…is horrible climate killing concrete used in the stone joints, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with your feel good gun story of the day.
Read: If All You See… »
…is horrible climate killing concrete used in the stone joints, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with your feel good gun story of the day.
Read: If All You See… »
This isn’t breaking news or anything, this occurred back in the early part of the month. However, if Obama can still Blame Bush, and media outlets can bring up things for months and years ago, the delay should be OK
(Fox News) A nativity scene at Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina was abruptly removed last week.
Now we know why.
The recommendation to remove a Nativity from a Christmas display at the base came from Pentagon lawyers who feared the plastic Baby Jesus could give the appearance that the military is endorsing religion.
A spokesperson for the South Carolina base told me that Pentagon lawyers were acting on a complaint filed by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, a radical anti-Christian organization whose leaders appear to hold great sway over President Obama’s Pentagon.
This goes to several things, one of which is the s0-called “tolerance” of the political Left. They’re tolerant as long as they get their way. And then you get groups like the MRFF (the same group which complained and forced the removal of Nativity scenes at Guantanamo) who expose their intolerance by pushing this fake “endorsement” issue. It’d be nice if Leftists would read, and understand, the Constitution for a change.
Another is the wimpification and secularization of our military under Obama. And
The Military Religious Freedom Foundation said they were alerted by an undisclosed number of Airmen who said they were emotionally troubled by the sight of the plastic Jewish family.
Robert D. Raiford calls this the United States Of The Offended. “Emotionally troubled”? Seriously? Get a life. Get a backbone.
The Nativity scene was moved to near the base chapel from its position near Memorial Lake. So, it is still on base, just somewhere else. So, how is different? It’s all about whiners being whiners and wanting to create an issue. Their poor delicate eyes can’t take it or something.
Funny how these same Leftists do not seem too emotionally troubled as to what happens to women and gays in Muslim nations.
Read: Nativity Scene Moved From Display At Shaw Air Force Base »
You’ll notice something is missing from this article by Brett Logiurato at Business Insider
Obamacare Enrollment Is Absolutely Exploding In California
California’s state health insurance exchange announced Thursday a huge surge in enrollment over the past three days, as more than 50,000 people signed up for private insurance under the Affordable Care Act.
Covered California, the state’s official online marketplace, said in a press release that 53,510 people had selected an insurance plan from Monday through Wednesday. That’s 60% more than the number of people who signed up in the entire month of October (30,830).
Overall in November, nearly 260,000 people selected insurance plans through both federal and state exchanges. That was a significant bump from the 106,185 that enrolled in October, but still far off the pace of the Obama administration’s goal of 7 million sign-ups by March 31.
Can you guess what’s missing? I’m sure you can, because you’re smart, and understand that this is about people selecting plans, not actually paying for plans. I go to Amazon and download free previews of books to my Kindle all the time. There are 5 previews on it right now. According to Obamacarists, this means I’ve purchased the books, even though I haven’t paid a dime for them. I also put some cigars for my dad for Christmas in a shopping cart at one site, but purchased elsewhere. Under Obamacare supporter doctrine this means I’ve purchased them.
The press release from Covered California makes no mention as to whether these people, including the signups in October and November, have paid.
BTW, it’s pretty darned sad that Covered California is using Blogspot for their “news”.
Read: Obamacare Enrollment Is “Absolutely Exploding” In California Or Something »
Continuing the 25 Days Of Climate Christmas, some serious wackadoodleness
There’s so much disturbing weather all over the world right now
It got so hot in Denver this week that they hit a record high of 68 degrees Farenheit.
But don’t worry. Not everywhere where it’s supposed to be winter is having summer. Some places that are supposed to be having summer are having winter.
What? Yeah. It’s snowing in Vietnam. And in Cairo.
Enjoy Christmas, folks, because it could be your last. Here’s a list of recent freaky weather events that you can use against your relatives who don’t believe in climate change. Call it a cheat sheet, if you like:
Why, yes, yes, the article did just blame snow on “climate change”. Here’s the list of “disturbing weather”
So, there you go, folks, two of 5 are about snow. One is about heavy rain, which is often associated with a reduction in solar output (a reduction means an increase in cosmic rays striking the earth, increasing cloud formation). So, Christmas might be cancelled in the future, cause mumble garble climate change.
(Photo via Vietnam News Agency/AFP/Getty Images, Ice-covered tree in Lao Cai, Vietnam)
Said NY Times article starts of with a Typical Human Interest story about a family that saw their premium skyrocket, and if they just made a little bit less they would be eligible for some sort of subsidy, then notes
The Chapmans acknowledge that they are better off than many people, but they represent a little-understood reality of the Affordable Care Act. While the act clearly benefits those at the low end of the income scale — and rich people can continue to afford even the most generous plans — people like the Chapmans are caught in the uncomfortable middle: not poor enough for help, but not rich enough to be indifferent to cost.
“We are just right over that line,†said Ms. Chapman, who is 54 and does administrative work for a small wealth management firm. Because their plan is being canceled, she is looking for new coverage for her family, which includes Mr. Chapman, 55, a retired fireman who works on a friend’s farm, and her two sons. “That’s an insane amount of money,†she said of their new premium. “How are you supposed to pay that?â€
Insane. Yet, that’s just the premium. The Chapman’s haven’t even gotten to the point where they are considering the insane deductibles. But, this Times article is about premiums
An analysis by The New York Times shows the cost of premiums for people who just miss qualifying for subsidies varies widely across the country and rises rapidly for people in their 50s and 60s. In some places, prices can quickly approach 20 percent of a person’s income.
Experts consider health insurance unaffordable once it exceeds 10 percent of annual income. By that measure, a 50-year-old making $50,000 a year, or just above the qualifying limit for assistance, would find the cheapest available plan to be unaffordable in more than 170 counties around the country, ranging from Anchorage to Jackson, Miss.
Of course, let’s be honest, there are 3,007 counties in the United States. Heck, North Carolina alone has 100. But, because of Obamacare, 6% would find their premiums “unaffordable”. But a lot of this is based not just on county, but earnings, in terms of whether one would qualify for a subsidy (and let’s not forget that subsidies in those states with a federally run Marketplace are actually against the law).
The article also notes that the availability of the subsidies, and how much they are, can change dramatically from year to year based on earnings, meaning more rate shocks.
But, what the article doesn’t touch on is the notion as to what happens with those with employer based coverage. They do not qualify for subsidies. But, they might see their subsidies skyrocket, because those plans must have the same offerings of the Exchange plans. We’ll soon start seeing exactly what they are. Employer based is around 44% of the population.
Interestingly, 17.1% stated they were uninsured in 2012. I wonder what that rate will be come 2014? Of course, in reality, if you have a plan but cannot afford the deductibles, you are still essentially uninsured.
Read: NY Times: Say, This Obamacare Thing Isn’t Such A Great Deal For The Middle Class »
If his grandkids are 17 or under, they haven’t actually experienced global warming, anthropogenic or otherwise. Continuing the 25 Days Of Climate Christmas
Santa Claus and Climate Change: A Letter to My Grandkids
December 2020
Dear Grandchildren,
Once upon a time, a jolly old man named St. Nick, or Santa Claus, lived at the North Pole. Every year, at Christmas, he bundled up toys made by his magic elves and flew around the world in a sleigh pulled by flying reindeer, including his most famous one, Rudolph. Santa brought these presents to all the good little boys and girls in return for nothing more than cookies, milk, and unquestioned love. But he also kept a list of bad little boys and girls, who got a lump of coal in their stockings as a reminder to be better next year.
I’m sorry to have to tell you there will be no presents from Santa this year.
It’s not that you’ve been bad. Rather the world’s governments (sometimes run by bad boys and girls now grown up) have failed to address the long-worsening problem of climate change. Santa is the latest climate victim. As the last of the summer ice at the North Pole finally disappeared, Santa’s workshop sank to the bottom of the Arctic Ocean. When the insurance companies cancelled most flood insurance policies, and Canada claimed the North Pole, Santa lost everything and became the latest climate refugee.
Is there any point in supplying rebuttal information to this bit of climahysteria? Perhaps we could mention Gleik’s involvement in Fakegate. Perhaps we should note that Arctic ice actually grew quite a bit in 2013 (when the Arctic was supposed to be ice free, according to several unhinged Warmists). Or that nutballs have been making predictions of a doomed Arctic back into the 1930’s (they’ve actually made the same prognostication back into the late 1800’s, but I don’t feel like searching Steven Goddard’s archive). Na. Let’s just give Excitable Peter a gift of

Read: Warmist Peter Gleick Offers Up A Christmas Climate Hysteria Letter To His Grandkids »
…is snow that is caused by fossil fueled heat, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Victory Girls Blog, with a post on Los Federales asking Google to remove certain political ads
Read: If All You See… »
Good news: it’s not just federal and state government that’s broken
(WRAL) Eric Becoats announced his plan Thursday night to resign as superintendent of Durham Public Schools effective Dec. 31, 2013. He has been under scrutiny in recent months for financial management missteps that range from the use of a school bus to transport family and friends to the underestimate, by $15 million, of the school system budget.
Becoats, who was under contract until June 30, 2016, will get a one-time severance payment of $298,072.54.
Let me get this straight: he’s under investigation for multiple issues, one of which is using the school credit card for personal purchases (which would get one immediately fired at most private firms), yet he’s allowed to resign with a payoff of almost $300k in taxpayer money?
Here’s an interesting one: one of the things I and many others have noted is that the Constitution does not restrict religion in Government nor on Government property. The 1st Amendment simply stops government from creating a national religion, along with stopping Los Federales from stopping the free practice of religion. But, we’re heading to Florida
(Tallahassee.com) The Satanic Temple will not be placing its holiday display in the Florida Capitol.
The group’s application was declined by the Department of Management Services due to its “grossly offensive†nature.
In an email Wednesday afternoon, DMS Administrative Assistant Sherrie K. Routt denied Satanic Temple spokesperson Lucien Greaves the inclusion of a kiosk adorned with an angel falling into a pit of flames and the words “Happy Holidays from the Satanic Temple†because “The Department’s position is that your proposed display is grossly offensive during the holiday season.â€
One thing I and others have noted is that if a Christian display is allowed, displays from other religions should be allowed, if they want. To go with a Nativity scene at the Fla. Capital, you have one featuring the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Another for Festivus. And, of course, several from atheist groups. Because they can’t help being jerks at Christmas-time. But, Florida was waiting for a photo from the Satanic group before they would approve or deny the display. Once they saw it, they said “no!”

It even features a Bible verse from Luke: “And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.â€
So, here’s the tough question: should the display, despite being “grossly offensive”, be included? In the header of my blog I have the quote “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.†This would apply to expressing religion. But, here’s an interesting thing from the Florida Constitution, Article I, Section 3
Religious freedom.—There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.
First, that clause in bold allows for the Satanic Temple display to be rejected. Second, that is an extremely dangerous phrase when it comes to any religion. What if someone is offended by having to view crosses at public churches, and sues under that phrase? I could think of many ways that phrase could be abused. Fortunately, most people who would abuse it, primarily people on the political Left, never actually read any of the Constitutions/Bills Of Rights for the US and the States.
So, Friday question: should the display be allowed?