…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… »
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 »
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 »
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.â€
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 »
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.
Trackback URL
…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… »
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 problemâ€, the Danish Council on Ethics (Det Etiske RÃ¥d) 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 effectiveâ€.
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 »
Normally, things like this do not interest me enough to write a post, but, this one has three things: an open letter, stated rules, and people in High Outrage
(UK Daily Mail) A nursing mother was forced to dump nearly four gallons of breast milk after trying to take it through security at an airport.
Security staff allegedly made Jessica Coakley Martinez discard the liquid form of the milk and a two gallon frozen block intended for her eight-month-old son at Heathrow Airport’s terminal five.
The upset mother-of-two from California took to Facebook to rant in a open letter: ‘You humiliated me and made me feel completely defeated as a professional and a mother.’
The angry message, which began ‘I normally would not post something this personal, but I do not remember the last time I felt so justly upset,’ was shared nearly four thousand times after it was posted on Thursday.
She added: ‘You made me dump out nearly two weeks worth of food for my son.’
The whole concept of the “open letter” has reached idiotic proportions. It seems that everyone who has had some sort of experience has to post an open letter for everyone to see, and, really, this is more about themselves rather than attempting to right a wrong. Perhaps it’s not fair to pick on Ms. Martinez, but then there’s this
The limit for liquids in carry-on luggage is 100 millilitres according to regulations posted on Heathrow’s site, which states that larger amounts must go in checked luggage.
That’s right, the rules for baby milk are printed, and it took me all of 5 seconds to google them and look them up. The rules also state you can carry a reasonable amount in the cabin. Is almost 4 gallons reasonable, even if most is frozen? If it’s frozen, why not just place it in the checked baggage? Oh, and then there’s something else interesting, but, I’ll get to that in a minute.
Of course, she wanted Heathrow to blow off The Published Rules for her. This sounds like so many other Special Snowflakes, who want their own set of rules just because. Airport security said they had to comply with the rules, probably because they don’t want to be sacked for failing to do their jobs. So, she apparently become irate and threw a fit in the airport. She’s lucky they let her board the plane.
The BBC, typically a very left leaning news org, also highlight those pesky things called The Rules.
And that other thing? Martinez was not traveling with her child. That’s right. She blew a gasket, then posted the open letter, when she did not even have the nursing child with her. Why not simply put it all in the checked luggage in the first place? I almost get the feeling that this whole thing was set up. And, of course, people in her Facebook are in high dudgeon, and are all Very Upset And Outraged over something minor that happened to someone else. Go figure.
Read: Woman Fails To Follow The Rules On Breast Milk At Airport, Posts “Open Letter” »
Why? Well, for one thing, no one could show they were actually harmed or unduly stopped from voting due to the law
(AP) Lawsuits challenging changes to North Carolina’s election law failed to show it hampered the ability of minority voters to exercise political power, a federal judge ruled Monday in dismissing the cases.
U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder ruled against the U.S. Justice Department, the North Carolina NAACP chapter and named voters. They sued alleging the law was passed to discriminate against poor and minority voters in violation of the Constitution and U.S. Voting Rights Act.
Of course, it wasn’t, but facts and reality aren’t typically present in Barking Moonbats
While North Carolina had a sordid history of freezing black voters out of the political process, the plaintiffs didn’t show that the law hampered the ability of minority voters to exercise electoral politics, Schroeder said.
Nice bit of editorializing, based on a short part of what the judge said, failing to mention that this occurred well over 50 years ago, and that the Democratic Party was in control during that time and implemented those policies. Rather like how the media, and Democrats, always forget to mention that it was the Democrats who implemented the sterilization of Blacks and the disabled
The plaintiffs “failed to show that such disparities will have materially adverse effects on the ability of minority voters to cast a ballot and effectively exercise the electoral franchise” as a result of the 2013 state law, Schroeder wrote. That argument was made more difficult after black voter turnout increased in 2014, he wrote.
Of course, the liberals bringing the suits state that they are not giving up, and that the suits will continue, because Liberals/Democrats apparently believe that Blacks and minorities are too stupid, incompetent, and poor to be able to obtain a proper photo ID, a photo ID that is needed for just about everything these days, it seems.
The NY Times is likewise vexed, noting all the talk from opponents of the law who think Blacks are too dumb, incompetent, or poor (they can get ID for free, BTW) to obtain the type of ID they need for so many other things, like driving, buying certain medicines, going to the doctor, taking a flight, etc.
(ABC11) “This ruling is a decisive victory for North Carolina over George Soros, Hillary Clinton and the Roy Cooper-backed out-of-state special interests who tried to overturn the state’s common sense voter ID law, in order to make it easier to cheat in our elections,” said NCGOP executive director Dallas Woodhouse. “Despite the scare tactics, misinformation and constant attacks from the radical left, the court threw out their false arguments and ruled that this common sense law is constitutional.”
One of the things the judge found is that the NC law comported with voting laws from all over the country. Perhaps Democrats could simply spend their time making sure that the few who do not have proper ID obtain one. They like sticking people on buses and bringing them to vote. Bring them to get their free ID.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Dooooooom!
Unbelievers?: "Facebook's shiny new HQ will disappear thanks to global warming" https://t.co/O7zSYhbhHr
— Tom Nelson (@TomANelson) April 25, 2016
From the link
According to a group of scientists collectively known as Our Coast, Our Future, they have mapped what a rise in sea levels would do to the Bay area and it appears the locations of several of the world’s biggest tech companies are in the firing line.
“Facebook is very vulnerable,†Lindy Lowe, a senior planner at California’s Bay Conservation and Development Commission said to AP. “They built on a very low site – I don’t know why they chose to build there. Facebook thinks they can pay enough to protect themselves.â€
At current projections, a 1.6-foot rise in sea levels by the end of the century – which is at the lower end scientists estimates – would envelop the campus.
Of course, the reality of actual data versus computer models says something different. The sea level trend for the San Francisco observation station has the rise being at 1.94mm per year, equivalent to .64 feet of sea rise in 100 years. The data goes back to 1894. Redwood City has the same trend, but, it’s virtually worthless for its short measuring period. Alameda shows just .24 feet over 100 years, with data going back to 1939. In fact, the majority of California measuring stations show similar data, with only two, which have very short term data, showing over 1 foot of sea rise over 100 years. One station is even negative. We see these same trends in Washington and Oregon.
It’s a real shame when actual physical data knocks out hysterical prognostications.
Read: Bummer: Sea Rise Could Totally Doom Facebook’s Shiny New HQ »
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.