If All You See…

…is a horrid fossil fueled vehicle causing polar vortex after polar vortex to roll down into Florida, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is American Power, with a post on a crazy feminist.

Read: If All You See… »

Another Recommendation For Parents To Talk To Their Snowflakes About “Climate Change”

I’d recommend not doing it as they come in the house, their cheeks rosy red from the cold, stomping snow off their boots

Parents: Talk Climate Change With Your Kids

……

Start Them Early
It’s their earth they will inherit, help them to appreciate and respect it. Everyone has to do their part to help reduce their carbon emissions — it is especially important to teach your kids. They hold the keys to saving the planet. We all have some type of mess in our lives. It doesn’t matter if it is economical or ecological, it is up to to do our part to help clean it up.

Warmists have specificially stated that they want this junk science to be personal: I’d like to know if the writer, Neale Godfrey, still drives a fossil fueled vehicle. Oh, and why does she have kids? Kids are Bad for “climate change”. Hey, she wrote that “everyone has to do their part…” Warmists should lead the way. Otherwise, why should anyone believe their dogma? Anyhow, she has a few ideas to discuss with the kids, such as

  • Take your kids on a train or a bus ride — even better if it’s a natural gas powered bus. Explain that, in the U.S., cars and trucks emit 20 percent of the carbon emissions. Trains and buses, mass transit, move groups of people, with far less fuel consumption and pollution than everyone taking their own car. (<-think Neale does this?)
  • Use a time to limit the length of showers. Let your kids know that showers account for two-thirds of your water heating costs? If you shorten your shower time, you can save money and 350 pounds of CO2 emissions per year.
  • Change your menu. Eat less meat, especially beef. If you reduce the meat in your diet by half, an average family can avoid creating about three tons of emissions a year.
  • Include a civics lesson. Teach your kids how democracy-in-action works. Together, with your kids, let policy makers know you are concerned about global warming. Research you representatives in local, state, and federal government — and write to them with your concerns. Have the kids make appropriate drawings to include. (nothing better than teaching them far left hyper-partisanship early, so they can end up like the typical unhinged leftist creating mayhem)

She also recommends planting a tree (hey, never a bad idea), wrapping insulation, and turning down the temperature of the water heater. I do those last two myself, they save me money. I did plant a tree by my porch.

She always wants parents to take their kids on a scavenger hunt to pick up bottles and cans. Essentially, trash. This is one of the parts of “climate change” that makes me nuts. Warmists wrap real issues, such as litter, under the banner of their wackadoodle cult.

As with all the lessons you teach your children, remember to use the world as your classroom. There are examples of waste and conservation all around us. Point them out. Explain them. Challenge your kids to come up with solutions. Also, remember that they learn by example. Create good habits, and greener living – you kids will follow along.

So, practice what you preach, Warmists. Somehow, I doubt Neale does. Oh, and you can start by no longer having children. This way we can wipe out your deranged cult within a couple generations.

Read: Another Recommendation For Parents To Talk To Their Snowflakes About “Climate Change” »

Rep David Schweikert (R-Ariz) Introduces “Secret Science Reform Act”

What is it? It’s a way of forcing the Environmental Protection Agency, which has seemingly forgotten what their actual mission is, to end their secrecy in rule making

(Fox News) Republican lawmakers in the House are pushing legislation that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing new regulations based on science that is not transparent or not reproducible.

The Secret Science Reform Act, introduced Thursday by Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., would bar the agency from proposing or finalizing rules without first disclosing all “scientific and technical information” relied on to support its proposed action.

“Public policy should come from public data, not based on the whims of far-left environmental groups,” Schweikert said in a statement. “For far too long, the EPA has approved regulations that have placed a crippling financial burden on economic growth in this country with no public evidence to justify their actions.”

This is primarily aimed at the EPA’s junk science rules regarding “climate change”, but could certainly affect rule making for other issues.

Smith said the proposal “prohibits EPA from using secret science to justify new regulations.”

“The American people foot the bill for EPA’s costly regulations, and they have a right to see the underlying science. Costly environmental regulations should be based upon publicly available data so that independent scientists can verify the EPA’s claims,” Smith said in a statement.

This should easily pass the House once it makes it to the floor on what will be a virtually 100% partisan vote, since Democrats will not be happy with the EPA being forced to be transparent. After that, it will be shelved in the Democrat controlled Senate, with only a few Democrats, such as West Virginian Joe Manchin, wanting a vote. This is another important reason for the GOP to regain the Senate.

The legislation is H.R. 4012, which can be found via the new Congress.gov website, which is replacing the older Thomas. It was just introduced on 2/6/14, so there is no text available. It’s purpose is “To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regulations or assessments based upon science that is not transparent or reproducible.”

Read: Rep David Schweikert (R-Ariz) Introduces “Secret Science Reform Act” »

Obama May Extend Time For Keeping Those “Junk” Health Plan You Like

If the law is so bad, so poorly written, so poorly implemented, perhaps it should simply be scrapped and replaced with legislation that works

(AP) The Obama administration is considering an extension of the president’s decision to let people keep their individual insurance policies even if they are not compliant with the health care overhaul, industry and government officials said Thursday.

Avalere Health CEO Dan Mendelson said Thursday that the administration may let policyholders keep that coverage for as long as an additional three years, stressing that no decision has been made. Policymakers are waiting to see what rate hikes health insurers plan for the insurance exchanges that are key to the overhaul’s coverage expansions.

Less you think that this is just a health industry guy speaking out, along with Aetna Inc. Chairman and CEO Mark Bertolini

Health and Human Services spokesman Joanne Peters confirmed that the issue is under discussion, saying: “We are continuing to examine all sorts of ways to provide consumers with more choices and to smooth the transition as we implement the law. No decisions have been made.”

The time where people can keep those “junk” plans, as the administration termed the plans dropped for 4.7-6 million citizens, was already extended through an administrative fix, was for only one year. This second administrative fix would push it out past 2016, or even possibly to 2017, depending on whether it is added to the original. Either way, it would *Surprise!* head past the 2016 general election.

Nothing is settled yet, this seems to simply be in free-flow bull-session status at this time, but for the most part it would simply be all talk, because a good chunk who lost their plans were not able to get them back. This would be about optics.

BTW, in a hilarious bit of irony, the parent company of the Huffington Post, AOL, is reducing their 401(k) benefits due to Obamacare, per AOL’s CEO Tim Armstrong

“Obamacare is an additional $7.1 million expense for us as a company, so we have to decide whether or not to pass that expense to employees or whether to cut other benefits,” AOL’s Chairman and CEO Tim Armstrong told CNBC Thursday morning. AOL is the parent company of The Huffington Post.

So, it’s not just health insurance, jobs, and job hours that are being damaged thanks to their horrendous law.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama May Extend Time For Keeping Those “Junk” Health Plan You Like »

Millenials Have To “Do Something” About Climate Change

Before we’re all doomed or something

Millenials must take on climate change before it’s too late

Discussions about climate change are often like an episode of “Lost” —  a solution to one puzzle raises five more questions. If climate change is a proven trend, then what should be done? What should the government do? What should corporations do? And whose fault is it really? 

It’s interesting that question “what changes in my own life?” Is not posed.

It is both odd and expected that we millennials don’t care more. Odd because theoretically we are the most likely to join political movements to encourage change (see President Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign slogan). Expected because adapting to changes, positive and negative, is what we’re good at.

And how are Millenials doing? Their unemployment and underemployment rates are staggeringly high. They’re saddle with tons of school loans debt with poor job “ladders of opportunity”. They’re moving back in with their parents at record rates. The last thing they need to be worrying about, except as a drunken bull session, is “climate change”.

Read: Millenials Have To “Do Something” About Climate Change »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful bike which Everyone Else should be forced to ride, you might just be a Warmist

 photo a_little_flbp_for_mlk_day_45_photos4_zpslturx9pf.jpg

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on secret IRS rules.

Read: If All You See… »

Australians Care Little About “Climate Change”

Poll after poll after poll consistently show that when given a list if issues, “climate change” comes in way down the list of concerns. More often last place. Heck, in Australia it is 2nd to last when it comes to environmental concerns

(The Age) Australians rank climate change well down on their list of concerns, even though most believe temperatures where they live will rise, according to an annual survey of attitudes by the CSIRO.

On a list of 16 issues ranging from health and cost of living to terrorism and drug problems, climate change came in at just 14th.

Even among environmental issues, the climate ranked only seventh out of eight concerns, behind household waste and above only salinity.

Zoe Leviston, a social psychologist at CSIRO and lead author of the survey, said the ranking was “surprisingly low”, not least because more than 70 per cent of respondents also judged climate change to be either somewhat, very or extremely important.

Dr. Leviston thinks people are turned off because the issue has become so politicized. That could be a partial explanation. I would suggest a bigger one is that when it comes to things people want to actually tackle they stop worrying about a cute little 1st World issue and worry about real things. Climate change is fun and trendy to yammer in about, but when it comes to Doing Something most realize that their own lives will be harmed. And most do not want to give up any of their cushy 1st World lifestyle.

Read: Australians Care Little About “Climate Change” »

Team Obama To Allow Immigrants With “Limited Terrorism Ties”

Your government at work

(Daily Caller) The Obama administration has issued new exemptions to a law that bars certain asylum-seekers and refugees who provided “limited material support” to terrorists who are believed to pose no threat from the U.S.

The Department of Homeland Security and the State Department published the new exemptions Wednesday in the Federal Register to narrow a ban in the Immigration and Nationality Act excluding refugees and asylum seekers who had provided limited material support, no matter how minor, to terrorists.

“These exemptions cover five kinds of limited material support that have adversely and unfairly affected refugees and asylum seekers with no tangible connection to terrorism: material support that was insignificant in amount or provided incidentally in the course of everyday social, commercial, family or humanitarian interactions, or under significant pressure,” a DHS official explained to The Daily Caller.

Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry signed the exemptions.

Fantastic! The Obama admin. is going to allow people with tiny terrorism ties in to the country. What could possibly go wrong? Yet, the Obama admin. is trying to deport German’s who came to the US seeking asylum so that they could home-school their children.

There is also a consideration as to whether the Obama admin. has the authority to make these changes to the law. Not that The Law ever stopped Obama before. And then there’s this

And while the changes will affect those seeking protection in the short term, the manner in which the Obama administration changed the law will not be lost on Republican skeptics of immigration reform in the long term.

“This glaring end-run around Congress underscores that immigration reform is doomed to failure,” a Senate GOP aide told TheDC.

If Team O wants to unilaterally change immigration law, especially in terms of allowing people, on a cases by case basis (supposedly), with ties to terrorism, why should the GOP trust him on any new immigration legislation?

Read: Team Obama To Allow Immigrants With “Limited Terrorism Ties” »

States Look To Pass Laws To Broaden Obamacare Networks

One of the “unexpected” results of the “Affordable” Care Act’s notion of reducing health care costs has been a restriction of in-network providers. This is where quite a few folks found out that if they like their doctor, they can’t keep their doctor. Since most people who signed up through the Exchanges were people who previously had insurance and saw it cancelled, rather than those who did not have insurance, this is important. Also, quite a few hospitals, including the best hospital, have been left out of the networks. How is this working out?

(Bloomberg) Health insurers under pressure to keep premiums low are eliminating some hospitals from coverage in a cost-cutting strategy that threatens to freeze out centers that provide specialized care, limiting patient options. (snip)

The law puts pressure on premiums by requiring insurers to “broaden health benefits, restricting how much premiums can vary with age and adding a new health-insurance tax,” said Robert Zirkelbach, a spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, or AHIP, a Washington-based trade group. Narrowing networks to those that accept lower payments in exchange for higher patient volume “is one way to help mitigate profit increase for consumers,” he said.

Insurers say one way to help lower costs is to select medical providers who deliver quality care at a low price. This week, the Health and Human Services Department said insurance plans may be required to include at least 30 percent of “essential community providers” in each county in 2015 from 20 percent this year. That means about 38 percent of current plans would need to broaden their networks, according to the McKinsey study.

So, HHS is going to blow out one of the main cost reduction methods caused by Obamacare and the rules passed by HHS. This could result in skyrocketing costs for the insurers and the insurers dropping out of the Exchanges.

Quite a bit of the article is about the Seattle Children’s Hospital, which is excluded from 5 of the 7 plans in Washington state. They are excluded because they are more expensive than other hospitals. The article forgets to note that they’re more expensive because they are very very good. Their “product” is top notch. Both a Camry and a Maserati are simply cars with four wheels, an engine, and a steering wheel, right? Why does one cost more than another? Exactly.

Many hospitals, doctors, and medical centers want to be in-Network (many don’t, especially doctors). But the Exchange plans have to save costs. In comes government, beyond the aforementioned HHS

(Fox News) Lawmakers in a Washington state Senate committee heard a proposal this week that would reportedly allow health insurance companies to keep offering insurance plans that don’t meet the new federal and state requirements. But they would only be offered to people who were enrolled in such plans as of Oct. 1, 2013.

Senate Bill 6464 also would let insurers from other states sell plans to Washingtonians without requiring the carriers to meet Washington state insurance regulations.

Both of those seem to violate federal law.

Meanwhile, in Mississippi, proposed legislation would bar insurers from cutting off most doctors and hospitals that agree to prices set by insurers. The bill also would prohibit insurers from charging higher copayments at certain doctors’ offices or hospitals, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Many other states are looking at similar legislation. What would this mean? Escalating costs. These will be funded by either the consumer or the pool of taxpayers. This would also mean reduced reimbursement rates to the medical facilities. And reduced care.

Yes, networks have always been restricted with insurance. And you do not always get to keep your doctor when switching. I’ve lost my dentist three times in 20 years because my company changed their dental insurance. Obamacare causes severe restrictions on networks both by the insurance companies and because medical facilities, primarily individual doctors/care professionals, want nothing to do with Ocare. So states and HHS will force the networks to grow. And we can all guess that this will cause Ocare costs to skyrocket.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: States Look To Pass Laws To Broaden Obamacare Networks »

Ocare Enrollees Have Trouble Finding In-network Doctors

Surprise?

(LA Times) After overcoming website glitches and long waits to get Obamacare, some patients are now running into frustrating new roadblocks at the doctor’s office.

A month into the most sweeping changes to healthcare in half a century, people are having trouble finding doctors at all, getting faulty information on which ones are covered and receiving little help from insurers swamped by new business.

Experts have warned for months that the logjam was inevitable. But the extent of the problems is taking by surprise many patients — and even doctors — as frustrations mount.

Part of this is bad information and bad websites, and insurance companies being overwhelmed. But, it also goes to losing your doctor

Aliso Viejo resident Danielle Nelson said Anthem Blue Cross promised half a dozen times that her oncologists would be covered under her new policy. She was diagnosed last year with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and discovered a suspicious lump near her jaw in early January.

But when she went to her oncologist’s office, she promptly encountered a bright orange sign saying that Covered California plans are not accepted.

“I’m a complete fan of the Affordable Care Act, but now I can’t sleep at night,” Nelson said. “I can’t imagine this is how President Obama wanted it to happen.”

Well, you just continue being a fan and putting that shield over Obama’s posterior. And not sleeping, because you lost your doctor, unlike what Obama promised.

Another person in the article referred to it as a “phantom network”.

Last week, the California Assembly approved legislation enabling people who lost coverage because of the overhaul to keep seeing their doctors if they’re pregnant or undergoing treatment for cancer or other conditions.

If you have to pass a law to keep people from losing their insurance due to the previous plan you supported, doesn’t say much about the original law, eh?

Nationwide, about 70% of new insurance plans under the healthcare law feature relatively narrow hospital networks compared with many existing plans, according to consulting firm McKinsey & Co.

Ocare is about cost savings, not expansion, and due to this idiocy people’s “choice” will be severely restricted.

Read: Ocare Enrollees Have Trouble Finding In-network Doctors »

Pirate's Cove