Democrats Love The Green New Deal (And Using Lots Of Fossil Fuels)

Most of them prefer that you, the peons, be forced to not use fossil fuels

Daniel Turner: 2020 Democrats love the Green New Deal but embrace fossil fuels to power their campaigns

Each of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates has a slogan. The one for Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., is “for the people.” Former Vice President Joe Biden says, “Our best days still lie ahead.” Former Texas Rep. Robert “Beto” O’Rourke plays it cool with slang: “It’s Gonna Take All of Us.”

Clearly the polls say Americans want to feel like they are part of the team. Inclusive. A musical montage from a teen movie where everyone chips in and they save the day. But don’t be fooled: These candidates are not like you, and the policies they support are actually bad for regular Americans. In fact, their slogans should all be the same: “Do as I say, not as I do.”

Nowhere is this more obvious than when it comes to being green.

As part of their required Federal Election Commission quarterly filings, the candidates disclosed how their finances and each campaign have been spending a lot of money on private jet travel. After all, how else does one get from Iowa to New Hampshire? In coach? Taking off shoes at TSA? With campaign donations picking up the tab, private jets make the campaign trail much better.

For a collective group of Democrats who decry fossil fuels, who embrace the radical Green New Deal, who demand we change our habits and diets to reflect the “existential crisis” of climate change, they sure don’t put their campaign money with their mouth is.

Every one of the 2020 candidates supports the Green New Deal (GND) as part of their campaign, and as a reminder, this radical, socialist proposal of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seeks to make air travel “obsolete.” Air travel is such a no-no amongst environmentalists that “flight shaming” has become a common tactic the green radicals use.

So, why do these candidates get a pass? If they want us to stop flying commercial, why are they justified in flying private?

In reality, it’s not just the presidential contenders, but most of the Democrats, almost all of whom are Warmists. How about the 95 cosponsors in the House? How many travel using fossil fuels?

The Buttigieg campaign said it needs private jets because South Bend isn’t convenient to campaign stops and the mayor has a vigorous schedule. Here’s a question for Mayor Pete: If I live in rural America and am busy, can I get an exemption under the Green New Deal you support?

We all know the answer to that question, plebeian.

Warmists always have an excuse for their climahypocrisy.

What happens when the Green New Deal does make air travel “obsolete” and the 10 million American jobs in the airline industry are lost? What happens when Sanders gets his wish to make fracking illegal by executive order and consequently half our oil and two-thirds our gas comes off the market?

I’ll tell you what happens: You won’t fly home for Christmas. You won’t buy fruit in winter. Cold weather and athletic clothing with lycra and Core-Tex and nylon won’t be affordable. Food prices will skyrocket. Shipping costs will make European goods unaffordable, and speaking of Europe, forget about going. You can’t afford it, because with oil around $200 a barrel, even a cruise is out of the question.

You can bet that all the people who support this anti-fossil fuels push will be Shocked, Shocked! that this has happened.

Read: Democrats Love The Green New Deal (And Using Lots Of Fossil Fuels) »

40 To 80% Of Illegals Released By Sanctuary Jurisdictions Commit More Crimes

Remember, the Open Borders advocates tell us that they don’t want the bad ones, just the good ones

(Breitbart) During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official Timothy Robbins said that anywhere between 40 to 80 percent of criminal illegal aliens who are released by sanctuary jurisdictions go on to commit more crime.

“When aliens walk out the front of the jail that could have been handed over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for removal proceedings, they have the opportunity to commit additional crimes,” Robbins said. “What we’ve seen, and depending on the report you look at, anywhere from 40 to 80 percent of those who have committed crimes will re-offend.”

“In that regard, what we’re seeing is crimes that could be preventable, the human cost who are being victimized and hurt by criminal aliens that ICE had the ability to remove from this country,” Robbins said.

The data indicates that up to 80 percent of crimes committed be sanctuary-freed illegal aliens could have been prevented if those suspects had been turned over to ICE for arrest and deportation.

But, they’re all low level offenders, who are only committing DUI and stuff, right?

In June, a 35-year-old illegal alien was given only 12 months in prison for raping a disabled woman in the sanctuary county of King County, Washington. Immediately after his release from prison, the illegal alien allegedly hunted down his rape victim and attacked her, as Breitbart News reported, and he remains wanted by police.

Obviously, the Open Borders advocates will say that legal U.S. citizens may do the same when they are released from prison. Well, yes. But, they are our citizens. Not people who shouldn’t be here in the first place, and ones we could 100% keep from committing crimes again in the United States if they were handed over to ICE and straight deported. And, consider that the latest thing by sanctuary jurisdictions is to give much shorter sentences after being charged with lesser crimes in order to avoid getting on ICE’s radar.

OK, that last one wasn’t about releasing a criminal offender, just another we knew shouldn’t be here.

BTW, remember the Kansas City shooting Beto O’Rourke freaked about? The two men who did it were both illegal aliens.

Read: 40 To 80% Of Illegals Released By Sanctuary Jurisdictions Commit More Crimes »

Who’s Up For Los Federales Giving $462 Billion To Swap Fossil Fueled Vehicles For Electric?

Chuck Schumer has a plan

I don’t feel like giving the NY Times a hit, so

(WRAL) Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is moving Democrats’ climate talk to where the rubber meets the road, proposing a $462 billion trade-in program to get millions of Americans out of climate-damaging gas vehicles and into electric or hybrid cars over the next decade.

Schumer’s rebate proposal late Thursday joins a mix of trillion- and multitrillion-dollar programs that Democratic presidential candidates have outlined to urgently cut oil, gas and coal emissions, as climate change weighs as an issue in the 2020 campaigns.

Schumer said the “proposal to bring clean cars to all of America” would be a key part of climate legislation by Senate Democrats. The injection of government-supported spending for electric cars “could position the U.S. to lead the world in clean auto manufacturing,” he said.

The New York Democrat’s plan would give American car buyers thousands of dollars each to trade in gas-burning cars for U.S.-assembled electric, hybrid or hydrogen cell cars. Lower-income households, and buyers of cars with American-made parts, would get extra credits.

About $45 billion would go to boost availability of charging stations and other electric car infrastructure. And $17 billion would help automakers increase their production of electric cars, batteries and parts.

One thing Chuck forgot? How this will be paid for. Realistically, I have no problem with offering tax credits, and even expanding them for hybrids that are no longer eligible. What a lot of people do not know is that once so many of a model have been sold credits are no longer offer, such as the Prius or Accord Hybrid. That would probably be the best way to go.

But, people aren’t really all that interested in practice in buying hybrids, not when sedans and even compact SUVs can get pretty decent mileage. I get about 29+ in my Accord Sport (most of my driving is around town). But, look, a top end Civic, the Touring, gets 30 city/38 highway and goes for $28,220, and has 174 horsepower. An Insight Touring (I’m using this because it is essentially a Civic hybrid) gets 51 city/45 highway, but only 151hp, for $29,110. And has a few less features. And that price difference is closer than most (can’t compare Accord to hybrid Accord, very different engines) vehicle lines.

Toyota just came out with a hybrid RAV4 and Honda is coming out with a hybrid CRV early 2020. Will they sell? Good question. There’s a lot of interest, but, interest doesn’t equate to sales. People were very interested in the plugin Clarity, but, sales were dismal, even in California, after the initial quick sales.

I do like hybrids, I would have been interested in the Insight EX had it leased well, and that is another big problem. The cost differential is worth it if you drive a lot more than average, are going to keep it a long time, or going to lease it. But, hybrids have poor residual values (what the car is worth after 36 months and 60 months, as measured), so, leasing is only worth it IF there is massive backend money. A lot of what creates a residual is what people feel it is worth. If I say “Jaguar” you think “I need 2, because one is always in the shop.” Even though they are much more reliable, they can’t shake the reputation, hence, not worth as much for the residual. People fear hybrid/electric batteries dying by 100K miles, so, market value is lower than it should be. In reality, the batteries, at least in true hybrids, should give you 200-300K miles before replacing. But, people’s feelings aren’t changing at this time.

Oh, and when will Chuck switch his own vehicle to a hybrid?

Read: Who’s Up For Los Federales Giving $462 Billion To Swap Fossil Fueled Vehicles For Electric? »

If All You See…

… is wine which will soon disappear from climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Doug Ross @ Journal, with a post on the coming FISA abuse report.

Read: If All You See… »

Your St. Greta Thunberg Shirt Might Be Contributing To The Climate Crisis Or Something

This is tempting me to try and make one and upload it to Cafe Press

Is Your Greta Thunberg T-Shirt Contributing to Climate Change?

If Greta Thunberg acts like someone who has no time to lose, it’s because she doesn’t. Already, the world is feeling the effects of the climate crisis, which is raising sea levels, fueling extreme temperatures and increasing the frequency of flooding and drought. And so in the span of a year, the 16-year-old Swedish schoolgirl has gone from “striking” from classes every Friday to demand stronger climate action from her government to shaming the United Nations General Assembly for its “betrayal” of young people.

Hailed as a 21st century Joan of Arc, a real-world Katniss Everdeen and “one of our planet’s greatest advocates,“ the young activist has inspired worldwide youth walkouts and the largest climate protest in history. She has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize and has appeared on the cover of Time. In May, Vice made a 30-minute documentary called “Make the World Greta Again.“ Such has been the “Greta effect,” in fact, that at times she almost transcends personhood, becoming a symbol, a movement, a zeitgeist and an attitude rolled into one. Or — occasionally — a T-shirt.

(snip though a couple paragraphs on all the shirts)

But the problem with T-shirts, even those purporting to promote climate action, is they’re especially hard on the environment. Just growing the cotton that goes into one can take 2,700 liters of water — enough for a person to drink for two-and-a-half years — and, if it isn’t farmed organically, a third of a pound of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals. T-shirts, particularly those with “heathered” yarns of mixed colors, may contain polyester and other synthetic fibers, which are derived from crude oil and emit greenhouse-gas emissions from extraction to disposal. They’re also linked to the production of microplastics: minuscule fragments of plastic, tinier than one-fifth of an inch, that slough off during laundering to pollute the oceans, tap water, table salt and the guts of every species of sea turtle.

So how bad?

“Most people don’t make the connection between clothing and climate change,” says Elizabeth Cline, author of The Conscious Closet: The Revolutionary Guide to Looking Good While Doing Good. “But we have to remember that a lot of the environmental problems we are suffering through are caused by overproduction.”

Case in point? The garment industry accounts for 8.1 percent of the world’s greenhouse-gas emissions — more than all international airline flights and maritime shipping trips combined.

To paraphrase another T-shirt, if we’re still wondering whether Greta would put her message on a tri-blend crewneck, the likeliest answer is Greta wouldn’t. This is, after all, the young woman who eschewed designer clothing in favor of her own at a Teen Vogue cover shoot.

 “Would you run a car for hours to protest climate change?” asks Rachel Kibbe, a circularity and textile-waste consultant. “Wearing a new cotton T-shirt to celebrate Greta, or to protest climate change, is the equivalent.”

Read: Your St. Greta Thunberg Shirt Might Be Contributing To The Climate Crisis Or Something »

NJ Looks To Revoke Liquor License For Trump Golf Club

If this golf club wasn’t owned by Trump, would they be doing this?

N.J. seeks to revoke liquor license at Trump’s golf club

New Jersey is seeking to revoke the liquor license of President Donald Trump’s Colts Neck golf club after the facility allegedly served an intoxicated customer who later drove drunk and and got into an accident that killed his father, according to a published report.

While the two offenses listed in the notice carry a combined penalty of a 25-day suspension, the state Division of Alcohol Beverage Control said it was seeking revocation of the license “due to the aggravating circumstances in this case.”

The letter was obtained by the Washington Post, which reported that the customer in question was Andrew Halder. The Woodcliff Lake man left the Colts Neck club on Aug. 30, 2018, and his car flipped and rolled after hitting the curb on a ramp, the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office said at the time.

His father, Gary, was ejected from the car and later died. Halder was charged with vehicular homicide and other offenses. At the time of the accident, his blood alcohol concentration exceeded .08 percent, the legal threshold for intoxication in New Jersey, according to the prosecutor’s office said.

The “aggravating circumstances” being “it’s owned by Trump.” And, the report is fake news. The accident happened in 2015, not 2018. So, why do this now? From the Washington Post article

The office of New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal, which sent the letter, declined to comment about the letter. Grewal was appointed in 2018 by Gov. Phil Murphy (D).

Both are virulent Trump haters

If the club’s liquor license is revoked, that would be a blow for the Colts Neck course, located near the Jersey Shore. The club could lose significant revenue from the two restaurants and a bar it operates for members, and find it hard to attract banquets or golf tournaments from outsiders.

Under New Jersey law, anyone who has one liquor license revoked must also give up all their other liquor licenses for two years. Trump has two other New Jersey golf clubs, including one in Bedminster that he uses as a summer White House.

Nope, nothing political.

Read: NJ Looks To Revoke Liquor License For Trump Golf Club »

Commentary Will Be Light: Broke My Thumb

I was going to try and wait to go to urgent care, couldn’t. Went to ER at 1230am. Finally got home at 430am. The Oxycodone/Acetaminophen combo just barely takes the edge off, got about 2 hours of sleep. Hard to mostly type with one hand. So, long commentary is out for a bit.

Glad I didn’t buy that Squier Stratocaster I found on sale yesterday. Would be a bummer looking at it

Read: Commentary Will Be Light: Broke My Thumb »

Governors Look To Raise Cost Of Living Through Higher Gas Taxes

Members of the Cult of Climastrology keep telling us that Doing Something about ‘climate change’ won’t affect our lives

Governors eye regional gas tax to fund transition from fossil fuels

Governors from several northeastern and mid-Atlantic states may have found a way to reduce pollution from cars and trucks and buck the Trump administration, which is trying to weaken auto emissions standards and gut efforts to curb climate change.

Under a regional cap-and-trade plan that a dozen states still are developing, drivers would pay more at the pump through higher prices for gas and diesel. The revenue would be invested in mass transit, electric-vehicle charging and other transportation infrastructure. Republican and Democratic governors and state lawmakers will have to decide whether to back the plan to address the largest source of carbon emissions — and pass on the costs to consumers in what opponents of the proposal are already calling a gas tax.

The coalition of a dozen states and the District of Columbia is hammering out a draft agreement to cap carbon emissions from gasoline and diesel, charging for the emissions and gradually lowering the limit over roughly a decade. The program is modeled on the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, which has reduced emissions in the power sector for several of the states mulling the similar program for vehicles.

The states engaged in the plan, called the Transportation and Climate Initiative, are Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, New York, Maine and New Hampshire. Eight are led by Democratic governors; four have Republicans.

Obviously, it won’t be direct taxation at the pump: it will be rising prices for all goods and services, since grocery stores, clothing stores, plumbers, carpenters, delivery drives, etc, will be paying more for fuel, so, they will pass the costs along. It all starts to add up.

But, Warmists won’t be complaining, right? This is what they wanted, right?

Will these same governors give up their own use of fossil fuels, and restrict the use of fossil fuels for the operation of state government?

Read: Governors Look To Raise Cost Of Living Through Higher Gas Taxes »

If All You See…

…is horrible carbon infused beer causing wild swings in weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Pacific Pundit, with a post on Gallup admitting their impeachment poll may have included illegal aliens.

Read: If All You See… »

Eco Anxiety Is Causing “Mums To Cry All Day”

They should try giving up their own use of fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral, see how they feel then. Or just pay lots and lots of taxes to the government

The mums with eco-anxiety: ‘I could cry all the time’

Like many new parents, Heather Sarno takes her son Jack along to rattle, rhyme and roll sessions at her local library. However, she broke down at a recent class because of her fears about the future of the planet.

“I was asking one of the staff members if I could speak to some of the other mums about coming to an Extinction Rebellion strike,” says Heather, from Beeston in Nottinghamshire. “She said they wouldn’t be able to get involved in anything political and I got really, really upset. She said, ‘I think you need to go and see someone’. But a doctor isn’t going to prescribe me with what I want.”

The 32-year-old mum of one says she wants an end to the damage humanity is inflicting on the planet.

She says the fact her fears are grounded upon scientific fact sets her anxieties apart from other psychological conditions or the usual fears that afflict new parents about their offspring’s future. For starters, she says, there is no medical treatment for the eco-anxiety she is experiencing.

“A doctor wouldn’t be able to control the companies responsible for 70% of the world’s carbon emissions or put a stop to recreational flights,” she says. “Only this morning, I was crying about it. It’s like a grief process.”

See, it’s always about Someone Else. Think of what could happen if all the Warmists decided to make their own lives carbon neutral and live like it’s 9 A.D.

Having a child has exacerbated Heather’s fears for the future. She says she only realised the impact of climate change after Jack’s birth.

“It was terrifying – for days, I couldn’t sleep. My appetite went. I cried loads. I felt really, really anxious and upset. I remember being really frantic and asking my husband, ‘did you know about this?’ I felt so guilty about having had Jack.”

Yes, I am laughing at this insanity. It deserves to be laughed at. It’s like getting all worked up because you forgot to get catsup at the store. It’s not a big deal.

Of course, feel bad for the kid, and all the kids of these unhinged Warmists who really do need competent mental health professionals who do not sympathize but, instead, tell them they are being stupid and hysterical over nothing, because the parents will damage the kids.

Read More »

Read: Eco Anxiety Is Causing “Mums To Cry All Day” »

Bad Behavior has blocked 9916 access attempts in the last 7 days.