If All You See…

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is snow that will SOON! melt away and never fall, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Doug Ross @ Journal, with a post on Larwyn’s Linx.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Dem Senator Brian Schatz Thinks They Need To Talk Like Normal People

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 10:30 am

Well, good luck with that. Along with talking to normal people

Brian Schatz to Democrats: Talk Like Normal People

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) can seem mellow. Having grown up in Hawaii, he exudes not only the Aloha spirit but what could be called shaka vibes. You know, that hang loose and catch-a-wave-when-it-comes sense of equilibrium that imbues many who hail from America’s Pacific paradise. (big snip)

I spent 45 minutes with Schatz earlier this month in his holiday and Hawaii-bedecked Hart office. He was blunt about a range of topics, most significantly his party’s failures and the necessity that they drop their faculty club and interest group vernacular. He was particularly scathing on the tic of using “center” as a verb. (snip)

You’re not quitting Twitter are you?

I still have an account. I am posting mostly on Bluesky.

But on the information environment piece, I think there’s the question of left-wing infrastructure, which I think should not be confused with the liberal project of preserving journalism and democracy, which is super important. But the problem is, a lot of liberal donors believe if we just fund good journalism, that that’s a counterweight to the right-wing noise machine. And I think that we’ve now learned that we have to build our own infrastructure, and that’s going to take money and staffing and all of that. I will help with that, but obviously as a federal legislator, that’s not my primary function.

He fails to realize that the vast majority of the news media is full of Democrats, and they push the Democrat narrative. And, if he’s sitting mostly on Bluesky, he’s speaking mostly to the choir, with the nuttiest of the nutters having moved over there. You can’t speak normal or to normal people if that’s your primary platform.

The third part of that, is that it’s not just that we’re unable to reach people. It’s that people are unable to reach us. So, when inflation was pissing people off, you could scarcely find a person in mainstream, left-wing circles, who would even talk about it. Except to explain that the Biden economy was better than other countries. And that the Biden stewardship was better than other industrialized nations. And by the way, I continue to think that’s true and totally irrelevant — If you’re talking about the question of are people pissed about the price of eggs, the answer is flatly yes they are. Not, ‘Don’t you know people are paying more in Paris and shouldn’t you be happy about that.’

He does have a point there, but, they won’t. Democrats think they are better than everyone else, so, they cannot be honest with anyone. They expect everyone to just go along with what the Elites say. Keep your mouth shut, suck it up, vote Democrat.

But who appeals to you in ’28?

I think whomever we nominate has to talk like a normal person. That is to me the most important thing. Normal doesn’t mean that they have an affect that is identifiable midwestern or southern or some sort of regional — But this person is real. If you had them over for dinner, you could understand what the hell they were talking about. And so I think we are looking for someone who can plausibly fit in as a human being all across the country. I don’t know who that’s going to be. But the challenge is going to be, how do you maintain your progressive values and not sound like you just got your post-doctoral thesis in sociology. And God bless those people.

Good luck with that. A goodly chunk of your elected officials, their advisors, and all your Credentialed News folks speak in Progressive. Who can they nominate who does not speak like an Elitist wackjob lefty? Who talks down to people who aren’t getting with the program?

Read: Dem Senator Brian Schatz Thinks They Need To Talk Like Normal People »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

French Government To Require Solar Panels Above All Parking Lots

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 8:29 am

It’s not a bad idea, but, done for the wrong cultish idea, and, really, who pays?

Government announces new law that could drastically change parking lots nationwide — here’s what you need to know

France is taking a major step toward renewable energy by requiring large parking lots to install solar canopies.

As The Progress Playbook reported, France first announced this policy in 2023 and finalized it recently. It will apply to outdoor parking areas larger than 1,500 square meters, with the aim of expanding the country’s clean energy output.

Under the new law, most large parking lots will soon be covered by solar panels, transforming them into mini power plants. This mandate aligns with France’s goal to accelerate renewable energy adoption and reduce reliance on dirty energy sources, such as coal and gas.

In addition to generating clean energy, solar canopies offer another perk: shade for parked cars, protecting them from overheating in the sun.

Realistically, putting solar panels above parking areas is a good idea: they are large pieces of land which are used for one thing, and solar will not interfere with their operations, and, as mentioned, provide shade. Not just for the cars but for the people walking to them, as well as protect them from rain and snow.

Solar carports have several advantages. Johan Pienaar, CEO of Eversolar, explained to The Progress Playbook that they make excellent use of space, are easy to maintain, and generate high yields because panels can be optimally positioned. Though they come with higher upfront costs compared to rooftop solar systems, their efficiency ensures a similar cost per kilowatt-hour over time.

“From a return on investments perspective, solar carports definitely make sense,” Pienaar said.

Since I do not want to do math, 1,000 square meters is a block 20 meters by 50 meters. Which is 65 feet by 164 feet. Applied to 1,500 square meters, that’s not a particularly a big space. Maybe 50 car spaces. How much is the cost, and how long does it make to recoup the losses? Who will get the power? Will it be fed back into the grid, or, do the companies get it? And, what will companies charge to make up for the installation costs if they are forced to pay for installation?

Overall, it is a mostly benign climate cult law. Of course, France is also trying to force their peasants out of their vehicles, so, will this be for the Elites who continue to travel in fossil fueled SUVs and limos?

Read: French Government To Require Solar Panels Above All Parking Lots »

Posted in Energy, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Hot Take: The Supreme Court Ruling Against The Gender Confused Is Bad For Women’s Equality

By William Teach December 27, 2024 – 8:13 am

The lengths that the people supporting mental health issues will go to

The Supreme Court Case Over Trans Youth Could Also Decimate Women’s Equality

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in what is likely to be the term’s blockbuster case, United States v. Skrmetti. The case considers the constitutionality of state laws that ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors. While the case itself addresses only a law from Tennessee, 26 states have passed similar laws that will be affected by the outcome.

A blanket ban on such care risks devastating effects for those youth who need it. But as the argument made clear, that is not all that is at stake. The case is also about women’s rights, and a fundamental legal principle that helped to secure them: Courts should be skeptical of laws that discriminate on the basis of sex.

With the defenders of Tennessee’s law challenging that bedrock principle, it is not only transgender equality, but sex equality more broadly that is in doubt. Depending on the outcome, Skrmetti could be the next Dobbs, adding another nail in the coffin to women’s legal freedoms — and freedoms we all enjoy regardless of sex.

The United States is challenging the Tennessee law on the basis of the Constitution’s equal protection clause, which has been interpreted to guarantee sex equality. Under this provision, sex-based laws — that is, laws that on their face classify people on the basis of sex — are subject to what is known as heightened scrutiny, which means that courts will invalidate them unless there is a persuasive reason to draw a sex-based line.

This really is the way Democrats think, that males with mental illness are actually women. And that denying all sorts of life-altering drugs and surgeries to minors will cause real women to lose all their rights. That states will be able to legally discriminate against biological women. The same women who are having nutjob penis invade their sports, locker rooms, changing rooms, and bathrooms.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar made clear at the argument that this constitutes sex discrimination. She offered an illustrative example: “[T]ake Ryan Roe, who is one of the individual plaintiffs here. He wants to take testosterone in order to live and identify as a boy, and he’s prohibited by SB1 from doing so because his birth sex was female. But, if you change Ryan’s birth sex and suppose he was assigned male at birth, then SB1’s restriction lifts.” Drawing a line between biological females and biological males — one can get the treatment and the other can’t — should trigger demanding judicial scrutiny of the law.

And this is one of the reasons that Democrats lost the election: they think transgender males are women. Here you have a female solicitor gender who’s deluded enough to argue against protecting actual women, along with allowing minors to have life-altering elective medical treatment.

Realistically, if the Court rules in favor of Tennessee nothing will happen to real women. The laws are quite clear on women’s equality, and states are not going to try and put the women back into the kitchen. This is just Democrat lunacy, as usual.

Read: Hot Take: The Supreme Court Ruling Against The Gender Confused Is Bad For Women’s Equality »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 30 Comments | Trackback URL

On The Return To The Office For Federal Employees Debate, It’s Not About You The Taxpayer

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 3:00 pm

Obviously, the rank and file of the Washington Post are all for working from home (and the beach, the mountains, in between Call Of Duty sessions and binge watching their shows), especially since those who run the WP have told employees they need to work from work. There is something interesting in this article

Trump wants federal workers back in the office. It may be a tall task.

President-elect Donald Trump warned federal employees last week that they must return to the office – or else “they’re going to be dismissed.”

The threat was the latest and loudest signal yet that Trump, his allies and Republicans in Congress are committed to ending a remote-work culture that became widespread for the civil service of 2.3 million during the coronavirus pandemic but that many conservatives now decry as an outdated taxpayer-funded perk that has hurt performance across the government.

A quick return to pre-pandemic – or even stricter – federal office policies is not likely to happen with the stroke of a presidential pen.

It’s 2024, almost 2025: the time of Wuhan Flu is long behind us. What is the point in all these taxpayer funded federal employees (supposedly) working from home? How about a study from productivity specialists to see if these taxpayer funded federal employees are actually doing their jobs. How many are getting perks associated with coming in to their place of work, which they aren’t doing?

“It’s in a lot of labor contracts,” Cathie McQuiston, deputy general counsel at the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), the largest union representing federal workers, said of the telework arrangements. “And at a lot of these agencies, the reality is, they don’t have the place to put people to force them back five days a week.”

Um, what? Where were they working beforehand? What happened to the office space? Oh, right, Biden was dumping the space over the years. Anyhow, here’s the part that really got my ire up

“AFGE embraces a work environment that includes full in-person, alternate work schedules, telework, and full remote work to best serve the needs of our members and staff,” Brittany Holder, another union spokeswoman, said in an email. The AFGE represents about 750,000 federal employees.

It’s not about what serves the federal employees, it’s what best serves the American taxpayers, who have their money involuntarily taken to pay the federal employees to work from home (at the racetrack, at the bar, sitting out at the pool). That should be the primary consideration. That’s what the job entails. They’ve long forgotten that they are public servants. If it makes sense and saves money without losing productivity to work from home, great! If not, come to the office, or go try and work in the private sector.

Read: On The Return To The Office For Federal Employees Debate, It’s Not About You The Taxpayer »

Posted in Government | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is a calm sea from carbon pollution killing the wind, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Chicks On the Right, with a post on Jill Biden telling Joe to turn on Democrats, burn it all down.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Santa Cruz Pier Collapse Linked To Enviroweenies Suing To Stop Repairs

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 10:30 am

Not as many people were Blaming global boiling for the collapse of the pier, but, they were out there

https://twitter.com/RepJimmyPanetta/status/1871338402588840093

Panetta was just one of many. The reality

Santa Cruz Wharf Collapses After Environmental Lawsuit Delayed Repairs

Repairs to the historic wharf in Santa Cruz, which collapsed in heavy swell on Monday, were reportedly delayed after an environmental and preservationist group’s lawsuit delayed changes to the 110-year-old structure by several years.

Waves were unusually high on Monday up and down the West Coast, bringing Christmas joy to surfers, who flocked to popular surf spots, north and south, to catch the swell.

I’ll disagree with Breitbart on the waves: there was nothing unusual about the wave heights. This happens all the time, which is one of the reasons why California has long been mentioned as the surfing mecca of the continental US, and one of the best spots in the world. Heck, looking at the two videos in the article I see some basic waves. Good ones, maybe 3 footers (wave height is half the face height). The ones up in Santa Cruz were bigger, but, nothing out of the norm. Just strong winter waves

The San Francisco Chronicle recalled Tuesday that the city had planned to reinforce the wharf, but that the proposal had faced a lawsuit by a group of environmentalists and preservationists called “Don’t Morph the Wharf,” which caused repairs to be delayed and also caused part of the project to be abandoned.

The Chronicle reported:

In 2016, the city had proposed another plan: create a below-deck walkway wrapping around the wharf’s western side, creating new space for pedestrians while providing the piles a buffer against incoming waves. The plan would have extended the wharf in some new places and added new buildings — including one directly atop the section that collapsed.

Opponents of the additions, assembled under the name Don’t Morph the Wharf, sued in late 2020, arguing the city hadn’t done a proper environmental review of the plan.

The city countered that the new “Westside Walkway” was necessary to mitigate damage from waves during storms, as it would extend past the current wharf and act as a break for waves, preventing them from hitting the wharf and the buildings on it, protecting the pilings on the west side of the wharf and providing additional lateral stability.

The enviroweenies won their suit in 2022, meaning that any plans to protect the old pier were put off for years. Plus, it was just old, and had taken a beating over all those years. It is in the ocean, after all. Waves happen. Big waves happen. Because ocean. Heck, you get huge, strong waves in the Great Lakes. That’s the way it works.

Going back to Panetta’s tweet, this is a problem with Democrats thinking every problem requires federal money, rather than state and local money.

Read: Santa Cruz Pier Collapse Linked To Enviroweenies Suing To Stop Repairs »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

HotCold Take: Average Briton Has A Huge Carbon Footprint On Christmas

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 7:15 am

One last bit of climate cult insanity

Average Briton causes 23 times more CO2 on Christmas Day, study reveals

Whether out of poverty or virtue, many of us spend much of the year reining in our appetites to save our pennies and our health. But at Christmas many of us put our worries aside and go wild in an orgy of lavish gifting, extensive travel and a gluttonous feeding frenzy.

This carnival of consumption has a cost: not just to our wallets and our waistlines, but also to the climate.

An analysis for the Guardian has found the average Briton’s consumption on Christmas Day causes 23 times more greenhouse gas emissions than a regular day.

Emissions generated by each adult by all the travel, gifts, energy, decorations, food, drink and waste associated with the climax of the annual carnival of consumerism amount to 513kg of CO2 equivalent (CO2e), the analysis found. The average daily emissions of a UK adult are about 22kg CO2e.

The research lays bare the climate impact of the annual celebrations, enjoyed by hundreds of millions of people in the wealthiest parts of the world but which have long been criticised as having been hijacked by marketing promoting mass consumption.

These cultists are just so tedious. And, weirdly, they never tell us how they’ve reduced their own “carbon footprints.”

https://twitter.com/MatthewWielicki/status/1871570685350515162

They could certainly pay for it themselves or take a loan out, right? See if a company will fund them, rather then drinking at the federal trough.

Read: HotCold Take: Average Briton Has A Huge Carbon Footprint On Christmas »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | Comments Off on HotCold Take: Average Briton Has A Huge Carbon Footprint On Christmas | Trackback URL

MTG Wants Death Penalty For Illegal Who Murdered Woman On Subway By Setting Her On Fire

By William Teach December 26, 2024 – 7:00 am

Blowing through social media, the Usual Moonbats are more upset with what MTG said than a woman being set on fire

Marjorie Taylor Greene wants death penalty for migrant who allegedly set woman on fire on subway: ‘Finish him’

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., is calling for the swift trial, conviction, and execution of the man charged in connection with the gruesome murder of a woman burned alive on a New York City subway.

The outspoken Republican took to social media on Tuesday to address the incident, in which Guatemalan national Sebastian Zapeta, 33, is accused of setting a woman on fire while on a train in Brooklyn.

“Death penalty, don’t waste money on a lengthy trial. Convict him and finish him. What he did is so incredibly evil,” Greene declared in a post on X. “I can’t watch the video anymore. And how it seems like no one tried to save her is beyond me. Maybe they did but it doesn’t seem like it.”

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., also called for capital punishment.

“Death penalty,” she tweeted.

Unfortunately, it takes way too long to go through the whole system before someone is put to death. Obviously, there are those on the Left and the Right who are not fans of the death penalty. How about building a federal prison for the worst illegal criminals on an island off the coast of Alaska? Nowhere to escape to, nice harsh cold conditions, which is wonderful for all those who came from hot countries. Or, just drop them off with a few supplies and say “we’ll be back periodically for your court appearances”?

Meanwhile

Massachusetts Gov. Healey clarifies state’s stance on migrants

Massachusetts Democratic Gov. Maura Healey is making it clear that her state is not a sanctuary state despite eight Massachusetts cities, including Boston and Cambridge, declaring sanctuary status. Sanctuary policies are designed to limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, with the primary goal of protecting immigrants who are in the country illegally from being detained or deported by federal authorities.

Healey sat down for an interview with WBZ-TV in Boston earlier this week.

“We’re seeing the number of migrant families coming into Massachusetts go way down,” Healey said. “That’s good because I’ve also sent the message: Massachusetts, we are not a sanctuary state. If you come here, there is not housing.”

Huh. I thought all these Dem run states were super accepting of illegals? Well, until they realize how much they cost and how much crime they bring. Oh, and I bet she’s been listening to Tom Holman when he says he’s serious about seeing those who help illegals will get prosecuted.

Read: MTG Wants Death Penalty For Illegal Who Murdered Woman On Subway By Setting Her On Fire »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…Christmas Edition

By William Teach December 25, 2024 – 1:43 pm

…is a world turning to sand from too much heat, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Don Surber, with a post on the most American Christmas ever.

Read: If All You See…Christmas Edition »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove