Washington Post: Say, Why Won’t Democrats Embrace Carbon Taxes?

The Washington Post editorial board is on a roll in calling carbon taxes the best solution for Hotcoldwetdry, and want Democrats to embrace them

Why won’t Democrats embrace this solution for climate change?

IN AN ideal world, our leaders would acknowledge the danger of climate change and seek the best way to combat it. If they did, they would easily find an answer that is effective and progressive: The latest bulletin from the International Monetary Fund maps what it would take to restrain warming to tolerable levels without wasting massive amounts of money or unnecessarily harming workers, companies and households.

In our far-from-ideal world, President Trump can’t even acknowledge the problem, and the Democrats who call for immediate action seem to be running from the best solutions.

The IMF reiterates what economists have long understood: Enacting a carbon tax is “the single most powerful and efficient tool” because pricing mechanisms “make it costlier to emit greenhouse gases and allow businesses and individuals to choose how to conserve energy or switch to greener sources through a range of opportunities.” Politicians should favor choice and flexibility over central planning. “People and firms will identify which changes in behavior reduce emissions — for example, purchasing a more efficient refrigerator versus an electric car — at the lowest cost.”

The IMF wouldn’t actually have a vested interest in this, right? Somehow they think that it would increase consumer choice.

The IMF found that the average global price is a paltry $2 per ton of carbon dioxide, while the world requires a $75-per-ton global carbon tax by 2030 to keep warming below the 2-degree Celsius threshold scientists advise. Electricity prices would rise 70 percent on average — though only 53 percent in the United States — and gasoline prices 5 percent to 15 percent in most places.

But that’s the picture before one considers what the money raised by a carbon tax could do. If governments recycled the revenue back to low-income and vulnerable people, and cut economically inefficient taxes — such as income taxes — a $50-per-ton carbon tax would feel to the economy more like $20 per ton. The plan would help low-income households and place a higher burden on the upper-income bracket. There could also be money for essential research and development to aid the energy transition.

See? It would only feel like $20 a ton! Because the government would give money back! Which would make citizens more beholden to government.

So is this the plan that the Democratic presidential candidates have embraced? If only. Though former vice president Joe Biden and former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke have cautiously acknowledged the importance of carbon pricing, they are far more specific in their ideas for spending lots of money. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) recently adopted a regulate-and-spend program. And Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) would have the federal government establish its own utilities and build its own power-generation facilities, from scratch, according to, yes, a central plan.

Here’s my carbon tax plan: it will apply to all news organizations. It would immediately start at $75 per ton. Gathering and disseminating the news is a pretty CO2 intensive business, what with all the energy used, the travel with fossil fueled vehicles, and the killing of trees. They are just as bad as coal energy companies. Think the WP editorial board would be so hot to trot on carbon taxes then? Because they think that said taxes wouldn’t apply to themselves. The same WP post published this in September of this year

For example, while nearly half of adults say they would be willing to pay a $2 monthly tax on their electricity bills to help combat climate change, just over a quarter say they are willing to pay $10 extra each month. And while two-thirds support stricter fuel-efficiency standards for the nation’s cars and trucks, increases in the gas tax remain deeply unpopular.

That meshes with many other polls that show a majority aren’t willing to spend more than or even spend as much as $10 a month to “solve” Hotcoldwetdry.

I agree, though: Democrats should embrace carbon taxes. Go full hog on them. It’ll be just another nail in their coffin.

Read: Washington Post: Say, Why Won’t Democrats Embrace Carbon Taxes? »

NY Times: If You Support Trump On Impeachment, You’re A Raaaaacist

The only thing that’s truly surprising about this op-ed by Darlena Cuhna is that it took so long. You would have thought it would have come sooner, because devolving to throwing down the raaaaacism card is a default position of the Democratic Party (which works hard to keep minorities, particularly blacks, down in urban area slums). This is the top opinion piece on the web front page

How Florida Republicans Are Talking About Impeachment

A few weeks ago, I sat on a park bench, watching my 11-year-old twins pass a soccer ball and push their friends on a tire swing. I turned to the mother of my daughters’ classmate to talk about the second whistle-blower coming forward about President Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.

“Oh, I don’t care about that,” she said. “I’m just glad he’s standing his ground during this witch hunt.”

I’ve been in this state for almost a decade, yet its politics still surprise me. Fox News tag lines come out of real people’s mouths. “I work hard. I don’t want the government giving my money away to people who don’t,” another mother added.

My acquaintance agreed with her. “It’s one thing to need help, but so many people scam the system. Why should they get away with that? Having kids just for the welfare, using food stamps for steak and beer, finding every excuse not to work, and then I have to carry them with my tax dollars?”

You can see the direction, right?

As the impeachment inquiry marches on, several polls show more American support for impeachment than not. Of course, we learned in 2016 that polls can sometimes mislead, and in this particular case, digging a little shows a deeply partisan divide. While nearly 50 percent of people polled now support impeachment, that number is made up of nearly 85 percent Democrats. Just 12 percent of Republicans support impeachment and upward of 70 percent of Republicans believe the president’s dealings with Ukraine are within typical presidential limits. Most Republicans think he meant to stop corruption and protect American interests, according to a CBS News poll.

Obviously, that is a Problem

With a damning reconstructed phone call transcript, a detailed whistle-blower report, several high-ranking Trump surrogates being subpoenaed and testimonies well underway, how can such a seemingly cut-and-dry issue be read in an oppositional way? With farmers left in the dust, discrimination against pre-existing conditions returning to insurance coverage and taxes rising for millions, how can Republicans continue to support the president?

Simple. They identify with him.

Working-class Republicans in Alachua County see Donald Trump as a white businessman who made a lot of money. They like to think that could be them. The only thing standing in the way of achieving that dream, they tell me, are policies that elevate people of color, immigrants and poor people without health care. My neighbors misidentify what is holding them back, but they don’t want to correctly identify the actual problem — corporations, billionaires, white privilege, late-stage capitalism — because they hope to be part of that world someday. They think they have rightfully earned it.

See? It’s raaaaacism. Along with a smattering of “you’re entitled to your opinion, but, you’re Wrong.” Heck, it’s probably Raaaaacism that people are holding on to those Wrongthink views!

Darlena also managed to work in a dude who just suddenly sat down with her and started talking to her who had few teeth but was against Universal Health Care. That view from the man is probably raaaaacist, too.

Anyhow, here’s Lindsay Graham, because the media is attempting to spin his comments

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of President Trump’s most vocal supporters on a variety of issues, said in a recent interview that he is open-minded about supporting impeachment.

“Sure, I mean show me something that is a crime. If you could show me that, you know, Trump actually was engaging in a quid pro quo outside the phone call, that would be very disturbing,” the South Carolina Republican said on “Axios on HBO.”

The so-called whistleblower had zero firsthand knowledge of the call, the readout shows nothing beyond normal international politics, and there was no crime in any form or fashion. Heck, former Obama communications director Jen Psaki admitted that this kind of stuff is the norm, that it happens all the time.

But, if you support Trump, you’re a raaaaacist.

Read: NY Times: If You Support Trump On Impeachment, You’re A Raaaaacist »

Hot Take: Mom’s Demand Action Is Not Anti-Gun

And they’re grassroots!

From the article

Moms Demand Action is a grassroots organization advocating for stronger gun control measures, founded as a Facebook group the day after the that took the lives of 26 people, 20 of whom were young children. But while its members advocate for an assault ban, Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts says that it’s a “misnomer” to call the group anti-gun.

“Often people think that because we’re doing this work, we’re anti-gun or we don’t support the Second Amendment. Nothing could be further from the truth,” Watts said in an interview with CBS News chief Washington correspondent Major Garrett in this week’s episode of “The Takeout” podcast. Watts noted that many volunteers the organization were gun owners or married to gun owners.

“This is simply about restoring the responsibilities that go along with gun rights,” Watts said. She added that while the top priorities for Moms Demand Action are background checks, red-flag laws and disarming domestic abusers, the organization also advocates for an assault weapons ban and has worked with municipalities on the issue.

She is right, because it is a misnomer to call the group anti-gun and anti-2nd Amendment: they are also very much anti-4th Amendment, being happy to remove people’s due process in order to take their guns. Anyhow, if they are calling for taking away people’s guns, at least relating to law abiding citizens, which they are, then they are anti-2nd Amendment. They do not advocate for making sure that Red Flag laws protect other Constitutional rights, that they aren’t abused (even the ACLU is worried about Red Flag laws), they advocate for no provisions for protection.

Shannon runs Mom’s Demand, which is funded via Everytown, which comes from billionaire Mike Bloomberg, and, all her tweets seem to be about electing people who want to enact massive gun control on law abiding citizens and blaming guns for crimes.


Read More »

Read: Hot Take: Mom’s Demand Action Is Not Anti-Gun »

If All You See…

…is snow from the climate crisis, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny, with a post wondering if the U.N.’s reputation can get any lower.

It’s sweater week (if the server stops crashing).

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Patriotic Pinup Vaughan Bass

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America. Getting some much needed rain from Nestor, the Devils finally achieved two wins after start 0-4-2, and Fall is in the air. This pinup is by Vaughan Bass, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Weasel Zippers has bad lip reading with Joe Biden
  2. Vox Popoli discusses science fiction ethics
  3. The Right Scoop highlights Kamala melting down when pressed on Guiliani’s “crimes”
  4. The Quiet Towers explains what does and doesn’t count as a conspiracy
  5. The People’s Cube wants you to remember when Hillary pushed the Russian asset button
  6. The Lid covers Tom Arnold’s Trump assassination chic
  7. The Last Tradition covers the dangers of RINOs and what to do with them
  8. The First Street Journal note’s 2016’s sore loser lashing out again
  9. The Feral Irishman has 3 days of CNN condensed
  10. Raised On Hoecakes features the Halloween grinches being out in force
  11. Pacific Pundit discusses Beto and #NationalPeriodDay
  12. Moonbattery covers how much it costs Seattle to clean up after the homeless
  13. Living Freedom has some good advice to protect against your computer dying (my 2 cents: get an external hard drive, preferably a solid state one, and backup every few months. More if you are saving a lot of stuff. I lost a bunch of stuff when my last computer saw a slow HD die-off)
  14. Legal Insurrection explains what happened at a St. Greta rally in Canada
  15. And last, but not least, Jihad Watch shows what happens to Muslims and non-Muslims when they do something bad in Britain

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. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

CNN: Putin Now Owns Syrian Mess, And It’s All Trump’s Fault Or Something

Let’s face it: Syria is not an issue most Americans really care about. There are only about 2,000 U.S. military members in the nation, mostly as advisors. The issue of the Kurds is concerning, but, what would 2,000 military members actually do? The only thing that was a concern was when Obama set a red line, and then failed to back it up. Remember, Obama placed it on the international community. And, interestingly, Obama’s name never comes up in this CNN “analysis” which really is attempting to make a Russia Russia Russia connection

US is out of the picture in Syria-Turkey crisis. Putin now owns this mess

As US President Donald Trump hailed the agreement his administration negotiated with the Turks for northern Syria as “a great day for civilization,” the Turks quickly dumped cold water over the White House’s euphoria, refusing to even call the deal a ceasefire.

Only a few hours later, airstrikes and artillery fire could be felt in northern Syria as the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces accused Ankara and its proxies of severe ceasefire violations.

The mood both in Washington and in the Middle East is that the ceasefire is not the real deal. It expires on Tuesday, October 22, the same day Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Turkish counterpart Recip Tayyip Erdogan will meet in Sochi to discuss the future of Syria. It seems pretty clear: that’s when the world will find out that the real deal will be for the future of this volatile region.

It’s also clear that the future will, to a large extent, be determined by the Russian President. With Trump’s abandonment of the Kurds, America’s main allies in the fight against ISIS, and his de facto green lighting of Turkey’s invasion of northern Syria, the White House maneuvered itself out of the Syria equation. For better or worse, Putin now owns the military and political mess unfolding there.

But unlike the Trump administration’s hectic efforts at last-minute diplomacy to try to end the bloodshed it helped unleash, Putin at least seemed like a man with a plan.

Russia immediately started negotiations with the Kurds and Moscow’s main ally, the Assad government, quickly reaching a deal to allow the Syrian military into Kurdish-held areas where Damascus has not had a presence for years in order to stave off the Turkish-led offensive. Moscow also quickly deployed its own military as a buffer to keep the Turks and their forces apart from the Kurds and Syrian government troops.

Trump’s plan is pretty easy: don’t have U.S. military members in Syria, which has had a civil war going on since 2011. Yes, 2011. It was part of the wider Arab Spring, which, if you remember, Obama blew off. Hey, remember when Syrian strongman Bashar Assad was being called a reformer by the Obama administration?

Anyhow, CNN sure seems to love Putin now, eh? When they can try to bludgeon Trump with the issue, right? Through the next 15 paragraphs, which include a section about all roads leading to Moscow (um, Syria has been a client state of Russia (and Iran), in their sphere of influence, for a long, long time, like back during the Cold War era), they laud Putin

(Arab Weekly) Obama handed over the whole Syrian file to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Obama was once outraged by the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons against its opponents in Eastern Ghouta and threatened to use the tremendous firepower of the American giant. Aircraft carriers and naval ships ploughed their way towards the Mediterranean and the parliaments of US allies were mobilised. It was the brink of a major war.

Suddenly, here came Putin, offering to take care of the “dirty work” on behalf of the world’s major democracies. “Do not dirty your hands and let me do it my way,” he told them. Indeed, Putin delivered Syria’s chemical weapons to the world. Damascus handed over its arsenal and Washington and the western alliance handed Syria over to Putin.

Since Obama gave the green light to the Russian leader to begin his military intervention in Syria in September 2015, Sergei Lavrov and John Kerry — Russia’s and the United States’ highest-ranking diplomats at the time — established the sacred texts in politics, security and the military that keep the Western world abreast with the Russian baptism of fire in Syria.

We never should have gotten involved in the first place

(Huff Post) Obama’s geopolitical strategy is also going badly. What once seemed a hopeless stalemate between what remains of the regime of Bashar Assad and various anti-Assad forces changed dramatically when Russian air power entered the war.

The turn against American influence began not yesterday but in fact three years ago, amid what seemed at least to Obama to be a successful turn of events.

That three years ago was 2013, when Obama handed over the keys to Russia. The U.S. was barely involved at that time, other than some advisors and diplomacy. But, somehow, this is all Trump’s mess. CNN is like “Obama who?” Despite blaming everything bad on George W. Bush during Obama’s first term. The only thing really missing is a direct blame that Trump is doing Putin’s bidding.

Read: CNN: Putin Now Owns Syrian Mess, And It’s All Trump’s Fault Or Something »

If All You See…

…are cobblestones which would be perfect for replacing fossil fueled vehicles with low carbon transportation modes, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Pacific Pundit, with a post on the dustup between Hillary and Tulsi Gabbard.

Read: If All You See… »

Extinction Rebellion Arrests Broccoli For The Planet

Remember, we’re supposed to take the beliefs of these people seriously (make sure you turn the volume up for the added insane)

Oh, and there’s a hero below the fold

Read More »

Read: Extinction Rebellion Arrests Broccoli For The Planet »

Surprise: Democrats Spend Bigly On Private Jet Flights

See, these same Democrats all have some sort of Big ‘climate change’ plan which will limit your use of fossil fuels, and most want to get rid of fossil fuels. And most have shown their support for the Green New Deal. Yet

Green New Deal Update: Democrats Spend Big on Private Flights

The Democratic Party’s presidential candidates may support the “Green New Deal,” and an end to fossil fuels, but all of the frontrunners are spending large amounts of money on private flights as they jet around the campaign trail.

The Hill reported Friday:

Spending on private flights by Democratic presidential candidates soared over the past three months, from roughly $680,000 in the second quarter to more than $2.2 million in the third fundraising period of the year.

Topping the spending list was former Vice President Joe Biden, who dropped about $924,000 on private air travel …

South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg spent nearly $479,000 on private flights over the past three months, up from roughly $300,000 in the second quarter. And Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) used about $253,000 in campaign cash to charter flights, significantly more than the $17,000 she spent in the second quarter.

The Democratic primary field’s leading progressives, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), also saw their private air travel spending swell in the three-month fundraising period.

The “carbon footprint” of these flights is pretty darned high, well above the average even for Americans, which is already well above the global average. The list also included Gov. Steve Bullock, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and former tech executive Andrew Yang (all who spent a lot less), and every single person on the list other than Bullock has endorsed the Green New Deal, which calls for eliminating the use of fossil fuels. And, again, many have plans which call for the same.

But, hey, they are Special. It’s OK that they must use fossil fuels and private jets to get around, because they’re running for president. You, on the other hand, are just a peon, a Little Person, so, it’s fine if your life gets disrupted and it’s hard for you to get anywhere, because you aren’t part of the Political Aristocracy.

Read: Surprise: Democrats Spend Bigly On Private Jet Flights »

State Dept Probe Of Clinton Emails Finds No Deliberate Mishandling Of Classified Information Or Something

You have to read that headline in a robotic, emotionless voice, as the talking points have gone out

That’s just a smattering of those news outlets who even bothered to cover this, with headlines and articles meant to protect Hillary and say that she is completely innocent, that she did nothing wrong.

Of course, if this was really about Hillary, you’d just say that she was incompetent

State Department report on Clinton emails finds hundreds of violations, dozens of individuals at fault

A State Department report into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for government business, obtained by Fox News on Friday, found dozens of individuals at fault and hundreds of security violations.

The report summarized an administrative review of the handling of classified information relating to Clinton’s private email server used during her tenure as the nation’s highest-ranking diplomat between 2009 and 2013. The report, dated Sept. 13., was delivered to the office of Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa., who was chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee until last year.

The report reflected only approximately 30,000 emails that the State Department was able to physically review, and found 38 individuals were responsible for 91 violations.

Another 497 violations were also found, although the report was not able to assign responsibility in those cases, in part because many of those involved had already left the department during the time it took to receive the emails and review them.

The “no deliberate mishandling” part is not about Hillary Clinton, but about the employees who sent the classified information to her, most who probably had no idea that she had an insecure, home brew server.

The department concluded that the use of a private email system “added an increased degree of risk of compromise, as a private system lacks the network monitoring and intrusion detection capabilities of [the] State Department.”

“While the use of a private email system itself did not necessarily increase the likelihood of classified information being transmitted on unclassified systems, those incidents which then resulted in the presence of classified information upon it carried an increased risk of compromise or inadvertent disclosure,” the report said.

Strange that the report didn’t conclude that it was 100% against State Department and federal government policies. But, hey, must protect the Precious. Where this you or me, we would be in jail. Hillary is part of the Political Aristocracy, so, nothing will ever happen.

BTW, she still lost the 2016 election by the rules. Get over it, Trump haters.

Read: State Dept Probe Of Clinton Emails Finds No Deliberate Mishandling Of Classified Information Or Something »

Bad Behavior has blocked 10908 access attempts in the last 7 days.