…is a horrible fossil fueled fireplace causing snow to fall, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The Last Tradition, with a post on scaring people with a Christmas Tree prank.
PS: I would avoid going to the website in the top right corner of picture. I snagged it via Google images while searching for “sexy santa hat”, xaboom.com is rather NSFW.
Read: If All You See… »
Gotta love starry eyed, unicorn riding yoots
(KSTP) Students at more than 20 high schools and colleges across the state are calling on President Barack Obama to address climate change this holiday season.
The students are working with Environment Minnesota to collect photo petitions showing support for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. The call to action comes as the Environmental Protection Agency prepares new standards to limit carbon pollution from power plants.
Their message is that all they want for the holidays is action on climate change.
Fortunately, the Mother Nature is happy to oblige. The highest forecasted temperature through Christmas is 23F for Minneapolis. The average high is 26. Christmas will be a below average 18F.
Read: All Minnesota Students Want For Christmas Is Climate Change Action Or Something »
Well, we know who should be pulling full duty on Christmas
(Fox News) The commander of the Guantanamo Bay naval base decided Wednesday to move Nativity scenes from two dining halls following complaints that the decorations improperly promoted Christianity.
Both Nativity scenes will be moved to the courtyard of the base chapel, said Kelly Wirfel, a spokeswoman for Capt. John Nettleton, commander of the base in southeastern Cuba.
The displays were set up by foreign contractors who manage the two dining facilities and were “not intended to endorse any religion,” Wirfel said in response to concerns raised by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation.
Showing religion on government grounds (remember, government grounds are owned by We The People) is not an endorsement per the 1st Amendment. But, Scrooges want to be Scrooges. 18 troops anonymously complained to the MRFF, and supposedly
Eleven of those who complained are Protestant or Roman Catholic and the rest are Muslim, Jewish, agnostic or atheist, he said.
Most likely those “eleven” were brought up as Protestant and Catholic, and have switched to atheism, though they do not want to say it. Now, will these 18 whiners who want to screw it up for everyone else as they think only of themselves be skipping the special Christmas day meal, along with all the extras, presents, and everything that goes with the Christmas celebration? Who wants to bet the answer is “no”?
The senders (of the email to the MRFF) said they put up with a great deal of hardship in their jobs, including having bodily fluids hurled at them by prisoners, and should not be made uncomfortable on their time off.
Oh, no, made to feel “uncomfortable”. How horrible for them. So, again, they ruin it for everyone else.
Read: Complainers Complain About Nativity Scenes At Gitmo, Forcing Removal »
Remember how Mr. Obama and so many other Democrats told us that people would love Obamacare as time went on? How’s that working out?
(NY Times) Americans who lack medical coverage disapprove of President Obama’s health care law at roughly the same rate as the insured, even though most say they struggle to pay for basic care, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
Fifty-three percent of the uninsured disapprove of the law, the poll found, compared with 51 percent of those who have health coverage. A third of the uninsured say the law will help them personally, but about the same number think it will hurt them, with cost a leading concern.
The widespread skepticism, even among people who are supposed to benefit from the law, underscores the political challenge facing the Obama administration as it tries to persuade millions of Americans to enroll in coverage through new online marketplaces, a crucial element of making the new law financially viable for insurers.
One of the big problems with Obamacare, ie, the “Affordable” Care Act, is that having health insurance doesn’t mean one has health care. Why? Even if a person can afford the premiums, and even with subsidies (provided one is eligible) they can still be expensive, the deductibles themselves are high. Can your average person pitch out $5K, $6K, $7K, $10k or more for the actual care? And that’s just the tip of the Obamacare iceberg.
“I don’t understand it at all,†said Derrick Stapleton, 47, an independent from Peru, Ind., speaking in a follow-up interview. Mr. Stapleton, who is uninsured and out of work, said he planned to sign up for coverage before the March 31 deadline. But he added, “It sounds, from what I understand, that it might not be as affordable as they once thought.â€
The heck you say! Those who wrote the bill, and Team Obama as they crafted the rules, decided that the best way to lower costs was to make sure no one could really afford to use the insurance.
Robyn Logan, 55, of Bowie, Md., is an uninsured Democrat who said poor past experiences with the health care system made her skeptical of the law’s potential. “I need to see a doctor and my fear is that even if I get insurance, I won’t be able to find one,†she said. “I was on Medicaid at one point and couldn’t find a doctor because no one would take me.â€
The same will happen with the huge numbers of Americans pushed into Medicaid instead of “private” health insurance.
From the CBS story on the poll
Overall, by more than two to one Americans think the health care law will hurt them (34 percent) rather than help them (16 percent). While the uninsured are more positive than those with insurance about the law’s impact, more think the law will hurt (37 percent) rather than help (33 percent) them.
Ouch. Here’s a big point
You have a sweeping law affecting 1/6th of the US economy, touching on the lives of ever single American. It could be a light touch, it could be a heavy touch. Gobs of taxpayer money is being spent on this law. Democrats and their groups have spent gobs of money pimping it. Yet, overall, only 36% think Obamacare will make the health care system better than before. Which should tell you just how horrible this law is.
Crossed at Right Wing News
Read: Surprise! Majority Of Uninsured Disapprove Of Obamacare »
Trackback URL
Today’s awesome app is INRIX Traffic, a handy dandy little app that shows you reported traffic conditions in an easy to see format. You’ll see accidents, color coded roads to show issues, view traffic cameras, see the estimated travel time between work and home, and so much more.
It covers 4 million miles of road worldwide. You can report accidents and police activity. I love this because it is easy to see quickly. Give it a whirl!
Hmmmm
(Washington Times) In Missouri, legislation has been introduced to nullify every federal gun control measure on the books, “whether past, present or future.â€
The 2nd Amendment Preservation Act, introduced as Senate Bill 613 (SB613) for the 2014 legislative session by Sen. Brian Nieves, follows on the heels of a failed effort to do the same in 2013.
The bill states, in part:
All federal acts, laws, executive orders, administrative orders, court orders, rules, and regulations, whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in this state, shall not be recognized by this state, shall be specifically rejected by this state, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this state.
State employees would be barred from enforcing federal firearms laws that violate the act, and could even see agents, including federal agents, who violate the law jailed.
This is interesting in that the bill is meant to stand up for State’s Rights, as portrayed by that pesky 10th Amendment, and reduce the power of the Federal government, as the system was meant to be.
…is an evil electricity sucking smartphone which No One Else should have, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on haters gonna hate.
Read: If All You See… »
..it’s not science, it’s prognostication from reading tea leaves. Here’s USA Today writer Wendy Koch going full bore stupid
Rising sea levels torment Norfolk, Va., and coastal U.S.
How high will they go? Scientists don’t know exactly how much the seas will rise, but they see an accelerating climb that could range from 8 inches to more than 6 feet by century’s end.
A range of 8 to 72 inches is a difference of 900%. Or, you could say 9 times the difference. After the typical opening sob story, we get
As the 10th part of its year-long series on climate change, USA TODAY traveled to Virginia’s picturesque Tidewater region — bound by creeks, rivers and the Chesapeake Bay — to look at how rising sea levels are affecting America’s coastal communities, where more than a third of its people and wealth reside.
The seas have risen and fallen before. What’s new is the enormity of coastal development that will need to be protected, moved or abandoned. In this 21st century tale, an old fisherman isn’t battling a large marlin (as in Ernest Hemingway’s classic The Old Man and the Sea), but the cities are battling the seas.
What’s new is the number of people who have built their homes and businesses in a coastal area, and are proclaiming “climate change” as a reason for Government to give them piles of cash to protect their property from what has happened before and will happen again.
Sea level has risen nearly 8 inches worldwide since 1880 but, unlike water in a bathtub, it doesn’t rise evenly. In the past 100 years, it has climbed about a foot or more in some U.S. cities because of ocean currents and land subsidence — 11 inches in New York and Boston, 12 in Charleston, 16 in Atlantic City, 18 in Norfolk and 25 in Galveston, Texas, according to a USA TODAY analysis of 2012 tide gauge data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
8 inches would be actually below the historical average for the last 7,000 years of 6-8 inches per century. And the higher data would be well within the historical norm for what one would expect during a warm period during the Holocene. NOAA has a monitoring center in Sewell’s Point, Va, the closest for Norfolk, mentioned as 18 inches
This shows a completely linear rise going back to 1930, with a big spike during the El Nino year. Nothing unusual. This is nature in action. And there is no way to compare it properly to previous warm periods. So, is this unusual?
How much higher will it go? Scientists don’t know exactly but, depending on fossil fuel emissions, they project global sea level will rise about 1 foot to slightly more than 3 feet (or 39 inches) by 2100, according to this year’s Fifth Assessment Report by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. NOAA has projected sea level could rise higher, as much as 6½ feet, by century’s end.
And there we go, the blame is on Mankind, and especially fossil fuels. Despite there being nothing unusual about the sea level rise. Despite scientists not really knowing, which means they are simply making a WAG. Warmists want to spend a billion dollars in Norfolk alone to deal with “adaption”. A lot of Norfolk is only, at best, a few feet above sea level. What did they think was going to happen? Norfolk is also dealing with land subsidence. Welcome to the reality of natural changes in the earth, Warmists.
Continuing the 25 Days Of Climate Christmas, here’s Warmist Karen Telleen-Lawton in Santa Barbara
(Noozhawk) My holiday wish list is a little beyond my family to manage, so I’m putting it out to the world. It’s not dazzling or even visible in the short term, but stems from the startling fact that the U.S. still has no national limit on carbon pollution from power plants.
Now, regulations on the largest source of carbon pollution are finally within sight. Last September, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed federal carbon pollution standards for new fossil fuel fired power plants. At an emission rate of about 2.3 billion tons of carbon dioxide pollution per year, fossil fuel-burning power plants are the nation’s single largest of source of emissions, producing about 40 percent of the total. Carbon dioxide traps heat, which destabilizes the climate. My wish is that these new regs be passed in 2014.
How cute, “destabilizes”. I hadn’t heard that gripe before, but I suppose it goes to the Warmist notion of “extreme weather”, which hasn’t happened. I wonder if Ms. Telleen-Lawton can enlighten us as to when Earth’s climate has been stable? Oh, right, that happens mostly during ice ages and “snowball Earth”
The proposed standards are not just an edict without reasonable alternatives for meeting the demand. Solutions are available and in use today, including renewable energy, natural gas, coal with carbon recapture technology, and improved energy efficiency. The proposed standards are good for business because they provide reduced uncertainty about investing in alternative sources. Technology businesses will be able to bring to production cleaner, safer and more efficient solutions.
Notice what’s going on here: Ms. Telleen-Lawton is doing the typical Warmist schtick and wanting to implement Hotcoldwetdry policies on Someone Else. Furthermore, nowhere does she realize that her “wish list” will cause pain for those companies, which will be passed on in the form of higher consumer costs and lost jobs.
Carbon pollution affects rich and poor, urban and rural in every state of the nation. With a leveled playing field, the market can be trusted to devise ways of encouraging sustainable practices and discouraging polluting ones. Santa, can you just sprinkle us with some (biodegradable) fairy dust to encourage passage of the carbon pollution regulations?
Leveled playing field? Doesn’t sound too fascistic (National Socialist Party, anyone?), does it? Santa, can you sprinkle Warmists with some fairy dust that causes Warmists to give up their own fossil fueled vehicles and make their own lives “carbon neutral”?
Read: Warmist Christmas Wish List Includes New “Carbon” Regulations – On Other People »
We’ve long known that Democrats are not particular supporters of the military. This seemingly grew out of the hippy/anti-Vietnam movement…interestingly, a war started by Democrats…and strengthened during the Carter years, to the point that the Left has been attempting to cut military spending at every turn. They’re still trying to do it today, supporting cuts to the military while protecting illegals
(Daily Caller) Senate Republicans were unable to stop military pension cuts when Senate Democrats blocked a vote on an amendment to prevent the cuts by closing a welfare loophole for illegal immigrants Tuesday night.
The two-year budget deal brokered by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, would cut military pensions by $6 billion over ten years, leaving some Senate Republicans scrambling to stop the cuts.
“Removing this unbalanced treatment of our military retirees ought to be one of the key actions we should take before this legislation moves forward. In fact, greater savings than this can be achieved by passing a legislative fix recommended by the Inspector General of the U.S. Treasury that would stop the IRS from improperly providing tax credits to illegal aliens,†Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions said Monday, announcing his co-sponsorship of Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker’s amendment to restore the military retirement benefits Monday.
What this is about is a provision in the law that allows the parents of illegal children to obtain welfare benefits, to the tune of $4.2 billion dollars in 2010. Sessions’ amendment would have required a Social Security number to be used to claim the child tax credit, rather than a taxpayer ID number, as well as restore the military pension cuts.
Sessions’ motion failed on a 46 – 54 party line vote, with North Carolina Sen. Kay Hagan crossing the aisle as the lone Democrat to vote with the Republicans.
“Reid’s majority just voted to keep pension cut for vets instead of cutting welfare payments to illegal aliens,†a Sessions aide emailed.
But of course. Democrats have determined that they really love illegal aliens. Military members? Not so much.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Senate Democrats Prefer Illegal Alien Welfare To Military Pensions »
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.