Washington Post Editorial Board: Pour More Money Into Infrastructure To Prevent Next Train Tragedy

You might be aware of Liberals blaming a supposed lack of infrastructure spending for the crash of the AMTRAK train in Philly (say, whatever happened to the $800 billion Stimulus, as well as all the smaller stimulus packages during the first few years of Obama’s reign?), as well as attempting to blame Republicans in multiple ways (many easy examples at Twitchy, including here, here, and here). We even know the actual cause. The Washington Post knows the actual cause. Heck, even the Washington Post Editorial Board knows the cause, and they still drive to the corner of Disgraceful Road and Bat Guano Insane Lane

Prevent the next train tragedy
The Philadelphia train crash is a reminder of the need to invest more in U.S. infrastructure. (WT note: that subhead is from the WP front page)

IT’S NOT yet clear why Amtrak Northeast Regional Train 188 derailed Tuesday night, killing seven and wounding more than 200. The National Transportation Safety Board said Wednesday afternoon that the train was traveling more than 100 mph in a 50 mph zone in North Philadelphia, where the tracks take a sharp turn.

So, everyone knows that the train was going double the speed limit, including the WPEB, but the WPEB is unsure what caused the crash? Would this be considered Amtrak Trutherism? It’s certainly a way for the WPEB to push Talking Points

At first glance, in other words, this would appear to be a story of human failure. But no matter what the investigation yields, there almost certainly will be lessons about the United States’ negligent stewardship of its roads, rails, bridges and tunnels.

There’s no doubt we could do more for the road. Funny how the Liberal push to mandate better fuel economy, hybrids, and electric vehicles has reduced the available money via gas taxes. Say, whatever happened to all the Stimulus money? Oh, right, repaving roads that didn’t need repaving, painting bridges instead of fixing them, money wasted on signs talking up the Stimulus, and general mismanagement. Has anyone asked Joe Biden, who was nominally in charge of the Stimulus money?

Amtrak long ago should have installed automatic safeguards against reckless driving on a route like the Northeast Corridor, which is heavily trafficked and passes through dense urban centers. The technology exists. But Amtrak hasn’t finished installing its “positive train control” system, even along its busiest line.

Go that? It’s the fault of those who haven’t finished installing the system, not the people/person who had the train going double the speed limit into a curve.

Their most basic task is to put the transportation budget on sound footing, which Congress has failed to do, year after year. The Highway Trust Fund relies on the federal gasoline tax to finance all sorts of transportation needs, but the revenue stream hasn’t covered the country’s spending requirements for years. The obvious solution is to raise the gas tax, which has been at the same level since 1993. But neither President Obama nor Congress has the courage to say this aloud. Legislators are poised to patch together several billion dollars to keep the fund solvent for a short while longer, while they continue to debate second-best solutions. Instead, they should fix the problem now. Congress also should reduce the time and hassle it takes to get infrastructure projects approved.

Interesting. Didn’t I just mention the gas tax issue? In all honesty, I hadn’t even read to this part of the editorial when I wrote about the gas tax above. Anyhow, it was government which created the loss of revenue, as mentioned by me, and the WPEB has ignored that “why”, so the obvious solution is to raise the tax, which is almost always the solution for everything in Liberal World. Strange how they never recommend that the money raised should be spent wisely and responsibly.

They go on to recommend more “investment” in the Northeast Corridor train service. Fine. Great. All these mostly Democrat states should spend the money for the service that is primarily used in their own states. They even complain at Obama for pissing away money on high speed rail in a mish mash manner (the complaint is surely raaaaacist, since any complaint aimed at O is raaaaacist). This is a great argument for the reduction of the power of the federal government when it comes to spending, putting that power back into the hands of the States, along with the money. People closer to the issues know (generally) how to better spend the money on the projects needed most.

Such steps would not lessen the burden of Tuesday night’s tragedy. They might prevent others, however.

In other words, the WPEB is simply taking advantage of a tragedy to push their politics. Shameful.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post Editorial Board: Pour More Money Into Infrastructure To Prevent Next Train Tragedy »

Thank Goodness: We Can Now Listen To 133 Years Of Climate Chang In Song

We’re saved or something

(Treehugger) While charts and maps are great ways of communicating how humans are changing the global temperature, there are other avenues to help people connect with climate science and understand its findings.

Daniel Crawford, an undergraduate student at the University of Minnesota, has created a particularly evocative way of connecting people with climate data through music. He collaborated with geography professor Scott St. George to turn climate data from four latitudinal regions of the globe into a musical composition for a sting quartet.

Anything to avoid actually living the carbon neutral lifestyle embedded in Cult of Climastrology talking points.

Interesting music, though.

Read: Thank Goodness: We Can Now Listen To 133 Years Of Climate Chang In Song »

If All You See…

…is a horrible carbon pollution infused beer, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Watts Up With That?, with a post on 22 very inconvenient truths.

Read: If All You See… »

Obama Is Totally A Climate Change Denier

So says the unhinged 350.org’s Bill McKibben (who takes all sorts of fossil fueled plane and vehicle trips all over the world)

Obama’s Catastrophic Climate-Change Denial

THE Obama administration’s decision to give Shell Oil the go-ahead to drill in the Arctic shows why we may never win the fight against climate change. Even in this most extreme circumstance, no one seems able to stand up to the power of the fossil fuel industry. No one ever says no.

Incuding those who take lots of fossil fueled trips to whine about fossil fuels.

No, what’s most extreme here is the irresponsibility of Shell, now abetted by the White House. A quarter century ago, scientists warned that if we kept burning fossil fuel at current rates we’d melt the Arctic. The fossil fuel industry (and most everyone else in power) ignored those warnings, and what do you know: The Arctic is melting, to the extent that people now are planning to race yachts through the Northwest Passage, which until very recently required an icebreaker to navigate.

Do we have to get into a discussion about the failed ice free arctic prognostications, and the growth of Arctic ice? Nah, let’s just

 photo 62971d4a_zps18828beb.gif

And yet Mr. Obama — acting on his own, since these are all executive actions requiring nothing from Congress — has opened huge swaths of the Powder River basin to new coal mining. He’s still studying whether to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, though the country’s leading climate scientists have all told him it would be a disaster. And now he’s given Shell the green light, meaning that, as with Keystone, it will be up to the environmental movement to block the plan (“kayaktivists” plan to gather this weekend in Seattle’s harbor, trying to prevent Shell from basing its Arctic rigs there).

This is not climate denial of the Republican sort, where people simply pretend the science isn’t real. This is climate denial of the status quo sort, where people accept the science, and indeed make long speeches about the immorality of passing on a ruined world to our children. They just deny the meaning of the science, which is that we must keep carbon in the ground.

There’s something I never thought I’d read: Barack Obama, climate change denier. This really goes to show how far out of the mainstream, how bat guano insane, how loony tunes the Cult Of Climastrology actually is.

PS: can you believe that this twice today that I’ve sorta defended Obama?

Read: Obama Is Totally A Climate Change Denier »

Ruth Marcus: Carly Fiorina’s Candidacy Offends Me

And, apparently, the only reason her candidacy is still going is sexism. A bit of CDS (Carly Derangement Syndrome) from Ruth

The sexism that propels Carly Fiorina’s candidacy

How depressing is it that, out of the more than a dozen announced or prospective Republican candidates for president in 2016, only one, Carly Fiorina, is a woman. Even more depressing: that Fiorina, as long-shot as her candidacy is, would not be taken even semi-seriously were it not for her gender.

That is a tough and controversial thing to say, but it requires saying. I would love to see a female president, of either party, and I expect I will — if not in 2016, then in an election to come. But the female president I would love to see is one who is fully qualified to be president — qualified by dint of experience, not of chromosomes. Carly Fiorina is not that woman.

That assessment has everything to do with biography and nothing to do with ideology. (If South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley or New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte chose to run for president, you might find me disagreeing with their positions but not questioning their qualifications.) In my view, Fiorina’s background simply does not prepare her to be president.

No, Marcus would come up with any excuse to slam and slur any Republican woman. Hey, remember when Ruth slammed Obama for having done nothing other than getting elected to State office then to the US Senate? Me neither.

For the record, I would say precisely the same about retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson. Politics isn’t brain surgery, but being a brain surgeon doesn’t prepare you for high-level politics, and Carson isn’t prepared. I’m writing about Fiorina because, frankly, as a woman, her candidacy offends me.

Ruth then goes on to note that Hillary has pretty much done nothing but be a coattail for Bill (“Yes, Clinton’s path to power came through her husband”), before moving to

But back to Fiorina: She has a checkered, to put it charitably (failed, to put it more bluntly), business career and no political career whatsoever, having lost her previous run for elective office. It is the height of chutzpah to imagine that she is remotely qualified to be president. Or, since it’s the more likely endgame, for vice president either.

Let’s see: started out as an AT&T sales rep, moved up to being named the most powerful woman in American business by Fortune magazine. Eh, there’s no point in pointing out all of Carly’s business experience, mostly successful, sometimes not (just like life. Weird, eh?) Experience of which Barack had zero, and Hillary hasn’t had since her Whitewater days. Unless you count the graft involved at the Clinton Foundation.

Notice, though, the other big complaint: Carly hasn’t been elected previously. This goes straight to the heart of the notion of a political aristocracy, something the Founders were very concerned with. There’s no requirement for previous political experience in the Constitution. In fact, the original idea of the Founders was of citizen politicians, who would serve a short time then return back to private life, rather than people who make being an elected official their career. Ruth continues in this vein, then drops in a jaw dropper

I would have serious qualms about any candidate who seeks the presidency without government experience, no matter how much value he or she produced for shareholders. Business demands different skills than politics; the presidency isn’t the place for on-the-job training.

Um, what? Refer back to Captain Sisko above.

It’s not sexist to criticize Fiorina for being unqualified. What would be sexist is to hold her to a lower standard than a man with similarly paltry credentials.

It was considered racist to point out that Obama had no actual experience, other than winning a few elections and making a few speeches, that made him qualified to be president. Ruth can write this, but, if Fiorina was running as a Democrat, you can bet the farm Hollywood McMansion that her tune would be 100% different.

Read: Ruth Marcus: Carly Fiorina’s Candidacy Offends Me »

Obama Accused Of Sexism Towards Elizabeth Warren

Barack is learning about the kind of treatment Conservatives/Republicans typically receive from Liberals

(The Hill) National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill on Wednesday called President Obama’s critique of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) sexist.

O’Neill told The Hill she took issue with Obama calling Warren by her first name during an interview with Yahoo News published Saturday.

“Yes, I think it is sexist,” O’Neill said. “I think the president was trying to build up his own trustworthiness on this issue by convincing us that Senator Warren’s concerns are not to be taken seriously. But he did it in a sexist way.”

Obama told Yahoo that Warren was opposing his trade agenda to further her own political brand.

“The truth of the matter is that Elizabeth is, you know, a politician like everybody else. And you know, she’s got a voice that she wants to get out there. And I understand that,” Obama told Yahoo.

O’Neill said Obama’s “clear subtext is that the little lady just doesn’t know what she’s talking about.”

Senator Sherrod Brown also accused Obama of sexism

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) on Tuesday suggested that some of President Obama’s remarks criticizing Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) were sexist.

Obama and Warren have been in a public fight over the president’s trade agenda, which Warren opposes.

Brown said Obama had spoken disrespectfully of Warren and suggested the president wouldn’t have made the same comments about a male senator.

He specifically criticized Obama for publicly referring to Warren as “Elizabeth” when responding to her comments.

More on Brown at Twitchy.

This is not the first time the claim has been made that using a woman’s first name is sexist. It’s now sexist to call Hillary Clinton Hillary. Even though Hillary (whoops, that’s sexist) is using Hillary all over her Hillary campaign website, Twitter feed, and Facebook, simply referring to her as Hillary, using the H as a logo, #Hillary2016, and so on. There are even guidelines which state that using a woman’s first name is sexist.

Of course, Barack is constantly referring to others by their first names. For instance, John McCain and John Boehner are often referred to simply as John. He refers to Mitch McConnell as both Mitch and Senator McConnell. Eric Holder is mostly “Eric”. Obama sometimes uses the first name, sometimes the last name with a title of Mr./Mrs./Ms or political title. Far be it for me to defend The Worst President Ever, but this is simply a silly attack on him. I doubt he even thinks about it in the least when he is referring to people by their first names or by their titles. It a big “nothing burger”.

But, it is amusing that Barack is learning how Conservatives are often treated, namely, being accused of sexism (or, is that seeeeexism?) for silly stuff. Of course, no matter what a man does, he’s sexist.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama Accused Of Sexism Towards Elizabeth Warren »

Bloomberg Backed Anti-Gun Group Takes On NC Gun Law They Don’t Understand

I’ve been remiss in covering the latest Freak Out by the anti-gunnites here in North Carolina, which extends to the Typical Liberal Media here in Raleigh, in Charlotte, and other news outlets. Let’s see what this is really, really about

(Breitbart) Michael Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety is fighting the repeal of a law that requires North Carolinians to acquire a permit to purchase a handgun before they can actually purchase one. They are doing this by equating the permit to purchase with background checks and suggesting that if the permits are repealed, background checks will be repealed as well.

But repealing a state-issued permit to purchase has nothing to do with federal background checks.

In North Carolina’s present system, potential handgun purchasers have to acquire a permit to purchase from a local sheriff before they are allowed to go buy a handgun. State Reps. Jacqueline Shaffer (R-Mecklenburg) and John Faircloth (R-Guilford) believe a streamlined system—where North Carolinians don’t have to get a permit to exercise their Second Amendment rights—is a better approach, so they have put forward House Bill 562.

HB 562 would get the state government out of the way so North Carolinians can buy handguns without first asking the state for permission via the permit to purchase requirement. And HB 562 would in no way impact federal background checks, which every North Carolinian will still have to pass every time they buy a handgun from a retail outlet.

Background checks will still be required. Period. But, instead of going down to the sheriff’s office, waiting in line, then finally getting that permit (I’ve had to do this myself twice), and possibly getting denied because they said so, this streamlines the process of exercising our 2nd Amendment Right. If liberals do not like that, then they should attempt to get the 2nd changed or repealed.

Bob Owens notes something interesting

The pistol permit was introduced into North Carolina law in the Jim Crow-era South, when the NC Democrat Party and the Ku Klux Klan were one in the same.

The intent of the permitting process was brutal and simple: Klansmen didn’t want to get shot while cross-burning and lynching, and so they wanted to ensure that blacks in Jim Crow North Carolina didn’t have the legal right to own handguns. The permits had to be applied for in person so that local sheriffs could deny permits based on race.

That this same permitting scheme still applies in 2015 is a travesty of justice.

Nothing is done with said permits after they are processed. Are liberal anti-gunnites, including Bloomberg’s group, against making it easier for law abiding Blacks to obtain a firearm?

Read: Bloomberg Backed Anti-Gun Group Takes On NC Gun Law They Don’t Understand »

Climate Change Is Totally Going To Cause Less But More Powerful Hurricanes Or Something

First the Cult Of Climastrology stated categorically that the 2005 hurricane season would be the new normal, with lots and lots of storm, ranging from tropical depressions to monster hurricanes, making landfall. When that quickly failed to come to pass, they started saying that hurricanes would be fewer but stronger. Then, when the big hurricanes failed to materialize, they started blaming “climate change” for the absence of land-falling hurricanes, along with stating that they’d materialize in the future. They’ve claimed that the absence is just bad luck. They’ve claimed that the lack of Florida hurricanes is a bad thing. They’ve even been puzzled. And now?

Researchers: Hurricanes come in bunches and could get stronger

….

Another conference session will explore whether storm statistics are in for change because of a changing climate.

Kerry Emanuel, professor of atmospheric science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, will present research that ties climate change to fewer small or average-sized storms and an uptick in the number of the most powerful storms.

“The very high intensity events should go up in number and that’s important because a disproportionate amount of damage is done by these high category storms even though they are relatively rare,” Emanuel said.

Emanuel’s research also points to a likelihood that hurricanes are going to rain a lot more in the future — a worry because of the flooding and deaths that can result.

The beginning of the article is about concern that people, especially in Florida and place typically prone to tropical system strikes, have become blase about the whole thing, since a hurricane has not hit Florida since 2005, and what can be done to make sure people take any future hurricane seriously. This is smart policy. Anyone has been through even just a tropical storm knows the dangers. And I would be very surprised if Florida makes it through another year or two without a strike.

But, instead of just dealing with a real danger, these fools have to bring in “climate change”, rather than focusing on the reality.

Read: Climate Change Is Totally Going To Cause Less But More Powerful Hurricanes Or Something »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful railroad track for trains, which Everyone Else should be forced to ride, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on the problem with all that Antarctic ice.

Read: If All You See… »

The Winners Of Today’s “Climate Change Causes Earthquakes” Sweepstake Are…

You know how this works. Something happens that has always been considered a natural event, except in villain type movies and conspiracy theory literature, like earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, etc, and the modern day wackos blame it on human-induced “climate change”

https://twitter.com/JonGoofel/status/598094913578737664

https://twitter.com/simonson_jake/status/598099355447394306

More below the fold

Read More »

Read: The Winners Of Today’s “Climate Change Causes Earthquakes” Sweepstake Are… »

Pirate's Cove