to her waffling on immigration, to her support for Sonia Sotomayor, to her Master’s thesis advocating greater federal control of local education, to her past support for weakening California’s Proposition 13, to her statement to the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board that Roe v. Wade is “a decided issue,” Carly Fiorina’s oft-repeated claim to be a “lifelong conservative” was only plausible in the universe of NRSC staffers who recruited her in the first place.

That bit is also repeated in John Hawkins’ piece The Conservative Case Against Carly Fiorina. He notes that she has many liberal positions, and is about as insider/establishment GOP as they come.

A Red State diary by streiff also discusses her non-conservative bonafides

To a great extent, Fiorina is a clone of Rudy Giuliani: a fairly liberal Republican with some good features.

Though we look askance at Trump when he suddenly become pro-life, we see that Fiorina had a come-to-Jesus moment on the same issue. Unlike Trump, she seems to have been politically pro-abort, acting as McCain’s surrogate to assuage fears among embittered pro-Hillary women that McCain was wooing in 2008. Was she a Judas-goat, deceiving these women? Or was she pro-abort? We sort of have to take it on faith that she isn’t yet another “5th Avenue liberal” to use a phrase that has gotten a lot of traffic recently and has legitimately changed.

The abortion issue really doesn’t move me all that much, it is a lower tier issue in my list of concerns. But, it is high on other Republican voters list, so, where does she stand? She seems to have flipped right around the time she decided to run for president.

She’s still better than most Democrats, let’s be clear on that. She’s more of the exact type of Republican needed in a heavily Democrat voting California.

But, is this good for Cruz? How does he go after Trump when he has a VP pick that has flipped on many positions, is a moderate establishment Republican, has held many liberal positions, all similar to what has happened with Trump?

Some wonder why I never seem to criticize Cruz. Well, here you go: I think this was a desperation move, and makes Cruz look weak. I have zero faith that this move will help out. Trump has too much momentum, and with the media discussing him non-stop, he will be the nominee.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Ted Cruz Picks Carly Fiorina As Running Mate: Good Idea Or Bad One? »

Posted in GOP | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, “How can we tackle Climate Change?”

By William Teach April 27, 2016 – 4:30 pm

Weather Underground’s Pamela Bishop does something unusual: she tells Warmists what they can do

Before we answer that question, you should ask yourself whether you can tackle climate control on an individual level or not. Keep asking yourself the same question until and unless you get a positive answer.

Climate control is a big thing, but nothing is going to change until we make changes at an individual level.

Warmists like that, as long as the individual in question is Someone Else. That Guy. Here are her ideas

1. Learn about climate change (so you can nag your friends, family, and coworkers)
2. Recycle and reuse (simply environmentalism, nothing to do with Hotcoldwetdry )
3. Choose your vehicle wisely (Warmists shouldn’t be driving any fossil fueled vehicle)
4. Say no to plastic (the won’t)
5. Second-hand shopping (and give up new tech and fancy clothes? Not happening)
6. Look for the energy star rating (environmentalism and responsible energy use)
7. Use solar products (all Warmists should do this, regardless of the cost and poor energy return)
8. Plant a tree (environmentalism)
9. Look for an environmental career: (suck off the tit of the tax payer doing nothing productive)

Really, almost none of these have anything to do with Hotcoldwetdry. And since Warmists won’t really do anything in their own lives, they want Other People involved by force of government.

Read: Say, “How can we tackle Climate Change?” »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 27, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a world which needs walls to stop the humongous rising seas that will DOOM US ALL!!!!!!!, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jo Nova, with a post on 18 million square miles carbon pollution induced greenery.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Global Warming Is Making The Weather Nice, But Doom Is Coming Soon Or Something

By William Teach April 27, 2016 – 12:00 pm

Leave it to the Cult Of Climastrology to always look for the dark side of every silver lining. In this case, we have the typically unhinged Seth Borenstein

Global warming may have improved U.S. weather, but for how long?

Global warming has mostly made the weather more pleasant for Americans over the past 40 years, which may explain why much of the public doesn’t consider climate change as big a threat as do scientists and the rest of the world, a new study suggests.

We can also consider that people just do not believe the apocalyptic doom and gloom emanating from the CoC, nor their cultish like science. Of course, there’s a but to the initial paragraph

But that perceived benefit of global warming — mostly milder winters — will soon be outweighed by more-oppressive summer heat, according to a study in the journal Nature that’s dividing the scientific community.

If heat-trapping gases aren’t controlled, nearly nine out of 10 Americans will have noticeably worse — not better — weather by the end of the century, especially in the summer, the study found.

We’ve actually discussed this study last week, but it’s nice to know that the Cult is will to say we’re utterly doomed. In 80+ years. When no one will remember. Even though all their other predictions have so far failed in the current time frame.

Warmists really are some miserable people. And they still cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the current warm period is mostly/solely caused by Mankind.

Read: Global Warming Is Making The Weather Nice, But Doom Is Coming Soon Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Top North Carolina Senator: Let People Vote On HB2 Bathroom Law

By William Teach April 27, 2016 – 8:08 am

This is actually a good idea

(WTVD) Twenty-four hours after raucous protests for and against HB2 consumed the General Assembly, Sen. Tom Apodaca’s comments signify, perhaps, the biggest crack yet in the united front from Republican lawmakers, who want to leave the law alone.

“If it was up to me, I’d just put it out to a vote of the people, let them decide what they want to do,” Apodaca said.

Apodaca, a Republican from Hendersonville and the No. 2 Republican in the state Senate, who voted for HB2, is pushing to let North Carolina voters decide whether or not to repeal the law. He wants a referendum on the November ballot.

“You know, let’s put it on the ballot and get it over with once and for all,” Apodaca said.

Crack? Or simply a way of letting the people decide directly? Of course, leftists are against letting the Citizens vote

Greensboro State Rep. Chris Sgro insists the law, which blocks state protections for the LGBT community and takes away people’s right to sue in state court over workplace discrimination, is a complete disaster. His solution is repeal not a referendum.

“(Republicans) understand the problem; they have the wrong solution,” Sgro said. “The only solution is the full repeal of House Bill 2. A bad bill needs to be repealed.”

Here’s my thought: remove the section on suing in state court. Repeal it. Add in a provision giving protections to LGBT folks (even though they are technically protected from discrimination per state and federal law). Make it very, very precise to avoid the casual, ginned up, and manufactured suits. Allow state, local, and county governments to have separate bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers for the tiny, tiny, tiny segment that thinks they are transgender. Otherwise, keep the rest of the ban intact, with still providing no penalties for TG folks. Because this is mostly about stopping government tyranny, not punishing citizens.

When it comes to the state primacy portion, keep it. It simply reiterated and reinforced what has been law. Liberals cannot complain about this (though they will), since this was their position when it came to Arizona’s SB1070 illegal immigration law, along with other illegal alien laws, and on gay marriage. However, create a mechanism where a city and county can petition for the ability to have something slightly different from state law, in order to deal with certain conditions.

100% keep the provision that allows businesses to make their own decision. This is really what HB2 was about, and they could have just left it at that. The Charlotte ordinance would have forced the private sector to comply in allowing TG folks to use whatever bathroom, locker room, and shower, among others, that they felt like, under penalty of law. Of course, we know liberals do not like “choice” in this, either, bless their authoritative hearts.

That said, put the whole thing up for a vote, see how it goes. If it loses, simply pass another law that focuses solely on the private sector, allowing them the choice.

Read: Top North Carolina Senator: Let People Vote On HB2 Bathroom Law »

Posted in NC News | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Calls Himself The Presumptive Nominee, As He And Hillary Win Big In Primaries

By William Teach April 27, 2016 – 7:44 am

Interestingly, Donald Trump was not complaining about the nomination process, about how it’s rigged, how it’s a dirty system, and so forth

(Fox News) Donald Trump completed a five-state sweep in Tuesday’s Republican presidential primaries, strengthening his shot at avoiding a contested convention – while Hillary Clinton scored convincing victories but was denied the same bragging rights of a primary sweep by a surprise Bernie Sanders win in Rhode Island.

Of the two front-runners, Clinton – who won four states Tuesday – remains closer to clinching the nomination. She now has nearly 90 percent of the delegates needed to secure the party nod, even as Sanders vows to keep fighting.

On the Republican side, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich still can potentially hold Trump under the 1,237 delegates he needs. But the billionaire businessman’s Super Tuesday III run-of-the-table reinforces his aura of invincibility going into the next round.

“I consider myself the presumptive nominee,” Trump said at Trump Tower, with ex-candidate and now-supporter New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie standing behind him. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s over.”

But, he did whine and complain and trash talk during his “victory” speech, rather than be gracious and show he’s of presidential timber. At this point, he will most likely make it to 1,237, and, even if he doesn’t a majority of people in exit polls from yesterday’s primary states think that the person with the most votes should get the nod.

However, very disturbing is an exit poll from NBC, which, for the question on whether Pennsylvania Republicans would vote for Trump in November, 55% said yes, 21% said probably, and 23% said “no way”. The same question for Hillary has 62% yes, 23% maybe, and 14% “heck no”.

One big question will be whether Trump can unite Republicans/Conservatives and get them to rally to his cause. But, what is his cause? Here’s Brent Bozell, very much a reliable and consistent Conservative, who was allowed by Breitbart to publish an open letter (sigh)

Sarah Palin, Ben Carson, Mike Huckabee and Phyllis Schlafly—you are friends and allies, serious men and women for whom I have great respect. You and other conservatives disagreed.

I pen this open letter to you.

Even those of us who oppose Trump understand that he’s tapping into something that has exploded onto the national scene: disenchantment, even white-hot rage among the Republican base with the party’s establishment and the Washington status quo. You and I understand this because we were taking on the weak-kneed GOP leadership many, many years ago, back when Donald Trump was donating to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

He wants to know if Trump is the answer

Many critics have outlined the innumerable left-wing positions and candidates Trump championed before he got in this race. It’s worth recalling some of them now: Trump not only supported but bankrolled amnesty. He supported taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood. He supported not just abortion but partial-birth abortion. He was open to gay marriage. He supported government-funded universal healthcare.

He supported eminent domain for (his) private gain. He supported the Wall Street bailout. He supported “assault weapons” bans. He applauded President Obama for doing a “great job.” He congratulated Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for doing a “good job.” He financially helped the Democrats pass Obamacare. Trump was a registered Democrat when that party was being led by the likes of Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), donating heavily during President Obama’s tenure. He’s bankrolled Democrats like Jimmy Carter, Rahm Emmanuel, Anthony Weiner, Terry McAuliffe, Chuck Schumer, Charlie Rangel, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, to name a few.

But Trump said he’s changed. On everything. Overnight. Just in time for the GOP nomination fight.

This did not sit well with so many of the Breitbart Tumpistas, as you can imagine, just like any questioning of Trump’s conservative, heck, even just plain old Republican, bonifides sends them into a rage on social media. I can understand Republican voters wanting an outsider. I can understand how many were very excited over his verbal plan to build a wall (while ignoring that he also backed “touch-back” amnesty). I can understand how they were thrilled when Trump refused to be cowed nor humbled when he was attacked by the media, how he fought back, something we’ve wanted from Republicans for quite some time.

However, what accounts for backing Trump when you learn his left leaning positions? When he continues to take Liberal positions this late in the nomination process?

Let’s look at Mr. Trump’s record during this campaign. He’s declared his support for single-payer healthcare. That puts him to the left of Obamacare. He’s re-declared his support for Planned Parenthood. He’s re-supporting tax increases. He’s supported crony capitalism. He’s endorsed “touchback” amnesty. He wants the U.S. to break the Geneva Convention. He’s “neutral” on Israel and Palestine. He wants South Korea and Japan to have nuclear arsenals.

He supported the Democrats on North Carolina’s HB2 gender confused bathrooms law just two weeks ago, before having to walk it back a little bit. He announced he’s pro-abortion and wants pro-life removed from the GOP plank. I thought Bozell should have ended here

What will you tell your supporters when the man you endorsed enacts an agenda that horrifies them?

What will the Trump supporters say when he enacts a leftist agenda? When he fights with a Republican Congress over Republican legislation passed by said Republicans? When he potentially picks pro-abortion left wingers for the Supreme Court and federal judges?

Will you take ownership if a Donald Trump shows his liberal stripes? Because this rests on you, Trump supporters.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Trump Calls Himself The Presumptive Nominee, As He And Hillary Win Big In Primaries »

Posted in GOP | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Islamists Infiltrating Swedish Greens

By William Teach April 26, 2016 – 6:54 pm

Initially, the environmental movement was infiltrated by remnants of those who loved the Soviets and pseudo communism, and needed something after rhe collapse of the USSR in the late 1980’s. These are the folks James Delingpole calls watermelons: green on the outside, red on the inside, who adopted environmentalism as a method of instituting authoritarian governmental policies. Now we get this

(Washington Post) One refused to shake hands with a female journalist. Another compared Israel to Nazi Germany. A third was seen doing hand signs associated with Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood in the background of a live TV broadcast.

The behavior of some Muslim members of Sweden’s Green Party, which is part of a coalition government since 2014, has sparked concerns that the small environmentalist group may have been infiltrated by Islamists.

It also has triggered a wider discussion about whether Sweden has tried so hard to be inclusive and tolerant toward migrants that it’s failed to stand up for its own feminist ideals.

“In our eagerness to embrace a diverse and multicultural society, we have turned a blind eye to undemocratic views,” said Gulan Avci, a lawmaker for the Liberals, a center-right opposition party.

The hardcore Islamists use any method they can to infiltrate and change Western society. It’s the old “death by a thousand papercuts” method. Unfortunately, Leftists and Progressives decided to take the side of the Islamists, failing to realize that they are basically considered to be useful idiots, idiots who are easily manipulated into defending a growing section of Islam that stands for square against everything liberals stand for.

So, why not use the enviroweenies as a vehicle to implement their authoritative cause? They seem to mesh perfectly.

Read: Surprise: Islamists Infiltrating Swedish Greens »

Posted in Islamification, RoP | Comments Off on Surprise: Islamists Infiltrating Swedish Greens | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 26, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is the flag of an evil carbon polluting nation, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Economics 101 and taxation.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Danish Could Face “Red Meat” Tax

By William Teach April 26, 2016 – 11:56 am

Isn’t it interesting that virtually every proposal from the Cult of Climastrology ends in either a tax or a Government imposed restriction? Or both? Yet rarely do they propose that Warmists practice what they preach

(The Local DK) Saying that “climate change is an ethical problem”, the Danish Council on Ethics (Det Etiske Råd) has called for a climate tax on red meat.

The council said that Danes have an ethical obligation to minimize their climate impact and that a natural place to start would be lowering their red meat consumption. (snip about UN whining about agriculture and GHG output)

The Council on Ethics said that in order to live up to global environmental standards, Denmark should use a ‘climate tax’ to bring down the nation’s meat consumption. The Council said it debated the issue for six months, focusing on whether it should be left up to consumers to make more climate-friendly choices or if government should push them in the right direction by taxing the food products that have the greatest negative impact.

While the council said that “Danes are ethically obligated to change their eating habits” it ultimately decided that simply leaving it up to consumers to lower their meat consumption “will not be effective”.

So, taxation and governmental control

“An effective response to climate-damaging foods that will also contribute to raising awareness of climate change must be united, which requires that society sends a clear signal through regulation,” council spokesman Mickey Gjerris said in a press release.

And Warmists get upset when they are called fascists and authoritarians. I can’t imagine why!

Read: Danish Could Face “Red Meat” Tax »

Posted in Global Warming | 28 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove