Surprise! Climastrologers Want Massive Taxes To Stop Bad Weather

Via Tom Nelson, who notes that our new Climate Astrologer Sec. Of State John Kerry (who has many homes and fossil fueled vehicles) says “not going to happen”

(Santa Fe New Mexican) Future generations face sea-level rises of 18 to 27 feet, extinction of 30 percent to 50 percent of animal species and other catastrophes if carbon-based fuels continue to be used at the same rate as today, a climate scientist told a group at the Santa Fe Institute on Thursday.

James Hansen, physicist, astronomer and adjunct professor at Columbia University’s Earth Institute, said average temperatures have risen eight-tenths of a degree centigrade over the last century, and efforts to stem climate change will be ineffectual as long as fossil fuels remain the cheapest form of energy.

No scare mongering there. Hansen goes on to whine about fossil fuels and….hey, wait, how did Hansen get to Santa Fe?

Hansen proposed a new tax for carbon emissions from oil, gas and coal, collected at the wellhead, mine or port of entry, increasing $10 per ton annually for 30 years, with proceeds distributed directly to the public, which in a decade would mean $2,000 to $3,000 per resident, or $6,000 to $9,000 per family.

Not mentioned in the article is that under Hansen’s proposal the money would magically come back to US citizens. Insert GIF of someone laughing here. Hansen also discusses essentially destroying international commerce, in that you would pay way more for items from other countries (and even other States) over local products.

“This would affect your lifestyle and you could make changes. When you get your new car, you better consider a more efficient one. … Are you going to commute 50 miles a day every day?”

This from a guy who constantly takes fossil fueled travel all over the country and world. Funny how Warmists mostly refuse to change their own lifestyles. I blame them for bad weather events.

Read: Surprise! Climastrologers Want Massive Taxes To Stop Bad Weather »

What Happens When Concealed Carry Permits Are Legalized?

Doug Ross calls this the “one chart that says it all about women and safety

That’s what happened when Colorado State University legalized concealed carry in 2003. Perhaps vomiting or urinating on oneself or blowing a “rape whistle” isn’t really the best idea for defense. (originally from Fire Andrea Mitchell)

Read: What Happens When Concealed Carry Permits Are Legalized? »

If All You See…

…is an evil fossil fueled truck causing the planet to boil, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post on irony and Bob Menendez.

Read: If All You See… »

Climate Change: The Skeptics Case In 12 Minutes

This is a long video (12 minutes, obviously), but well worth the watch

This is accompanied by a link to Dr. David M.W. Evans’ website with charts and graphs and data and facts. Like me, Mr. Evans used to be a Believer, and is now a Climate Realist. He is showing that all the climate models are pretty much mule fritters. Something we’ve all know for a while now.

PS: this in no way means that the global climate didn’t warm post-Little Ice Age (it has) nor should it conclude that we are headed for a cool period.

Read: Climate Change: The Skeptics Case In 12 Minutes »

Gun Grabber States Consider Requiring Insurance

Just more proof that this debate is about doing everything possible to burden legal gun owners with draconian rules while failing to go after criminals with guns

(NY Times) Both sides in a nation sharply divided over guns seem to agree on at least one thing: a bigger role for the insurance industry in a heavily armed society. But just what that role should be, and whether insurers will choose to accept it, are much in dispute.

By “both sides”, do writers Michael Cooper and Mary Williams Walsh mean liberals and Progressives? Actually, what they’re referring to is that groups like the NRA and United States Concealed Carry Association recommend and/or offer insurance for gun owners. The difference here is that it is voluntary, while many gun grabber States would make insurance mandatory, and you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be expensive and burdensome.

Lawmakers in at least half a dozen states, including California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Pennsylvania, have proposed legislation this year that would require gun owners to buy liability insurance — much as car owners are required to buy auto insurance. Doing so would give a financial incentive for safe behavior, they hope, as people with less dangerous weapons or safety locks could qualify for lower rates.

So, if you’re a tiny woman and want a scary looking gun with a collapsible stock which makes it easier to hold, say, a Bushmaster .223, you’re rates would be sky high (hey, you can always vomit on yourself instead to stop a rapist!). But, if you buy a Vepr-Pioneer .223, which is harder to hold for a small woman, you can save money. As for safe behavior, will that include insurance agents and law enforcement making random and un-announced visits?

“I believe that if we get the private sector and insurance companies involved in gun safety, we can help prevent a number of gun tragedies every year,” said David P. Linsky, a Democratic state representative in Massachusetts who wants to require gun owners to buy insurance. He believes it will encourage more responsible behavior and therefore reduce accidental shootings. “Insurance companies are very good at evaluating risk factors and setting their premiums appropriately,” he added.

What about criminals who engage in violence with guns, Mr. Linksy? Like most of the gun grabbers, Linsky is silent on that point. And all that this gun grabbing will do is make law abiding citizens more prone to being the recipients of criminal behavior. Don’t worry, though, because law enforcement will be around sometime after the assault to…check to make sure you have all your guns locked up tight and your insurance is in order.

Read: Gun Grabber States Consider Requiring Insurance »

Politico: Is Obama Overplaying Sequestor Hand?

A random act of journalism from Carrie Budoff Brown and Jake Sherman

(Politico) President Barack Obama’s greatest adversary in the latest budget battle isn’t the Republican leadership in Congress — it’s his confidence in his own ability to force a win.

He has been so certain of his campaign skills that he didn’t open a line of communication with House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell until Thursday, a week before the spending ax hits. And when they did finally hear from Obama, the calls were perfunctory, with no request to step up negotiations or invitations to the White House.

Is anyone particularly surprised that Mr. Obama didn’t bother talking to Boehner nor McConnell until yesterday? I wouldn’t be surprised if he had failed to discuss this with Congressional Democrats. It’s all part of Obama’s crisis creation governance system, based on Cloward-Piven. We’ve seen this time and time again, it follow the same pattern. He waits till the last minute, he demonizes and insults his opponents (before even engaging them in discourse), he scare-mongers in front of groups of human shields, and also tends to scuttle any deals which Congressional Republicans and Dems have worked out. Plus more demonizing and insults.

That’s because Obama’s all-in on an outside strategy, doing just about everything other than holding serious talks with Republicans. In the last two days alone, he’s courted local TV anchors, called in a select group of White House correspondents to talk off-the-record, chatted up black broadcasters, and announced plans to stump next week at Virginia’s Newport News Shipyard. Throughout, he’s talked in tough terms that signal little interest in compromise — or suggestion of backing down.

All this is guaranteed to create a crisis without attempting to do anything to mitigate or solve the issue. It’s part of the Neverending Campaign, but campaigning is not governing.

White House aides argued that a precedent had been set in the short-term deal by paying down the sequester with a share of spending cuts and tax hikes. They also rationalized that the reprieve would give both sides some space to figure out a solution.

But there has been no discernible effort by the White House to work on a bill that might pass.

Well, you know, golf lessons and hitting the links with Tiger Woods. One has to prioritize one’s calendar, and Obama probably understands the reality of the situation, namely that the Sequester is meaningless. It contains no cuts, it’s simply a slight reduction in the rate of growth, and will probably be blown off in a year or two. But, hey, once a community agitator always a community agitator. For someone who was handed a Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Obama sure likes picking fights.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Politico: Is Obama Overplaying Sequestor Hand? »

MTGP: IPCC Head Admits Global Warming Standstill

Don’t worry, he’ll find a way around this

(GWPF) The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last “30 to 40 years at least” to break the long-term global warming trend.

This comes from an The Australian article beyond a pay wall. Pachauri has absolutely no problem Moving The Goal Posts with the “30-40 years” thing. Warmists see a thunderstorm or a fart in the wind and blame AGW

Dr Pachauri said global average temperatures had plateaued at record levels and that the halt did not disprove global warming.

Of course not. Nothing will ever disprove AGW in the minds of the Warmists. If the Earth went into an actual glaciation period this year they’d blame it on Mankind.

“The climate is changing because of natural factors and the impact of human actions,” Dr Pachauri said.

“If you look at temperatures going back 150 years, there are clearly fluctuations which have occurred largely as a result of natural factors: solar activity, volcanic activity and so on.

“What is quite perceptible is, in the last 50 years, the trend is upwards.

“This is not to say you won’t have ups and downs – you will – but what we should be concerned about is the trend, and that is being influenced now to a large extent by human actions.”

If it was mostly natural factors back then, why can’t it be mostly natural factors now?

Read: MTGP: IPCC Head Admits Global Warming Standstill »

If All You See…

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Nice Deb, with a post on why we resist.

Read: If All You See… »

Schoolkids Won’t Know What Match Play Looks Like

Won’t someone please think of the children?

(Brattleboro Reformer) Already a year of wacky weather on the PGA Tour, this might have topped it all — snow.

The opening round of the Match Play Championship was suspended Wednesday when a cold rain that came down sideways quickly gave way to snow from a winter storm that dumped close to 2 inches on Dove Mountain in just over an hour.

“I’ve never actually played golf to the point where we’ve actually stopped for snow, which is kind of crazy,” said Jason Day of Australia, who was 6 up through 10 holes over Zach Johnson. “A little crazy for it to snow in the desert, as well. But that’s just how it is. Mother Nature can do whatever she wants.”

It’s so terrible! Schoolkids also won’t know what their schools look like due to over-heated planet created snow.

Read: Schoolkids Won’t Know What Match Play Looks Like »

More And More Firearms Businesses Refuse To Sell To Anti-Gun States

Perhaps it’s not fair to deny law enforcement the means to purchase a gun, but, many states are doing all they can to deny their citizens their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms

(The Blaze) Last Friday TheBlaze reported on a growing list of gun manufacturers and retailers who had stopped selling to law enforcement in states that were enacting stringent new gun laws.

Since that report, the initial list (seen below) has changed. However, none of the “big three” (Glock, Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson) providers to law enforcement have stepped up and joined the companies who have chosen to take a public stand on the issue. In less than two weeks, at least 18 companies have made the decision to stop selling to law enforcement in states that limit a private citizen’s right to own a gun.

In some cases, like Armalite, the companies will, in fact, sell to individual police officers who are purchasing the weapons themselves, but not the actual police department. I really like the stance of Trident Armory

Sunday night, 9pm. As of this moment, all contract bids and offers, as well as any current production contracts for any and all US government agencies and affiliates by Trident Armory are null and void.

“We will no longer participate with, or work for a government where the “rights” of the people are able to be adjusted by the whim of the government”.” I will not build guns which can be used to disarm my fellow Americans

And here’s the NRA’s ad, which will surely annoy liberals and gun-grabbers with the notion that government doesn’t grant us rights and doesn’t make us free

Read: More And More Firearms Businesses Refuse To Sell To Anti-Gun States »

Pirate's Cove