Climate Cultists Hail Ed Markey Victory

By William Teach September 8, 2020 – 3:00 pm

They’re thinking this is bold action. This is from 5 days ago, but, even the UK Guardian, the most pro Cult of Climastrology major media outlet in the world, doesn’t do all that much with Hotcoldwetdry these days, because most do not not care in practice

‘Bold action is a winning message’: climate advocates hail Ed Markey win

US climate advocates have their highest-profile evidence yet that putting the crisis first can win elections. And it arrived in an unlikely package: a 74-year-old Senate incumbent, who garnered intense grassroots support from young activists.

Ed Markey this week won a decisive victory in the Massachusetts Democratic primary election over Joe Kennedy who was challenging for his seat, the latest scion of the American political dynasty who had backing from the country’s top Democrat, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi.

John Podesta, who was Barack Obama’s climate adviser, said Markey’s win “sent a resounding message: the politics of climate have changed and embracing bold climate action is a winning message in tough races”. (snip)

It came as no surprise that climate was the major focus of Markey’s campaign. He introduced the Green New Deal alongside the New York congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez last year. And his name is on the Waxman-Markey climate bill of 2009, which is the closest Congress has ever come to taking significant action on climate change.

Say, remember when Markey voted “present” when the Senate voted on his own GND? Oh, and how he takes long fossil fueled flights from Mass to D.C. and back all the time? And how Waxman-Markey went nowhere in a Senate controlled by the Democrats?

Read: Climate Cultists Hail Ed Markey Victory »

Posted in Democrats, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 8, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is a summer snow world due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Maggie’s Farm, with a post on media gaslighting.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Bummer: Majority In Idaho Against Letting Gender Confused Men Compete Against Women

By William Teach September 8, 2020 – 10:30 am

I’ll take this survey with a slight grain of salt, as it does seem a bit biased, but, really, even without that bias, most people are probably against letting “trans-women” compete against biological women in sports

Poll: Majority of Idaho Voters Approve Law to Protect Female Athletes from Transgender Competitors

A poll conducted by Spry Strategies and the Women’s Liberation Front (WOLF) revealed what Idaho voters think about the state’s new law that protects female athletes from competing against biological male athletes who “identify” as a woman.

WOLF issued a press release about the findings:

While radical feminists and conservative Christians have together been the mainstay of organized opposition to the increasingly strange demands of the gender identity movement, these polling numbers show that our positions are solidly within the mainstream of opinion, in both red Idaho, and blue California.

Seventy-nine percent of likely voters in Idaho, and 74 percent of likely voters in California, agree with us that boys and men should not be allowed to identify their way into female-only sporting competitions.

These results track with previous polling that Spry performed for the American Principles Project this July, where an average of 77 percent of voters across ten battleground states—Arizona , Georgia , Iowa , Kentucky , Michigan , Montana , North Carolina , Pennsylvania , Texas , and Wisconsin—also disagreed with letting boys and men compete against girls and women.

The Idaho law, the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act, was sponsored by State Rep. Barbara Ehardt and signed by Gov. Brad Little in March with the support of 66 percent of likely Idaho voters.

If someone wants to be gender confused, that’s on them. They shouldn’t be able to force those beliefs on Other People and take away the sporting, and other, opportunities from real women.

Of course, this isn’t really a “Christian” issue, it’s an issue that people of all stripes are against allowing to happen. And it is definitely anti-science, in that no matter what one does, one is still biologically male or female.

Double of course, this doesn’t mean the hardcore moonbats won’t stop in their attempts to force this down our throats, no matter how many girls and women are hurt. They have a Narrative, and, while they talk a lot about Democracy, they are intolerant and unaccepted when they lose.

Read: Bummer: Majority In Idaho Against Letting Gender Confused Men Compete Against Women »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Liberal World | Comments Off on Bummer: Majority In Idaho Against Letting Gender Confused Men Compete Against Women | Trackback URL

Boston Warmists Add Justice And Coronavirus Recovery To Their Green New Deal

By William Teach September 8, 2020 – 7:10 am

I triple dog dare the Boston government to institute all the tenets of their Green New Deal right now, which would mean shutting down their airports, most of their shipping ports, restricting all use of fossil fuels in the city, getting rid of the Celtics, Bruins, Red Sox, and minor league teams in the city limits, replacing all energy with wind and solar, including during the winter, and so much more. Give it a w whirl, Boston

Boston Progressives Expand the Green New Deal to Include Justice Concerns and Pandemic Recovery

A year and a half ago, after the House passed and the Senate defeated Green New Deal resolutions in Washington, Boston City Councilor Michelle Wu posed an ambitious question to the large local climate community: “What could the city do in the vacuum of federal leadership?”

Nice lie by Inside Climate News’ Katelyn Weisbrod: the House has never voted on it. Literally all that’s been done in the House was it was introduced. Not even referred to committee.

By the time she and her activist coterie finished answering that question this summer, the scope had grown exponentially.

“Looking at 2020,” said Nina Schlegel, a Boston climate activist on Wu’s staff, “we were like, ‘Wow, we really need to think about racial justice and make that really explicit,” and “we need to respond to the pandemic because cities are the government closest to the people. We need to be responsive, and there’s no reason why a local green new deal cannot incorporate all of that.”

The end result, released by Wu’s office last month, is called the Boston Green New Deal and Just Recovery plan. Wu and Schlegel said the document, while inspired by similar blueprints produced by cities like Seattle, Los Angeles and New York, is unique in its scope, thanks to circumstance.

Its climate ambition is clear in its section on accelerating decarbonization: the plan calls for citywide carbon neutrality by 2040, 10 years ahead of the deadline established by Boston’s 2019 Climate Action Plan, in addition to 100 percent sustainable electricity by 2035, and net-zero municipal buildings by 2024.

So, it’s a unicorn plan which is all about left wing priorities. And, why would they need racial justice? Isn’t Boston an uber-progressive Democratic Party voting city? Is this update GND admitting that Boston is super racist? It is considered to be one of the most, if not the most, racist place to play major league baseball.

It’s scope is clear in its call for issuing municipal bonds to fund solar installation on city buildings, divesting municipal funds from private prisons and gun manufacturers, expanding Boston’s canopy of about 300,000 trees, and creating an Urban Climate Corps for training and employing youth to install green infrastructure.

“We really want to zoom out a little bit and talk about how we can seek policy change that also dismantles and rectifies past injustices,” said Schlegel. “That means looking at housing and displacement and looking at the proliferation of luxury development. It means looking at unequal access to transit, and where our heat islands are located.”

Sounds like this is all about politics, not science. And you know that Cancel Culture will rear its head against everything Wrongthink

The plan calls for a comprehensive “justice audit” of city programs and spending. “The results from a nationwide survey of Black individuals shows Boston is considered the least welcoming of eight major American cities, and only 4 percent of households earning $75,000 or more across Greater Boston are Black,” the plan says. “Air pollution and related illnesses are more prevalent in communities of color and result from government decisions about zoning and transportation infrastructure. City approvals for development continue to shape structural inequities as Boston misses opportunities for equitable wealth creation and justice.”

Yup, sounds like Democratic Party run Boston is pretty racist.

Read: Boston Warmists Add Justice And Coronavirus Recovery To Their Green New Deal »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Democrats, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Joe Biden Admits His National Mask Mandate Would Be Unconstitutional

By William Teach September 8, 2020 – 6:46 am

You’d think this type of information would be somewhat news worthy, wouldn’t you? Yet, the only outlets covering this are a few Conservative leaning ones, including Breitbart, but nothing from the ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Washington Post, LA Times, NY Times, or other big outlets

Joe Biden walks back his national mask mandate, admits it would probably be unconstitutional

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden declared on Aug. 13 that he would call for a nationwide face mask mandate. “Every single American should be wearing a mask when they’re outside for the next three months, at a minimum,” Biden said in August. “Let’s institute a mask mandate nationwide starting immediately, and we will save lives.”

Biden’s running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), eagerly approved of Biden’s mask mandate. “That’s what real leadership looks like,” Harris said on the same day. “We just witnessed real leadership. Which is Joe Biden said that as a nation, we should all be wearing a mask for the next three months, because it will save lives.”

During Biden’s acceptance speech on the final night of the 2020 Democratic National Convention, he firmly declared that he would implement a national mask mandate if elected president.

“We’ll have a national mandate to wear a mask — not as a burden, but to protect each other,” Biden said on Aug. 20 at the 2020 DNC. “It’s a patriotic duty.”

Of course, if he wins, he wouldn’t be able to do this till January 21st, 2021, and we all know that COVID19 restrictions will disappear the day after the election if he wins. And there is some data suggesting that the explosion of confirmed cases occurred after the mask mandates in states, cities, and counties exploded. And some data to suggest the opposite. Regardless, the one thing I don’t like is that people feel emboldened to get close since they are wearing a mask. Stay back. Anyhow, I digress

However, Biden walked back his national mask mandate on Sunday, admitting that it would probably be unconstitutional.

Dennis Welch, political editor of the Arizona’s Family publication and host of “Politics Unplugged,” asked Biden about instituting a stronger federal response to the coronavirus pandemic, such as a national mask mandate.

“Here’s the deal, the federal government…there’s a constitutional issue whether the federal government could issue such a mandate, I don’t think constitutionally they could, so I wouldn’t issue a mandate,” Biden said.

Oops? So all the rage-whining at Trump for refusing to institute a national mask mandate is based on a lie? He continued on (from the Breitbart article)

He said he would ask governors, mayors, county executives — anyone in authority — to impose one.

“I’m a constitutionalist,” Biden declared. “You can’t do things the Constitution does not allow you the power to do.”

He can ask, but, those who were going to do so have done so. As for being a constitutionalist, what did he tell Barack when he signed an order for DACA? How long do they want us wearing masks? On the bright side, they can hide our facial expressions from people, if you can work on keeping your eyes out of it.

Read: Joe Biden Admits His National Mask Mandate Would Be Unconstitutional »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, Democrats, Joe Biden | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Trot Out Knew Thing: Climate Alignment

By William Teach September 7, 2020 – 4:23 pm

Once you get beyond all the Duckspeak and “we’re all in this together”, it’s really just another form of government forcing the private sector to act in a certain manner

The Way The World Needs To Move Forward On Climate Action: Climate Alignment

To make fundamental breakthroughs in addressing the causes of climate change, we need to dramatically shift the way we think and act on climate. To date, the world has primarily — and understandably — tackled the issue as a project of nations, leaving countries to formulate their action plans in silos, sometimes even in secrecy. But business doesn’t stop at the border, and neither do emissions.

What’s this “we” stuff? Why don’t climate cultists practice what they preach themselves?

India, China, and the United States may appear as individual entities in the climate dialogue, but their steel, chemicals, and cement industries have a lot in common. To go far enough fast enough, we need the Paris Agreement’s nationally determined contributions, but we also need an equally strong focus on cross-cutting industrial transformation. The bottom line is that we won’t solve the climate crisis without solving industry, but our current approach is not enough.

It’s clear that if we are to have a future that avoids the worst-case climate scenarios while also being just and environmentally sustainable, and providing equitable access to opportunities for global citizens, we need to target net-zero emissions by 2050. But while 2050 sounds like it’s far away, we need to be on track for our 2050 goals by 2030. That means we only ten years (or nine and a half at this point) to drive past economic tipping points and cut emissions by half. Therefore, the 2020s have been referred to as “the decisive decade.”

Dramatic change in these sectors is possible, but it requires engaging the real economy and working directly with the leaders in the most carbon-intensive sectors in a way that hasn’t been done before. In that spirit, the emerging concept of climate alignment is critical. Climate alignment focuses attention on the disciplined stewardship of the limited carbon budget we need to work within if we want to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees C.

A climate-aligned sector or company has specified a science-based transformation pathway to net zero emissions, the metrics needed to measure progress, and the range of stakeholder commitments from industry, finance, customers, suppliers, and governments needed to move down that pathway. It is a term that’s gained traction in the financial community where banks and investors are seeking to align near-term activities with technical and economic pathways that are needed to stay under the 1.5-degree target.

And it would really be government setting those metrics, and forcing the private sector to comply. Surprise? The question is, will this become one of the next things for the Cult of Climastrology?

Read: Warmists Trot Out Knew Thing: Climate Alignment »

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 7, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is heat snow from other people driving fossil fueled vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is No Tricks Zone, with a post on European deforestation due to CO2 targets.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Cancel Culture Comes For Charles Darwin

By William Teach September 7, 2020 – 10:30 am

Charles Darwin has long been a favorite of Leftists, especially those who are anti-religion, which has long been hated by Leftists (technically, Communism, Marxism, Socialism, Progressivism, etc, are far to the right in the Authoritarian and Dictatorship models per Political Theory 101, but, let’s not quibble) who want to make The State the official religion. They love bring up the theory of evolution. But, sooner or later, the cancel culture alligator comes for everything

Now Charles Darwin gets cancelled: Natural History museum will review ‘offensive’ exhibitions about the Father of Evolution because HMS Beagle’s Galapagos voyage was ‘colonialist’

The Natural History museum is conducting a review into potentially ‘offensive’ collections including its Charles Darwin exhibitions.

In the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement, museum bosses have ordered an audit into certain collections that some staff believe are ‘legacies of colonies, slavery and empire’.

Rooms, statues and collected items in the museum that could be ‘problematic’ may be renamed, relabelled, or removed.

The review into the museum’s links to slavery and colonialism could result in a potential overhaul of the museum’s collections and public spaces.

In documents seen by The Sunday Telegraph, museum staff were told that as a result of the Black Lives Matter protests, the museum would undertake a review of room names, statues and collections that ‘could potentially cause offence’.

The executive board of the Natural History museum is said to be ‘very engaged’ with the issue and circulated an academic paper to staff which claimed ‘science, racism, and colonial power were inherently entwined’.

The paper proposes publicly acknowledging the past to create ‘less racist’ museums.

Once they are all labeled, the SJWs will then demand that they be removed

According to the academic paper shared with museum staff, the HMS Beagle was cited as one of Britain’s many ‘colonialist scientific expeditions’.

It wrote that one of the purposes of the voyage was ‘to enable greater British control of those areas’.

The paper also argues that ‘museums were put in place to legitimise a racist ideology’.

Other collections that could come under scrutiny by the anti-racist review are specimens gathered by botanist Sir Joseph Banks who sailed with Captain James Cook, as well as items gathered by Swedish scientist Carl Linnaeus who thought Africans were ‘crafty’, ‘indolent’ and ‘negligent’.

Science and exploration are raaaaacist. So are museums. So, museums will soon be cancelled.

The flora collection of Sir Hans Sloane, one of the British Museum’s founders, may also come under review.

He was labelled him a ‘slave owner’ by the British Museum in August and his bust was removed from a pedestal.

The ceiling of the main Hintze Hall of the Natural History Museum – where ‘Hope’, a skeleton of a blue whale is hanging (pictured) – could also be ‘problematic’ due to paintings of colonial exports such as cotton, tea and tobacco.

A statue of Charles Darwin that sits in the museum’s main hall could also come under questioning as well as a statue of scientist Thomas Henry Huxley because of his theories of five ‘races’ of human.

It’s hard to end a post when you keep reading about the insanity of cancel culture, eh? And, yeah, there’s even more. Hit the link.

Read: Cancel Culture Comes For Charles Darwin »

Posted in Science, Unhinged Tools | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Shocking: Extinction Rebellion Has Been Infiltrated With Marxists

By William Teach September 7, 2020 – 8:31 am

I’m gobsmacked. They just seemed so reasonable in their demands and actions

Extinction Rebellion at war with itself after infiltration by Marxists

A bitter battle is raging for control of Extinction Rebellion, with claims that the organisation is being infiltrated by far-Left groups who want it to adopt a more overtly militant socialist agenda.

More militant than it already is?

Evidence is emerging that Marxist groups such as the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and the Young Communist League (YCL) have instructed members to join the ranks of XR with a view to exerting a strong influence on its strategy.

The SWP has encouraged its members to attend Extinction Rebellion protests and blockades in order to recruit members to its own ranks and influence the organisation away from its original aim to tackle environmental threats towards a more Marxist direction.

Matters came to a head last week when members of the YCL, the youth wing of the Communist Party of Britain, were photographed at an Extinction Rebellion protest in Parliament Square holding a banner that read “Socialism not Extinction” alongside a hammer and sickle.

XR had this to say

But…

Read More »

Read: Shocking: Extinction Rebellion Has Been Infiltrated With Marxists »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Why Aren’t We Talking ABout Guns After Kenosha And Portland Or Something

By William Teach September 7, 2020 – 8:11 am

In the wake of the George Floyd shooting, the point was supposed to be about policing reform, right? It didn’t last long before all the Leftists started mixing in all their pet peeves/causes, like LGBT, ‘climate change’, mail in ballots, and more. Not to mention the riots, looting, plundering, assault, etc. Now it seems to be gun grabbing

After Kenosha & Portland, Why Aren’t We Talking About Guns?

The killings on the streets of Kenosha, Wis., and Portland, Ore., by gun-toting, self-appointed ministers of justice bolster one of the main arguments made by gun control advocates: widespread access to guns leads to needless death.

In both cases, confrontations between political opponents quickly escalated, shots were fired, and people died. Further, the Kenosha shooting involved a semi-automatic “assault” rifle, in a state with an open carry law (though the 17-year-old shooter, Kyle Rittenhouse, is one year short of being able to legally open carry in the state).

Yet the shootings have not sparked a fresh dialogue about gun control. We are not spending much time at all debating background checks, assault weapons bans or open carry laws.

Why aren’t we talking about guns? Chiefly, because the presidential candidates aren’t talking about guns. Donald Trump is busy blaming Joe Biden and Democratic mayors for failing to crack down on rioting and looting, while Biden is blaming Trump for fueling divisiveness.

Interesting. Far left Bill Scher, a contributing editor to Politico Magazine, fails to mention that the left wing shooter, Michael Reinoehl, actually stalked Aaron Danielson before murdering him. Nor does Scher mention all the shootings in the Seattle CHAZ area when Democrats were showing what mob rule looked like. Or that shootings in Democrat run cities have skyrocketed. Nor that all these left wing groups are showing up armed, when they typically call for people to be disarmed. I guess it’s a matter of them wanting Other People disarmed.

Yet if they don’t emphasize gun control now, they can’t easily argue next year that they have a broad mandate, cutting across political and cultural fault lines, to act. Any newly elected Democratic senators may not be so eager to sign on to gun control legislation, especially partisan legislation, for fear of losing tenuous support at home.

He’s telling you that Democrats want to take your guns. Are you listening?

Still, Biden is probably wise to put first things first. Erasing the political and cultural divide with a geographically broad victory is a necessary, if not sufficient, first step for creating a climate conducive to bipartisan cooperation and ultimate legislative success. If that means putting the gun issue on the back burner, even when gun deaths are in the news, so be it. But Biden and his fellow Democrats should be aware that any attempt at passing specific gun control measures in 2021 will be a heavy lift without first proving their popularity at the ballot box in 2020.

How did that “bipartisan” stuff work while Biden’s boss Barack Obama was in office? And, perhaps we should be talking about left wing violence, how Democrats resort to violence, arson, looting, assault, etc, quickly. Which is why so many people are buying their first firearms.

Read: Say, Why Aren’t We Talking ABout Guns After Kenosha And Portland Or Something »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove