Republicans Need To Change Their Product In People’s Republik Of California Or Something

See, the problem isn’t that Modern Socialists, people Dependent on Government, SJWs, and virtue signalers dominate the more urban areas of California, many of them having been taught this stuff in the Democratic Party run schools, leading to control of California by Democrats. No, see, it’s that Republicans aren’t taking Democrat positions, per George Skelton at the LA Times

Republicans need to change their product. Californians aren’t buying it

Politics is like private enterprise. You either sell your product or perish.

California voters have not been buying Republican merchandise. So Democrats have monopolized the market.

It’s not the fault of consumers for not liking what the GOP has been peddling. Nor should the Democratic retailers be blamed.

The Republican Party is culpable for not adjusting to the changing California marketplace.(snip)

I called former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a centrist Republican who famously warned a GOP state convention in 2007 that “in movie terms, we are dying at the box office. We are not filling the seats.”

See, it’s the Republicans fault that they aren’t offering what California’s want

“What you need to do is to be competitive,” he said. “It’s like a business, right? The ones that offer the best service are the ones who get the most business. Same with the party. The party that has the most answers to problems, they’re getting the action, the votes.”

Schwarzenegger said voters particularly wanted answers to problems of healthcare, education and climate change, and Republicans aren’t providing them.

“They’re extremely important to women,” he added. (snip)

Last week I asked (Assemblyman Chad) Mayes what the GOP needed to do. He says it needs to do more than just oppose taxes.

“I don’t know anyone who doesn’t believe Republicans aren’t the anti-tax party,” he said. “Obviously that isn’t enough. It doesn’t have the same impact it did in 1978” — when voters passed the property tax-lowering Proposition 13 — “or the mid-’90s.”

Mayes said Republicans should advocate more efficient education spending and embrace immigrants.

Immigrants “get the message,” he added, “that Republicans want to deport their parents and grandparents. It’s a repellent.”

This is what Skelton and Republican squishes are calling the “practical center”: amnesty for illegal aliens, raising taxes, ‘climate change’ legislation and all that comes with it, government paying for all healthcare, and abortion on demand.

California Republicans need to change their product.

If they change it to basically be Democrat, or Democrat lite, then they are no longer Republicans.

Read: Republicans Need To Change Their Product In People’s Republik Of California Or Something »

Say, What Would A Zero-Carbon Country Look Like Or Something

CNN takes a stab at it, and, doesn’t do a really good job at saying that this would be super awesome. It’s doubtful that the network is trying to say it would not be a great place, what with all their Cult of Climastrology leanings (except in the Travel Section, where they advocate taking all sorts of fossil fueled travel. And their ads, from companies that require the use of fossil fuels)

What would life be like in a zero-carbon country?

Drastic restrictions on almost every aspect of people’s lives, from the cars they drive, the way they heat their homes, to the fridges they buy — even the food stored in them. That is the reality of what awaits us in 2050 if a UK government pledge to cut greenhouse emissions to “net zero” is to be met.

If it can do it, the country will become the world’s first major economy to stop contributing to climate change. (snip)

Petrol and diesel vehicles will need to be phased out and replaced by electric or hydrogen powered ones by 2035. Consumption of beef, lamb and dairy must be cut by 20% by 2050. No houses built after 2025 will be connected to the gas grid. The owners of older buildings will need to switch their heating system to a low carbon one by around 2035. (snip)

“The methane created by livestock is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide … so we will have to reduce meat consumption, but it’s unlikely that we will reduce livestock to zero,” said Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, which is part of London School of Economics.

Aviation and shipping are other sectors where low-carbon alternatives don’t yet exist. “They are quite high carbon sectors, they are rapidly growing, and the decarbonization pathway is more uncertain for them,” said Barny Evans, renewable energy expert at WSP, a sustainability consultancy.

So, it sure seems like The Government is going to be telling us how to live our lives, what we can eat, which appliances we can purchase, whether we can fly, jacking up the cost of living and the cost of homes, while making travel utterly expensive because most cannot afford those electric vehicles (what are they powered with?).

Reaching net zero will cost about £1 trillion ($1.3 trillion), a price that for some, is simply too much. One vocal critic is Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg, who called the net zero policy “pointless” because the UK is only responsible for around 1% of global emissions. He argues the cost of the plan will far exceed its benefits, and advocates for more investment into research and development instead.

Over time, it doesn’t seem like a lot. But

The investments required to get to net zero will be around 1% to 2% of GDP each year, according to the Climate Change Committee. But dealing with the consequences of unchecked warming — rising sea levels, for example — would be way more expensive, it said.

That means taxes in the U.K. will skyrocket while earnings for citizens will go down as economic commerce drops.

Read: Say, What Would A Zero-Carbon Country Look Like Or Something »

If All You See…

…is a horrible fossil fueled helicopter causing Bad Weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on bitchy getting real.

It’s helicopter week!

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America. The sun is shining, the birds are singing, and, did you call your dad? This pinup is by Greg Hildebrandt, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Independent Sentinel highlights what Oberlin College learned after getting hit with a $44 million judgement
  2. Weasel Zippers covers 0% Gillibrand saying that pro-life people can’t be judges
  3. Victory Girls Blog notes that gay reparations are now a thing
  4. The Right Scoop covers the excuse Leftists will use to force real women to compete against TG women
  5. The People’s Cube has karaoke “Everybody Loves a Clown (Biden’s Song)”
  6. The Other McCain discusses the anti-American U.S. women’s soccer team
  7. The First Street Journal is also discussing the new gay reparations nonsense
  8. The Daley Gator features the British police handing out blunt knives for cooking
  9. Powerline covers the Washington Post blaming Trump for the Iranian attacks
  10. Pacific Pundit discusses illegal aliens whining about conditions at holding facilities
  11. neo-neocon highlights what happened when a trans person voiced a notion to leftists that maybe Trump isn’t the devil
  12. Moonbattery covers felons serving on juries in California
  13. Legal Insurrection discusses the whole “taking foreign info” kerfuffle
  14. Jihad Watch wonders why this migrant Muslim woman is in Canada if she hates Canada
  15. And last, but not least, DC Clothesline notes that Bernie’s Economic Bill Of Rights is virtually identical to Stalin’s 1936 Soviet Constitution.

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014). 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 out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

AOC Forgets How Congress Works, Starts Petition To Repeal Hyde Amendment

Once again, if people want to have irresponsible, unprotected sex with people they do not want to have a child with at this time, then they can pay for their own abortions, especially when they yammer about “my body my choice.” If that’s the case, then it should be “your choice, your money”

Ocasio-Cortez starts petition to repeal Hyde Amendment

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) started a petition Saturday to repeal the Hyde Amendment, which bars the use of federal funds for abortions, arguing the restriction overwhelmingly harms low-income Americans and women of color.

“It’s not the 70s anymore. This is 2019, and none of our leaders should be willing to stand by a policy that disproportionately harms low income Americans and people of color just to suit the interests of anti-choice zealots,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote in an email to supporters.

“That ends now. We’re going to fight to repeal the Hyde Amendment, and let people access the care that they need. Sign your name if you stand for repealing the Hyde Amendment,” she continued.

The Hyde Amendment, which prohibits government health programs such as Medicaid from paying for abortions except in cases of rape or incest or to save the life of the mother, was first thrust into the spotlight earlier this month after Joe Biden’s presidential campaign confirmed the former vice president still supported it.

She does know she can submit legislation to do away with the Hyde Amendment, right? Petitions are what citizens create to cajole lawmakers. Lawmakers submit legislation. The wording of the petition is pathetic

Abortion care is health care. It’s estimated that over 60,000 women are forced to go through with unwanted pregnancies every year just due to a lack of access to care. In a modern, moral, and wealthy nation such as the United States, that is unacceptable.

How extreme is this, that Democrats consider aborting a life as health care, and the moral position? And is anyone surprised that she trots out “wealthy nation”, meant to highlight that Other People should pay for a woman’s abortion? She is correct, for a change, that it isn’t the 1970’s anymore. Men and women have access to all sorts of birth control methods all over the place. They can even get an implant that will stop over 99% of pregnancies and can work up to 4 years. Combine that with a condom (and self control, responsible behavior, etc) and the chances are virtually zip that a woman gets pregnant when she doesn’t want to be. And that birth control is still pretty much covered through health insurance and government programs.

But, really, this is all about fundraising. Keeping her name out there. Getting people to give up their name, email address, and zip code, so she and the DNC can send out email blasts asking for money.

Read: AOC Forgets How Congress Works, Starts Petition To Repeal Hyde Amendment »

Climate Kids Should Hijack The Impeachment Movement Or Something

Because, remember, the ‘climate change’ movement isn’t political, it’s all about science!

Green New Deal “Climate Kids” Should Hijack the Impeachment Conversation

A wise old political adage says, “When you’re ‘splainin’, you ain’t gainin’.” We need a new, ad hoc version to wake up “climate kid”supporters of an existentially crucial Green New Deal, now sitting politely bored—as through their principal’s speech—while Democrat elders crowd them off stage with their heated-but-trivial Mueller-based debate on whether or not to impeach Trump. I propose this: “When they’re ‘splainin’, you ain’t gainin’.” It’s frankly depressing to see passionate, idealistic kids hold still like respectable middle-aged Rotarians while adults with shallow, juvenile agendas waste civilization’s ever-more-precious time and dominate the floor.

Hey, climate kids, it’s time to act like kids and get seriously rowdy. This is one “adult” conversation you desperately need to disrupt. And not merely disrupt but actually hijack. The future of the Green New Deal—and therefore of civilization itself—may depend on you remembering that you’re still kids and therefore totally smashing up what the old farts had planned. You’ve already earned your maturity street creds by your incredibly sane, responsible climate activism; it’s time to have some delinquent, disruptive, old-fart-torturing fun. (snip)

But my pet disruption idea—impeaching Trump for his extremist attack on climate—already takes care of the respectability element. See, you won’t be disrupting the conversation just to disrupt it; you’ll actually be contributing something highly relevant—or as overpaid respectable attorneys say, “on point.” In fact, far more on point than what the purported grownups are saying. Therein lies the special beauty of my climate impeachment scheme: it’s rationally and morally sounder than anything the so-called adults are pushing, while having the added juvenile thrill value of pissing them off to the maximal max.

As a passive-aggressive old fart desperately clinging to the last tatters of youth, I passionately relish that juvenile thrill value. I believe the relevant juvenile joy here is called “hostile obedience”: obeying so totally and pointlessly that your very obedience is an act of satiric ridicule toward your “respectable” elders. What you’re obeying is the ardent desire of “progressive” Democrat elders to impeach Trump—who richly deserves impeachment. But your stated reason for impeaching him—his way-beyond-criminal climate policy—makes a cosmic mockery of the far shallower reasons put forth by his conventionally progressive would-be impeachers.

Read: Climate Kids Should Hijack The Impeachment Movement Or Something »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful low carbon type of transportation, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Political Clown Parade, with a post on the lunatic fringe.

Read: If All You See… »

New Jersey Looks To Make Their Gun Laws Even Tougher

This should have the criminals totally shaking in their boots. But, there is one somewhat good thing

N.J.’s already tough gun laws could soon become even more strict

New Jersey’s already tough gun laws are on the way to becoming even more strict.

A state Assembly panel on Thursday approved eight new gun control bills, including a controversial measure on smart guns — handguns that can only be fired by their designated owners. Other proposals would require all handgun ammunition sales to be recorded and compel many people with firearms in the state to undergo regular safety training in the Garden State.

The bills cleared the Assembly Judiciary Committee with Democrats voting yes and Republicans voting no.

“These new bills will ensure that law enforcement, state entities, and gun store owners will work together to reduce gun crimes and gun trafficking in our communities,” said Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald, D-Camden.

The smart gun bill (A1016) would require Garden State retailers to have personalized handguns on their shelves for sales.

New Jersey first tried to require this in 2002. But Democrats, who lead the Legislature, say that law — which requires that only personalized handguns be offered for sale in New Jersey three years after they’re on the market in the U.S. — actually stifled the development and delayed the sale of so-called childproof handguns.

They want to repeal the law and replace it with one that would require every retailer offer at least one personalized handgun model for sale. This, they hope, will shake loose the research and development they say was stymied by gun rights advocates who didn’t want to start New Jersey’s three-year clock.

“If you want to see smart guns develop, keep your hands off of them and let the markets develop,” Scott Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, said at Thursday’s hearing as he urged lawmakers to vote against the bill, along with several others.

Look, I know a lot of gun owners are against so-called smart guns, but, a lot of that has to do with the NJ law. Think about it: if you could have a firearm that only you could fire (and designated people, if necessary) and it was reliable: would you want it? It would make theft of firearms almost impossible. It would mean that bad players would have a really, really tough time getting firearms illegally. And harder to use them. And, it would limit a lot of the gun grabber’s power.

Of course, a lot of what NJ is doing is making it harder for law abiding citizens, rather than criminals with things like

Require places that sell handgun ammunition to track their ammunition sales and report them to the State Police (A5455). They would also be required to make sure people purchasing handgun ammunition are 21 years old, which is the legal age for buying a handgun.

Heck, if I lived there I’d just drive to Pennsylvania or Delaware. California is looking to do the same thing.

Read: New Jersey Looks To Make Their Gun Laws Even Tougher »

U.S. Military Emits More Carbon Than Many Countries Or Something

Leftists have long hated the U.S. military, and have tried many times to significantly reduce the funding. Now they’ll be going after them over their carbon footprint

The Pentagon emits more greenhouse gases than many countries, study says

The U.S. government plays a big role in contributing to climate change, which has grown increasingly a part of our daily lives and is threatening the planet, a new research study found Wednesday.

The Pentagon produced 59 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 alone, more than Sweden and Denmark, according to a study released by Brown University’s Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs.

The study finds the Pentagon’s emissions to be “greater than many smaller countries’ total greenhouse gas emissions” in any year from 2001 to 2017.

“If it were a country, it would have been the world’s 55th largest greenhouse gas emitter,” says lead author and Boston University political scientist Neta Crawford, who is a part of Brown’s program, adding that the Defense Department is the world’s single largest consumer of oil.

Of course it comes from a Modern Socialism college like Brown. I wonder what the carbon footprint is for the college?

Department of Defense spokeswoman Heather Babb declined comment to USA TODAY about the study, but said in a statement the Department of Defense energy program’s chief priority is supporting the ability to carry out its mission to deter war and ensure national security.

The DoD makes it possible for idiot Warmists at Brown to have the freedom and modern lifestyle to write stupid studies

The study also notes the greenhouse gas reduction efforts made by the Pentagon, but Crawford writes that there is “a lot of room to reduce emissions” in the military: it would make a noticeable difference if the Pentagon started rethinking whether certain missions are necessary.

She told USA TODAY that everyday Americans can affect missions by urging their congressmen to “close [military] stations that are at risk” to climate change and to “rethink procurement of those thirsty [fuel-guzzling] weapons.”

In other words, close most bases and do away with tanks, mobile gun platforms, ships, and so forth. All the things that keep America free for idiots to make these type of pronouncements.

Read: U.S. Military Emits More Carbon Than Many Countries Or Something »

Abortion Insanity: Rep. Will Hurd Bounced From Cybersecurity Conference Over Abortion Stance

Rep. Hurd is one of the most knowledgeable people in Congress when it comes to cybersecurity. Also, if he were a Democrat, people would be screaming about racism, as he is Black

From a Fox News article

Rep. Will Hurd, R-Tex, will no longer be speaking at cyber security conference after critics expressed outrage over his voting record on women’s issues.

Hurd, a former undercover CIA officer and an advocate for cybersecurity on Capitol Hill, was invited to speak at Black Hat, one of biggest cyber security conferences in the country, being held in Las Vegas in August. But Tech Crunch security editor Zach Whittaker highlighted on Thursday what he described was Hurd’s “terrible voting record on women’s rights.” It includes voting against funding for Planned Parenthood, programs supporting women in STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) fields, and his support on restricting late-term abortions.

Black Hat initially defended its decision to invite Hurd, saying in a statement “Hurd has a strong background in computer science and information security and has served as an advocate for specific cybersecurity initiatives in Congress,” adding that he will offer a “unique perspective” at the conference.

But, because he’s a Republican and doesn’t support abortion on demand

“Black Hat has chosen to remove U.S. Representative Will Hurd as our 2019 Black Hat USA Keynote. We misjudged the separation of technology and politics,” Black Hat told Tech Crunch. “We will continue to focus on technology and research, however we recognize that Black Hat USA is not the appropriate platform for the polarizing political debate resulting from our choice of speaker,”

Black Hat vowed that the conference is “still fully dedicated to providing an inclusive environment and apologize that this decision did not reflect that sentiment.”

The only ones making this “polarizing” are the unhinged abortion supporters, who are so unhinged and fragile that they cannot listen to a speech on a completely unrelated topic. And Black Hat should be ashamed for caving to the Outrage Mob

Read: Abortion Insanity: Rep. Will Hurd Bounced From Cybersecurity Conference Over Abortion Stance »

Bad Behavior has blocked 7027 access attempts in the last 7 days.