Bummer: Warmists Who Eat Healthy Are Not Saving The Planet From Boiling

Of course, we are talking about French cuisine, so, take this with a grain of salt…unless you are in New York City, then Mayor Bloomberg might come for you with fully automatic assault rifles

Background: Healthy diets are supposed to be more environmentally friendly because they rely mainly on plant-based foods, which have lower greenhouse gas emissions (GHGEs) per unit weight than do animal-based foods. (big snip)

Conclusion: Despite containing large amounts of plant-based foods, self-selected diets of the highest nutritional quality are currently not those with the lowest diet-related GHGEs.

But, still, eating healthy is still not a bad idea.

Read: Bummer: Warmists Who Eat Healthy Are Not Saving The Planet From Boiling »

Hey, What Should The Next Pope Worry About?

Over at Ace’s spot, BenK provides his morning link dump and offers this

The Pope Is Stepping Down, Now The Media Gets To Continually Suggest The New Pope Not Follow Catholic Doctrine

The media is going to be falling all over themselves to push things. The above link is already softly pushing the raaaaacism meme

Sky News Foreign Affairs Editor Tim Marshall said: “Seven years as pope is not very long.

“Last time, there was a lot of speculation that it was time for the first black pope. What Pope Benedict has done in recent years is to pack the ranks of the Vatican with lots of Europeans.”

Eeeeevil old white men!!!!!!1!! And

Dr Rebecca Rist, an expert in the history of the papacy from the University of Reading, said: “The cardinals will now have to elect a new pope – perhaps someone from South America or Africa – areas of the world where the Church is growing in numbers.

“The new pope will have huge global issues to prioritise – poverty, education, human rights, the environment – and not least the importance of faith and belief in an increasingly secularised Europe.

Um, might one of the new Pope’s priorities, and really, his main priority, be, well, the Catholic religion?

Read: Hey, What Should The Next Pope Worry About? »

If All You See…

…is a horrible drought world from Other People driving SUVs, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Da Tech Guy, with some thoughts on the Pope resigning

Read: If All You See… »

White House Pressures GOP To Fix Sequester Plan Obama Proposed

Of course, what Team Obama really wants is more “revenue”, ie, tax increases

(The Hill) The White House on Sunday sought to pressure Republicans to “come to the table” to strike a deal to avert sequester cuts slated to hit at the end of the month.

In a blog post on the White House website, senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer argued the cuts would affect the nation’s job creation, national security, and economic growth.

Can anyone point towards where Obama has cared about any of those three? His pivots to the economy ever 6 months or so before moving on show that his policies are failures, as do the poor economic conditions of the country.

Pfeiffer took aim at congressional Republicans, blasting their call for offsetting cuts as a “my way or the highway approach.”

I’m highly tempted to follow the pattern of the previous post and insert a gif of someone laughing, but I’ll refrain and just point out that Pfeiffer is using some marvelous projection.

The two parties are split on how to best address the $85 billion in automatic cuts. Democrats, including President Obama, have said they want to offset that amount with a mixture of spending cuts and tax revenues gained by eliminating certain deductions and loopholes. Republicans have said they are unwilling to accept new taxes as part of a deal.

“If Republicans in Congress want spending cuts, there is a simple way to get them that will not imperil our economy, our national security, or vital programs that middle class families depend on: come to the table for a balanced plan that also closes loopholes for millionaires and billionaires,” Pfeiffer argued Sunday. “The unbalanced Republican approach does not reflect our values as a nation, and would not help our economy continue the important progress we are making. It’s time for Congress to act.”

Every time the GOP comes to the table Team Obama proposes mostly tax increases (he also then tanks the deal by demanding more). Any cuts they offer are marginal and drops in the bucket. Not that the sequester is that big a deal in the first place. In Washington spending terms, it is tiny. $1 trillion over 10 year? Which will surely be discarded within a few years.

The GOP has already voted on two plans in the House. So far, Obama and Senate Democrats have failed to produce a viable plan which includes serious cuts. Their plan is, surprise, tax increases in the middle of an economic downturn.

Read: White House Pressures GOP To Fix Sequester Plan Obama Proposed »

Oh, Snap: “Obama Prepares To Screw His Base”

I appreciate Buzz Feed’s Ben Smith giving me a good and hearty belly laugh first thing in the morning with that headline, and even funnier as one starts to read the article

President Obama’s enemies often accuse him, in the starkest political terms, of crudely acting to shift resources toward his political base: Green energy donors; single women; Latinos; African-Americans.

But the next 12 months are likely to reveal the opposite. Imminent elements of Obama’s grandest policy move, the health care overhaul known as ObamaCare, are calculated to screw his most passionate supporters and to transfer wealth to his worst enemies.

Vincent Price “says” it best

The passionate supporters are the youth, who voted for him by a margin of 60% to 36%, according to exit poll samples of people 29 and under. His enemies are the elderly: Mitt Romney won 56% of the votes from people 65 and over. And while one of ObamaCare’s earliest provisions was a boon to the young, allowing them to stay on their parents’ insurance through the age of 26, what follows may come as an unpleasant surprise to many of the president’s supporters. The provisions required to make any sort of health insurance plan work — not just ObamaCare, but really any plan of its sort — require healthy young people to pay more in health insurance than they consume in services, while the elderly (saved by Sarah “Death Panels” Palin from any serious attempt to ration expensive and often futile end-of-life care) consume far more than they pay in. There is always a push and pull, however, and this year will be spent laying plans to shift the burden further toward the young.

That’s the gist of the article, that young people are going to be paying a disproportionate amount for health insurance, and are essentially getting screwed by ObamaCare, legislation which the support in a much higher ratio than any other age group (oh, and that that pesky Sarah Palin stopped any attempt to ration care for old people, which, if you’ll remember, we were told didn’t exist before the Senate cut it, but the Independent Payment Advisory Board still exists).

And now the young people will learn what a good chunk of the rest of the populace has found out: Obama is always screwing people and ObamaCare, which surely most young supporters never read, is a Bad Idea. The young people should have realized this by now, since they are also one of the population segments which is having a tough time with the jobs market.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Oh, Snap: “Obama Prepares To Screw His Base” »

Warmist: Does Hotcoldwetdry Cause Asteroids?

Yeah, some are this bat-guano insane. Here’s CNN anchor Deb Feyerick who was talking with Bill Nye the science guy

(Newsbusters) She never got to that question in the subsequent interview at about 3:25 PM EST during CNN Newsoom, instead transitioning from a snowfall update: “Talk about something else that’s falling from the sky and that is an asteroid. What’s coming our way? Is this an effect of, perhaps, of global warming or is this just some meteoric occasion?”

Nye wisely refused to take the bait and move on, but, sadly, this is the kind of idiocy propagated by the Cult Of Gore, the kind of fuzzy headed thinking we have come to expect, and we can look at the Warm List for proof of all the climate astrologer insanity.

In fact, this isn’t the first time global warming has been linked to asteroids

A University of Michigan space scientist is worried that global warming is increasing the risk that an asteroid could, one day, collide with the Earth. The seemingly impossible connection is due to a basic law of physics: when a gas is heated, it expands.

“Some large meteoroids have skimmed the outer reaches of Earth’s atmosphere, skipping off back into outer space”, said Professor Charles Boyle, chairman of U. of M.’s Near-Earth Asteroid Team (NEAT). “As the atmosphere warms, it expands outward, potentially capturing large asteroids that would have otherwise been a near-miss. It seems that the dangers from global warming just keep mounting up…like the national debt.”

Yet, Warmists still won’t give up their own fossil fueled vehicles and go “carbon neutral” in their own lives.

Video below the fold

Read: Warmist: Does Hotcoldwetdry Cause Asteroids? »

If All You See…

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

The blog of the day is Prairie Weather (yeah, I know, a lefty website), with a post on taking away Obama’s drone strike authorization.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Patriot Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous, albeit white in the Northeast, day in America. Not sure who did this pinup, which I added to, but, this is something people up north could be doing, though on heat created snow instead of non-frozen water (if heat creates snow, does that mean cold creates non-frozen water?)

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Grandpa John’s has the new Coexist graphic
  2. The Lonely Conservative covers the new Central Planning Office’s idea for a safe and fascistic home
  3. The People’s Cube wants to shoot evil pickups
  4. The RightNewz catches CNN leaving out something from crazy liberal Dorner’s manifesto
  5. small dead animals links to videos about employment advice from liberals and conservatives
  6. Rhymes with Right covers the irony and hypocrisy of Ron Paul
  7. darleen click (protein wisdom) covers Bush compared to Hitler when it comes to painting
  8. Planck’s Constant has the latest raaaaacist rant from Louis Farrakhan
  9. Legal Insurrection wonders when laughing about abortion became hip
  10. Kurt (Gay Patriot) discusses our agenda driven media
  11. Flopping Aces wonders what all the bullets and black helicopters mean
  12. Fire Andrea Mitchell catches Obama quietly taking the teeth out of a Bush law meant to stop child soldiers
  13. Doug Ross has the elephant in the gun grabbers room
  14. At Da Tech Guy’s Blog, Roxeanne De Luca explains why college students are stripping to repay their loans
  15. And last, but not least, Atlas Shrugs covers dhimmitude at the Huffington Post

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check outwhat I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

The posts do take a long time, so, if you want to send me your links for Rule 5 babeage or links, use ye olde email in the header bar (remove the NOSPAM part). Preferably, create the html link so I can copy and paste how you want it to read.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Rand Paul On Illegals: Trust But Verify

Senator Rand Paul has written an editorial piece for the Washington Times which makes a few good points regarding any sort of illegal immigration legislation

I am in favor of immigration reform. I am also wary of reforms granted now for a promise of border security later. In 1986, Ronald Reagan signed a deal that made just such a promise, yet we are still waiting for the border security that never came. Conservatives are also still waiting for the promised three dollars in spending cuts for every dollar in tax hikes. Fool me once … So, it is understandable conservatives should insist that any immigration reform incorporate the principle of trust but verify.

In that vein, I approach these efforts in good faith. I will advance both immigration reform and verifiable border security. Under my plan for comprehensive reform the US would begin with prioritizing Visas for immigrants with advanced degrees, the so-called STEM Visas and an immediate expansion of the work Visa program. These reforms would happen immediately.

Border Security, including drones, satellite, and physical barriers, vigilant deportation of criminals and increased patrols would begin immediately and be assessed at the end of one year by an investigator general from the General Accountability Office. Most importantly, and in contrast with any other plan out there, my plan will insist that report be presented to Congress for a vote. If, and only if Congress agreed that border security was progressing, then more reforms would ensue. If we can’t secure our border, and if we cannot prove we can modernize our system of issuing and tracking visas, we cannot take on the task of adding more people to our system.

The problem here is that he’s thinking that Democrats, and some squishy Republicans, would use common sense to determine whether or not that border security was “progressing” (and what, exactly, would the standards be?) , when, in fact, those same legislators would immediately determine that the border was secure, so they’d start “normalizing” the status of illegals. What if the Democrats control the House and the Senate? There’s a majority vote for legalization, which, under Rand’s plan would be up to 2 million a year. He can discuss “trust and verify” all he wants, but that won’t happen as long as Democrats are hell bent on amnesty.

Where he runs off the rails is wanting to give up to 11 million illegals a de facto amnesty, which worked horribly when tried under Reagan

Currently, undocumented immigrants have a pathway to citizenship. They can leave the United States and enter legally in about ten years. They just value staying in America, even with the pitfalls of being undocumented, more than returning to Mexico or Central America for ten years.

To those who complain that if anyone is allowed to stay without returning to Mexico that it amounts to amnesty, I say: What we have now is de facto amnesty. No undocumented immigrants are being sent home and no one is seriously advocating rounding up and sending home 11 million people. Immigration reform begins the process of bringing these folks out of the shadows and making American taxpayers out of them.

He ends by calling “immigration reform” the “right thing to do.” Many of these illegals may value staying in America, but so many do not value being American. And Rand forgets that approximately one-third of illegals are those who over-stayed their visas. Rand is apparently thinking that the GOP will pick up a whole bunch of new voters, which won’t happen.

You want a plan? Here’s my plan

  1. More border security, particularly using armed agents, rather than using drones and fences.
  2. Use convicts to drive thin metal poles into the ground throughout the border with Mexico in those areas where underground tunnels could be dug
  3. Increase the fines and penalties on companies who hire illegals to a point where it is extremely risky, and costly, to those individuals and companies that employ them (there would be no legal ramifications for those who have done due diligence to determine legality)
  4. Massively increase the temporary visa system for temporary workers, said visas to be for no more than a year. Hiring companies would sponsor those visas for the workers, and be responsible for providing health insurance for the workers. These same workers would “lojacked” with a subcutaneous tracking chip to ensure that they leave.
  5. For those who are already here, if they want to be a U.S. citizen they have to prove it before being put on a pathway to citizenship. They would have to speak and write at least high school level English (adults would also have to demonstrate that their kids can read and write English at the appropriate grade level). They would have to pass a 9th grade test on American history and civics. They would not be allowed to be on any governmental programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, etc.
  6. They can’t have a criminal record.
  7. The minute the plan is initiated, any illegal that is caught will be deported within one week. If they have a family, they can bring them. No long hearings. No whining about the family and kids. No fluffy bunny hand-wringing. Caught, gone. That’s it.

There are certainly more ideas that dive down into the weeds, such as ways to deal with illegals in jails for felonies and sanctuary cities, but, really, this whole “it’s the right thing to do” argument is silly. The illegals did not do the right thing. Furthermore, so many like being here, but do not want to be Americans. Many are calling for a return of the Southwest US to Mexico. Like liberals, they like the benefits of America, just not America.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Rand Paul On Illegals: Trust But Verify »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful planet healing bike posing in front of awesome carbon sucking trees, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on teenage sex in the news.

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove