LA County To Put Defunding Sheriff’s Office On November Ballot

By William Teach August 5, 2020 – 10:30 am

It’ll be very interesting to see how the people of LA County vote. Remember, what people think of as Los Angeles is actually a huge county, going from Long Beach in the south to way, way north, up into the mountains and forests. You have Pomona, Inglewood, Santa Monica, Malibu, Beverly Hills, Palmdale, Santa Clarita, and so many more municipalities, with the city of LA proper right in the middle. Take a look at a map on this. You have everything from extremely rich to extremely poor encompassed

L.A. County Supervisors Vote to Put Defunding Police on November Ballot

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved a proposal on Tuesday to amend the city’s charter — which will be presented to voters on November 3 via ballot — to remove $880 million from law enforcement and “reinvest” the money in “direct community investment” and “alternatives to incarceration.”

Titled, “Reimagining L.A. County: Shifting Budget Priorities to Revitalize Under-resourced and Low-income Communities,” the proposal includes language frequently used by Democrat politicians and the broader left. It alleges the existence of “systemic discrimination, exclusion, and inequity” targeting blacks and yielding “racial injustice” and “racial inequity.”

Bill Melugin, an L.A.-based reporter, reported on some of the details via Twitter:

How will the vote go? You know those who are served by the Sheriff’s office will vote against the measure. Those who want that money for themselves will vote for the measure. How involved is the Sheriff’s office with LA County? Not sure about there, but the Sheriff’s office tends to be all around here in NC, even in the bigger cities like Raleigh. Where I grew up in NJ, I didn’t even realize we had sheriff’s. Never saw them. They are there, though.

But, you can bet most people won’t see their own money if it passes. It’ll be used to patronize low income voters to bribe them to vote Democrat. And crime will spike, especially in those low income areas. What’s left of the Sheriff’s department will serve only those areas that are moneyed and/or voted against the measure.

Read: LA County To Put Defunding Sheriff’s Office On November Ballot »

Posted in Dems in Charge: Now What? | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Does Being Optimistic On Climate Change Make You Pro-Trump?

By William Teach August 5, 2020 – 8:54 am

A little bit of amusing clima-fluff, but, one that hits the mark

Does Optimism on Climate Change Make You Pro-Trump?
Apocalypse Never, a book by iconoclastic environmentalist Michael Shellenberger, triggers polarized responses

My views on climate change—and, more generally, on humanity’s future—have never been stable. Depending on what I’m reading, and perhaps shifts in my neural weather, I ricochet between optimism and dread.

Last spring I was feeling pretty glum about, well, everything when iconoclastic environmental activist Michael Shellenberger sent me a prepublication copy of his book Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.

Before I weigh in on the book, some background. Shellenberger is a controversial figure. For years, he has urged his fellow greens to adopt a more optimistic outlook, which he insists is more conducive to activism than fear. His influential 2007 book Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility, co-written with his fellow activist Ted Nordhaus, accused environmentalists of being hostile to science, technology and economic progress. (snip)

We need economic and technological development to overcome climate change and other environmental threats, Shellenberger and Nordhaus insisted. People are unlikely to care about polar bears, they pointed out, when they’re worried about feeding their children. Shellenberger and Nordhaus also faulted the environmental movement for being reluctant to acknowledge its successes, as if doing so will foster complacency.

The book annoyed some greens, but I liked its can-do spirit, and I thought my students would too. So, in 2008 I invited Shellenberger and Nordhaus to speak at my school, Stevens Institute of Technology, and I gave them a $5,000 prize that I created, the Green Book Award. (I also gave the award to biologist Edward Wilson, oceanographer Sylvia Earle and climatologist James Hansen before my funding ran out.)

Literally, this is something that many Warmists have argued, that there needs to be less gloom and doom and more positivity. Of course, this is a cult, so, few listen. Furthermore, Shellenberger, like some other Warmists, pushes the use of nuclear energy heavily, which most Warmists are against.

The polarized reactions to Shellenberger remind me of those to John Ioannidis, the Stanford epidemiologist who has warned that our reaction to COVID-19 might be overblown. People judge the claims of Shellenberger and Ioannidis based less on their actual merits than on their perceived political implications. Optimism, whether toward the pandemic or global warming, is viewed as a conservative, pro-Trump position. Now more than ever, political polarization makes it hard to have a rational argument about scientific issues.

It is generally very true, eh? Warmists, and Leftists overall, tend to be miserable people who are all about doom and gloom. They love telling us we’re DOOOOOOMED, right? Unless we tax the hell out of Other People and restrict their lives, freedom, choice, businesses, etc.

Read: Say, Does Being Optimistic On Climate Change Make You Pro-Trump? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Donald Trump, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

BLM Protesters Go To Seattle Police Chief’s Neighborhood, She Seems A Bit About Them Targeting Personal Residences

By William Teach August 5, 2020 – 8:34 am

Local residents of the neighborhood were not amused (via Twitchy)

https://twitter.com/Doranimated/status/1290473037729587202?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1290473037729587202%7Ctwgr%5E&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fgregp-3534%2F2020%2F08%2F04%2Fgun-owners-defend-seattle-police-chiefs-property-from-protesters%2F

While funny, especially that white “vigilantes”, as they were called, were protecting a black police chief from a black movement, here’s the interesting part

After protests near her home, Seattle police chief asks City Council to intervene; activists say neighbors pointed guns at them

A debate unfolded online Sunday night over whether protests against police brutality should include visits to public officials’ homes — and whether such a discussion distracts from the fight for Black lives — after Seattle police Chief Carmen Best implored the City Council to “forcefully call for the end of these tactics.”

Best wrote a letter to the council Sunday after protesters showed up outside her Snohomish County home Saturday night, the latest in a series of visits the demonstrations have paid to those who hold public power in Seattle, including City Council members and Mayor Jenny Durkan.

Best’s letter said her neighbors “were concerned by such a large group” and didn’t allow protesters to “trespass or engage in other illegal behavior in the area, despite repeated attempts to do so.” She didn’t elaborate on the behavior in question but wrote that the Snohomish County sheriff was “monitoring the situation.”

The letter states

I urge both of you, and the entire council, to stand up for what is right. These direct actions against elected officials, and especially civil servants like myself, are out of line with and go against every democratic principle that guides our nation. Before this devolves into the new way of doing business by mob rule here in Seattle, and across the nation, elected officials like you must forcefully call for the end of these tactics.

Basically, she’s calling on the city council to take a stand against “protestors” who target the personal residences of city officials. See, now that her own residence has been targeted, she’s upset. Chief Best didn’t seem all that concerned when the “protesters” were targeting the businesses and homes of Other People, you know, the peons. She was only mildly concerned over that silly Seattle autonomous zone, which blocked people from their homes and businesses, destroyed property, and even attacked people and businesses.

See, the high and grand poobahs are fine with all this stuff until the protesters personally involve the poobahs. The Lynwood Times notes

In his statement Sheriff Fortney wrote, “The Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office has been supportive and accommodating to all peaceful protests that have occurred in our jurisdiction.  With that said, protestors targeting one individual’s house is a bullying tactic that will certainly require an extra patrol response to ensure every resident in Snohomish County can feel safe in their own home, with their loved ones, no matter what they choose to do to make a living.”

Yeah, but it’s not about every resident, it’s about Chief Best. If another resident had been targeted, would there be an extra patrol? Doubtful.

Read: BLM Protesters Go To Seattle Police Chief’s Neighborhood, She Seems A Bit About Them Targeting Personal Residences »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Democrats | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

SoCalGas Sues California Over Hotcoldwetdry Rules

By William Teach August 4, 2020 – 3:00 pm

I still say it would be better if the fossil fuels companies refused to sell their product to the governments that give them issues, but, hey, this is a start

California sued over climate change policy — by the nation’s biggest gas utility

Southern California Gas Co. is taking its battle with state officials over climate change policy to court, arguing in a new lawsuit that the California Energy Commission has failed to promote natural gas as required by state law.

The lawsuit, filed Friday in Orange County Superior Court, is the latest attempt by SoCalGas to shield itself against efforts to phase out gas, a planet-warming fossil fuel used for heating, cooking and power generation. The company, which maintains its headquarters in Los Angeles and is owned by Sempra Energy of San Diego, took in $4.5 billion in operating revenue last year.

A separate lawsuit was filed last week against the state’s Air Resources Board by the California Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition, whose two “charter members” are SoCalGas and Clean Energy Fuels Corp., which joined the gas company in its lawsuit against the Energy Commission. This lawsuit seeks to overturn the newly approved “advanced clean trucks” rule, which is aimed at putting 300,000 zero-emission trucks on the road by 2035.

The legal actions are part of a growing effort by leading players in the natural gas industry to defend themselves as public support increases for aggressive policies to wind down the burning of fossil fuels, not just in California but across the country. (snip)

The lawsuit claims state officials are flouting a law requiring them to consider the role gas might play in reducing emissions.

In 2013, lawmakers overwhelmingly approved Assembly Bill 1257, known as the Natural Gas Act. The bill, which was signed into law by then-Gov. Jerry Brown, required the Energy Commission to “identify strategies to maximize the benefits obtained from natural gas as an energy source” every four years.

This lawsuit has a lot better chance than the ones against the fossil fueled companies filed by states and municipalities. They also serve almost 22 million Californians in southern CA.

Also joining the lawsuit were three chapters of the Utility Workers Union of America, collectively representing over 4,000 SoCalGas employees.

“Is the position we take in this lawsuit a defense of the jobs, of the work our members, and allied union workers in the pipe trades, building and construction trades, manufacturing and services do every day? You bet,” the presidents of UWUA Locals 132, 483 and 522 said in a written statement.

This should be a fun one to watch.

Read: SoCalGas Sues California Over Hotcoldwetdry Rules »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | Comments Off on SoCalGas Sues California Over Hotcoldwetdry Rules | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 4, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…are horrible carbon pollution clouds, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post wondering just how the elderly are supposed to defend themselves.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

BLM Activist Accuses Chicago Fire Department Of Removing BLM Banner

By William Teach August 4, 2020 – 10:30 am

Something strange is going on

Chicago Fire Department Investigates Alleged Removal of BLM Banner

The Chicago Fire Department announced Sunday that it had launched an investigation into an online post that alleged someone operating a firetruck removed a Black Lives Matter banner, officials said.

A post on Nextdoor — a hyperlocal social network — by Dr. Adele Cobbs claimed that the Black Lives Matter banner in Kenwood near Lake Shore Drive was taken down by two white men operating a firetruck, the Chicago Sun-Times reported.

“They literally obstructed traffic to do this,” Cobbs wrote in her post, which included a photo showing the firetruck. “Unbelievable. They are paid to serve our community and this is what they think about Black lives.”

Cobbs told the Chicago Tribune Sunday she saw one of the men taking down the banner from a fence shortly before 11 a.m. Saturday.

“I’ve seen that banner,” Cobbs told the Tribune. “It’s in a discreet place that was bothering no one.”

Seems like an interesting narrative, eh?

Cobbs pulled over and parked in front of the firetruck as it stopped along a two-way street to remove the banner.

“I stuck up my arms and said, ‘Why?’” Cobbs said.

The only thing she got in return from the firefighters was an aggressive honk of their truck’s horn.

So Cobbs filed a report with the department confirming what she saw.

Here’s the strange thing: in the era of everyone having a phone which can take pictures and video, and people whipping them out to record every little thing that happens, not one news outlet has a photo or video of this happening. You’re telling me that a Dr. Cobbs wasn’t able to get on photo or video? And no one else seems to have any? I’ve rolled through over 10 articles. Checked Facebook and Twitter. Nothing. The only thing she shared was an image of Firetruck No. 15, which belongs to Station 45 in Bronzeville, behind her vehicle. Behind

Hey, maybe it did happen. But, most likely it was BLM activists who took it down looking to create outrage, and now they get to blame the CFD.

Read: BLM Activist Accuses Chicago Fire Department Of Removing BLM Banner »

Posted in Progressive Goals | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Warmists Get Tiny Little Sales Tax On November Ballot In Denver

By William Teach August 4, 2020 – 8:38 am

The best part will be when this gets shot down, as most climate scam taxes do. But, while I want it to be shot down in order to laugh at the climate cultists, I also want to see it pass, because we all know the sales tax will start increasing and increasing

A sales tax bump to fight the climate crisis gets some space on Denver’s November ballot

Denver’s Election Day ballot got thicker Monday after city council referred a climate change sales tax to voters.

If voters OK the tax on November 3, residents and visitors would pay 0.25 percent more, or 2.5 cents on every $10, for most items they buy. In exchange, proponents said, Denver would get cleaner air and relief from the effects of global warming like health problems, hotter temperatures, drought and flooding.

The legislative body passed the question onto city residents by a vote of 11 to 1, with Councilman Kevin Flynn dissenting.

The Climate Action Task Force, a body appointed by Mayor Michael Hancock to map out the city’s climate change response, recommended the tax to council. They think it will raise about $36 million a year, a lower sum than originally thought because of the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Pack this on top of all the other taxes. Funny thing about Warmists, they don’t want to pay taxes themselves. I’ll give this a 40% chance of passing

Much of that money would fund infrastructure and incentives that make Denver’s homes, buildings and streets more energy-efficient. For example, officials envision retrofitting buildings to emit fewer greenhouse gases while incentivizing cleaner energy sources like solar. They also see car-first roads becoming multi-modal streets that prioritize buses — from a carbon-free fleet — as well as bikes, electric bikes and electric cars.

Pollution from residential, commercial and industrial buildings is the main ingredient in a cocktail of greenhouse gases that trap the sun’s radiation in the city, according to government documents. The transportation industry, including fossil-fueled cars, trucks and airplanes, is the second-largest contributor to climate-changing greenhouse gases.

Well, that’s weird. Usually climate cultists blame fossil fueled vehicles 1st. Perhaps they’re saying this to deflect from the reality that Denver revolves around fossil fuels? The massive airport. All the major sports teams. All the tourists.

Some say a sales tax is not the way to go because it will disproportionately burden people with less money.

A sales tax is what numbers people call “regressive” because everyone pays the same rate for the same thing, regardless of the buyer’s income. So while the tax is equally applied, it is not equitably applied. While wealthy people might not notice it, those with fewer means will, said Alexis Morris, a young resident who spoke at the city council meeting Monday.

Um, it’s 2.5 cents for every ten dollars. 2.5. Cents.

Denver would be “settling” for a regressive sales tax, Flynn said. He supports a separate sales tax measure to help the city’s unhoused residents because people with money would be helping people without it, he said. Flynn said the climate tax measure would be “asking too much from our voters right now.”

Asking for 2.5 cents on every $10 spent is asking too much? What Flynn, speaking for Warmists means is that Someone Else should pay.

Read: Warmists Get Tiny Little Sales Tax On November Ballot In Denver »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Global Warming | Comments Off on Warmists Get Tiny Little Sales Tax On November Ballot In Denver | Trackback URL

NY Times Recommends Getting Rid Of Presidential Debates

By William Teach August 4, 2020 – 8:00 am

Of course, with the obvious mental decline of Joe Biden, combined with him having to defend the far Left Modern Socialist ideas, such as defunding the police, from Donald Trump, who never has a care over attacking, this will surely only apply for this election

From the screed

Nervous managers of the scheduled 2020 presidential debates are shuffling the logistics and locations to deal with the threat of the coronavirus. But here’s a better idea: Scrap them altogether. And not for health reasons.

Yes, health reasons. But, not COVID19 ones, Joe Biden ones. If you put that there in the first paragraph, that’s the focus

The debates have never made sense as a test for presidential leadership. In fact, one could argue that they reward precisely the opposite of what we want in a president. When we were serious about the presidency, we wanted intelligence, thoughtfulness, knowledge, empathy and, to be sure, likability. It should also go without saying, dignity.

But, hey, you know what makes sense? Demanding Trump’s tax returns.

Over time, the debates came to resemble professional wrestling matches, and more substantive debates were widely panned in the press. Points went to snappy comebacks and one-liners. Witty remarks drew laughs from the audience and got repeated for days and remembered for years.

That’s pretty much politics in the modern era, really going back to the Nixon-JFK debate, which is mentioned.

This, by the way, isn’t written out of any concern that Donald Trump will prevail over Joe Biden in the debates; Mr. Biden has done just fine in a long string of such contests. The point is that “winning” a debate, however assessed, should be irrelevant, as are the debates themselves.

Yes, it is.

The better way to pay attention to and choose among the presidential candidates is to follow the long campaign that so many complain about. The reason for such moaning has always been a mystery, because unless the campaign is taking place in your living room, you can simply switch it off.

Should we pay attention that Biden is essentially hiding? That we rarely ever see him speak, and when he does, it is not good? That the only coherent sentences he speaks are in commercials in which we don’t actually see him speaking them? I watch a lot of programs on Discovery Go and there have been lots of those Biden commercials, none with him actually speaking the lines.

The party conventions, also vestigial organs of a political system that no longer exists, are close to being done away with, if not for the reasons they should be. There’s no reason not to throw the presidential debates on the trash heap of useless (at best) rituals that are no help in our making such a fateful decision.

And next up is doing away with Biden having to make a speech at the convention. Probably just walk out, wave, and walk off.

Read: NY Times Recommends Getting Rid Of Presidential Debates »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats, Wonky Media | 26 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Carbon Taxes Are Not So Popular Anymore

By William Teach August 3, 2020 – 3:00 pm

The one thing this article forgets is to mention what is popular with Alarmists

Putting A Price On Carbon: It Was Hot, Now It’s Not

“A carbon tax is the most straight-forward and efficient strategy for quickly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.” That statement, from Bernie Sanders in 2014, was accepted as gospel in climate policy circles for many years.

Today, not so much. The evolving political consensus, at least on the left, has relegated carbon pricing to second-tier status, while measures involving more targeted government intervention have gained prominence.

Adding a tax to the price of carbon-based fuels to capture their real cost to society has long enjoyed broad appeal. Taxing pollution produced by the fossil fuel industry resonates with progressives, and, as a broad-based market mechanism, it also finds favor with conservative economists.

(discussion of attempts to implement one)

The Democrats have now moved on.

Presidential candidate Jay Inslee, who as governor battled doggedly but unsuccessfully for a carbon fee in the state of Washington, has shifted his attention to other climate policies.

A recent draft of the 2020 Democratic Party Platform is silent on carbon pricing. This omission is undoubtedly intentional because it was included in the 2016 platform — it called for greenhouse gases to “be priced to reflect their negative externalities.”

The Green New Deal, an evolving progressive policy framework introduced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ed Markey, is likewise agnostic on carbon pricing.

I wonder why?

First of all, taxes aren’t popular. In France, a fuel tax increase in 2018 set off the gilets jaunes protests, not because people were ignorant of climate risks, but because they lacked practical transportation options, and they felt the tax was punitive.

In theory, the taxes aren’t supposed to hurt the middle and lower classes. In practice, the only group who isn’t harmed is The Rich. Oh, and the Political Aristocracy who ignores all the mandates and such.

Furthermore, to achieve meaningful emissions reductions, carbon pricing has to ramp up rapidly. When asked about why he has cooled off on carbon pricing, Jay Inslee said, “To actually get carbon savings, you need to jack up the price so high that it becomes politically untenable.”

The hell you say!

The transition to the carbon-free economy will require systemic transformation — a reconciliation of our social and ecological realities with the entrenched infrastructure of the capitalist economy. It’s a far bigger job than what carbon pricing could be expected to achieve.

They never want to say what that systemic transformation involves, eh?

Read: Bummer: Carbon Taxes Are Not So Popular Anymore »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach August 3, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is carbon pollution hanging in the air, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Datechguy’s Blog, with a post on voting Trump if you want government accountability.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 23 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove