Israel Launches Attack On Iran

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

Israel pretty much showed Israel can launch a large, airborne attack on Iran whenever they want, blowing right through all Iran’s air defense and SAMs without losing a plane or military member

IDF launches strikes on military sites throughout Iran, weeks after missile attack

Israel launched its long-awaited retaliatory strike against Iran early Saturday, weeks after the Islamic Republic’s massive ballistic missile barrage on the country, with the military saying the “precise strikes” by the Israeli Air Force targeted strategic military sites — specifically drone and ballistic missile manufacturing and launch sites, as well as air defense batteries.

Reports of explosions near Tehran began to emerge around 2:15 a.m. local time, with the Israel Defense Forces quickly releasing a statement confirming that it was attacking, in response to “months of continuous attacks from the Iranian regime against the State of Israel.”

The strikes were carried out in several waves over the course of several hours, in various areas of Iran, with the Islamic Republic closing its airspace for the duration and seemingly showing little ability to counter the assault. Strikes were reported in the Tehran, Karaj, Isfahan and Shiraz areas.

The first wave of attacks apparently targeted Iran’s air defense capabilities, both to ensure the IDF’s freedom of operations during Saturday’s sorties, and to lay the ground for further strikes, should Iran retaliate. As the campaign was underway, Syrian state media reported that Israel struck several military sites in the south and center of the country, action possibly taken to enable the IAF to operate more freely in Iran.

The next waves hit drone and ballistic missile manufacturing sites — those used in direct Iranian attacks on Israel on April 14 and October 1 — as well as sites used to launch such weapons.

There were around 140 planes involved, and, having decimated much of Iran’s ability to defend itself from future attacks in the area around and in Tehran, Iran might want to reconsider getting frisky with Israel.

“Iran struck Israel twice… and has paid the price for that,” IDF Spokesman Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari said in a statement. “We are focused on the goals of the war in Gaza and Lebanon. It is Iran that continues to push for a wide regional escalation.

“If the regime in Iran were to make the mistake of beginning a new round of escalation — we will be obligated to respond,” he continued. “Our message is clear: All those who threaten the State of Israel and seek to drag the region into a wider escalation will pay a heavy price. We demonstrated today that we have both the capability and the resolve to act decisively, and we are prepared — on offense and defense — to defend Israel and the people of Israel.”

Israel can pretty much do what they want to Iran. Next time it could be the nuclear weapons production center. It could by Ayatola Khamenei’s residence.There’s really not much in the way of video on the ground, being Iran. One of the biggest going around on social media is actually from a refinery fire from years ago. So

Oh, there she is

Biden was either warned about the attack and continued to head off to vacation, or Israel didn’t want to trust him with the information. And Kamala is simply word salad.

Read: Israel Launches Attack On Iran »

Posted in Iran, Israel | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Climahypocrite Leonardo DiCaprio Backs Cackles Harris Due To ‘Climate Change’

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

This is the same guy who takes lots of fossil fueled private jets and mega-yachts all over the world, right? In fairness, he does own a lot of hybrid and plugin hybrids, which he has at his high carbon output megamansion

Leonardo DiCaprio Endorses Kamala Harris and Bashes Trump for Ignoring Climate Change: ‘He Continues to Deny the Science’

Leonardo DiCaprio has endorsed Kamala Harris for president.

In a video posted to Instagram, the Oscar-winning actor discussed the damage of recent hurricanes Helene and Milton, saying “these unnatural disasters were caused by climate change.”

“Donald Trump continues to deny the facts. He continues to deny the science. He withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accords and rolled back critical environmental protections,” DiCaprio said. “Now he’s promised the oil and gas industry that he’ll get rid of any regulation they want in exchange for a billion-dollar donation.”

It’s easy for Leo to deal with all the government mandates and price of living increases: he’s rich. No one is going to restrict what he has to say. No one in government is going to tell him he can’t fly wherever he wants.

As the Post article notes

With less than two weeks until Election Day, Harris has received the support of many high-profile entertainers including Taylor Swift, Oprah Winfrey, Meryl Streep, Chris Rock and George Clooney.

Funny how all these rich folks come out for Kamala, who said she’s going tax the bejesus out of rich folks (just like Biden did, Hillary did, Obama did). It’s almost like they don’t believe that will happen. Just like when Biden and Obama didn’t. Nor force them to pay their fair share to deal with Hotcoldwetdry.

Read: Climahypocrite Leonardo DiCaprio Backs Cackles Harris Due To ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Democrats, Global Warming | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Federal Appeals Court Rules That Federal Law On Date For Allowable Ballots Is Actually The Law

By William Teach October 26, 2024 – 6:45 am

The court didn’t so much rule that the law was Constitutional but that the law is the law and states need to actually follow the law because it is the law, which has given pro-cheating Democrats who do not like that laws actually mean something

Ballots that arrive after Election Day are invalid, federal appeals court rules

A federal appeals court ruled Friday that votes in federal elections must be received by state officials by the time polls close, striking down a Mississippi law that allowed ballots to arrive after Election Day.

The ruling could have sweeping implications for the way many states have administered elections for years, but it’s unclear if the decision — made by three Trump-appointed judges on the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit Court of Appeals — will apply on Nov. 5 or only in future elections. Likely appeals could also slow the impact. Still, the effect could be enormous if other courts uphold its rationale that long-standing federal law requires all ballots to be received by Election Day.

Recognizing the significance of its decision, the panel also left it up to a lower-court judge — who initially sided with Mississippi — to determine when the ruling should take effect. The panel underscored the longstanding legal principle that courts should avoid changing election policies on the eve of the vote.

For now, the circuit court’s ruling only applies to Louisiana, Texas and Mississippi — a list that does not include any core presidential battlegrounds but includes a key Senate race. It also tees the issue up for the Supreme Court, where a similar ruling would have a far more dramatic impact.

I’m not sure what the kerfuffle is: the law going back to 1845 sets the date for election on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, hence, November 5th this year. The Constitution gave the Congress the power and duty to set election time. Hence, ballots are due by the end of that day. Not the day after. Not days after. Federal law doesn’t say anything about being postmarked prior to election day. What if it’s postmarked November 4th and mailed from Alaska to Georgia: are we supposed to wait? People are adults, they need to send the ballots properly, and, really, there should only be so many and for reasons, not just because you are too lazy to head on down to the polling station. Sheesh, there are a ton to pick from here in Wake County alone. There are 3 within 10 minutes of work.

Judge Andrew Oldham wrote in a 22-page opinion, joined by Judges James Ho and Kyle Duncan, that Congress had set one national Election Day and that “text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this ‘day for the election’ is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials.”

If upheld, the decision would have a significant political effect. Mail-in voting has become increasingly popular, and broadly more Democrats vote via mail than Republicans since former President Donald Trump and his allies began attacking the process in the run-up to and aftermath of the 2020 election. Any decision that results in fewer mail ballots being counted will disproportionately affect Democratic-leaning voters.

Obviously, Democrats are upset. Here’s Slate losing their shit

Three Trump Judges Just Issued a Shock Ruling That Could Wreak Havoc on the Election

Shocking! Havoc! It will probably only apply to Mississippi, depending on appeals.

On Friday afternoon, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit handed down a shock decision declaring that states may not count ballots that are mailed by Election Day but received shortly thereafter. By its own terms, the ruling applies only to Mississippi, throwing the legality of its voting procedures into question just 11 days before the election. Nationwide, however, 18 states and Washington D.C. accept late-arriving ballots; the 5th Circuit’s reasoning would render all these laws illegitimate and void, nullifying hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of ballots. The court’s obvious goal, aside from destabilizing a close election, is to tee up a Supreme Court decision that could wipe out all these laws in one fell swoop.

ZOMG! You are an adult. Voting is an adult thing. If you cannot get it in the mail on time go vote. Is your mom cool with you mailing her birthday card late and getting it days after? Are you upset when someone important to you mails a card late to you?

Most likely, this ruling will only apply to the 2026 election and going forward. I seriously doubt the Supreme Court will touch it for this election.

Read: Federal Appeals Court Rules That Federal Law On Date For Allowable Ballots Is Actually The Law »

Posted in Constitution, Elections | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

UN Warns Doom From ‘Climate Change’ Soon If You Aren’t Made To Comply

By William Teach October 25, 2024 – 3:00 pm

To reiterate, I’d believe it was a crisis if the people who tell me it’s a crisis acted like it is a crisis with their own lives, not have 30K Warmists take long fossil fueled trips to the fossil fuels nation of Azerbaijan for COP29

Climate change: UN report says planet to warm by 3.1 C without greater action

Current climate policies will result in global warming of more than 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) by the end of the century, according to a United Nations report on Thursday, more than twice the rise agreed to nearly a decade ago.

The annual Emissions Gap report, which takes stock of countries’ promises to tackle climate change compared with what is needed, finds the world faces as much as 3.1 C (5.6 F) of warming above pre-industrial levels by 2100 if governments do not take greater action on slashing planet-warming emissions.

Governments in 2015 signed up to the Paris Agreement and a cap of 1.5 C (2.7 F) warming to prevent a cascade of dangerous impacts.

“We’re teetering on a planetary tight rope,” U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres said in a speech on Thursday. “Either leaders bridge the emissions gap, or we plunge headlong into climate disaster”.

Global greenhouse gas emissions rose by 1.3% between 2022 and 2023, to a new high of 57.1 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, the report said.

Teetering! Teetering I tell you. The temps have gone up 1.6F since 1850, and, we’re supposed to believe it will go up 3.7 in 75 years? Would you like to buy a bridge? Funny how we have all these Believers yet “emissions” keep rising, and what with all the government action. Here’s cBS on the UN report, which always comes out around this time of year to scaremonger

Global climate disaster inevitable if emissions aren’t drastically reduced by 2035, U.N. warns

Scientists and experts have been warning for years that if average global temperatures rise by 3 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial times, it will be “catastrophic” for people across the world. Now, after a year of record emissions, the United Nations is warning that there are just 10 years to dramatically change policies to prevent the worst impacts of climate change.

In a new report published on Thursday, the U.N. warned that the world is now in “climate crunch time” as greenhouse gases — which trap heat in the atmosphere that warms global temperatures and fuels more extreme weather events — have hit “unprecedented levels.”

Calling it “one of the most urgent climate warnings to date,” the U.N. said that humanity now has just a few years to minimize the worst impacts of climate change.

I suggest a law that restricts any US citizen who goes to Azerbaijan from using fossil fuels while in U.S., which would also disallow any attendee from flying to the U.S. in a fossil fueled airplane.

Read: UN Warns Doom From ‘Climate Change’ Soon If You Aren’t Made To Comply »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 28 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 25, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is an Evil fossil fueled boat, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is By Other Means, with a post on unemployment and inflation.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Wonders Just How Good Democrat’s Focus On Abortion Is For Election

By William Teach October 25, 2024 – 10:30 am

It might push the single issue folks who are concerned they might actually have to use contraception for their wild, irresponsible boughts of drunken sex instead of having an abortion afterwards (isn’t contraception a lot cheaper to boot?) into voting D (sic), but, is it enough? Seriously, the number of ads from Democrats about the “right to choose” and “control our bodies” (except of course when the Biden-Harris admin makes them wear masks and take an unproven “vaccine” to keep their jobs) has been absurd

As Election Day Nears, Democrats Test Just How Powerful Abortion Really Is

With Election Day closing in, there are signs that a small but crucial segment of voters may back both abortion rights and Republican candidates, a dynamic that could hurt Vice President Kamala Harris in swing states and other Democratic candidates in pivotal races.

Ten states have abortion rights measures on the ballot this year, and Democratic activists express confidence that most will pass, just as every similar state measure has won approval since Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022.

But they remain less certain about how many of these newly engaged abortion rights voters will then support Democratic candidates.

“The central question is, how much does abortion persuade people to vote for Democrats?” said Angela Kuefler, a Democratic strategist working on several abortion rights measures. “The issue itself is still of utmost importance to people. It is still a big driver when it comes to their vote decision. The question is just the ceiling.”

Hmm, it might have been a bad idea politically to put those measures on the ballot this year, giving people a chance to vote for them while checking the box for Trump and other Republicans who will do a much better job on the economy and other issues.

In Arizona and Nevada, the presidential race is tight, but measures enshrining abortion rights in state constitutions are expected to cruise to victory. In Montana, Democrats are struggling to hold a Senate seat but expect to pass a similar abortion rights referendum. And in Missouri, voters appear ready to back an abortion rights measure while also re-electing Senator Josh Hawley, one of the strongest opponents of abortion rights in Congress.

Oops?

There is little question that abortion rights remains one of the strongest election issues for Democrats. A series of polls have shown more voters prefer Ms. Harris on the issue over Mr. Trump, helping drive a gender gap that is defining the race.

But for a small yet potentially decisive percentage of voters, supporting abortion rights does not lead to checking the box for Ms. Harris.

About 12 percent of voters said they would vote for both Mr. Trump and an abortion-rights referendum, according to New York Times/Siena College surveys in Arizona and Florida. While the polls found that a slight majority of these voters trust Mr. Trump to handle the issue of abortion rights more than Ms. Harris, most of them also do not rank the issue as a top priority.

Really, despite all the talk by politicians, the news, celebrities, in commercials, how many voters actually care that much about abortion as a top issue? It certainly ranks higher than ‘climate change’, but, when the rubber hits the road people are thinking about their wallets and not getting into World War III.

And that one of the people running for POTUS speaks like she’s in a Monty Python sketch

Read: NY Times Wonders Just How Good Democrat’s Focus On Abortion Is For Election »

Posted in Democrats, Elections | Comments Off on NY Times Wonders Just How Good Democrat’s Focus On Abortion Is For Election | Trackback URL

Who’s Up For Using The Slime In Your Dishwasher To Solve Hotcoldwetdry?

By William Teach October 25, 2024 – 7:00 am

You know, it sounds like some people really need to do better with their dishwashers. Maybe clean off the food from their dishes a bit before doing the dishes. Seriously, it seems like these scientists need their moms to explain how things work, because that slime will get stinky

Scientists say the slime in your dishwasher could unlock a solution to global warming

Scientists have scoured the depths of the ocean and outer space for microbes to help slow global warming. They’re now looking at a new and unlikely place — ?inside your home.

A group called the Two Frontiers Project (2FP)?—?funded by biotech company Seed Health — is asking people in the United States to look for “weird microbial growth” at home, in a quest to find the next microorganism that could suck planet-heating carbon dioxide (CO2) from the air or help break down environmental pollutants.

Though microbes live on every home surface, the group is especially interested in those that live in more extreme environments, including places with high temperatures such as dishwashers, air conditioners, microwaves, solar panels, hot water heaters and shower heads.

“These environments, though common, mimic the extreme conditions found in nature,” Tierney told CNN. “They reflect environmental changes that our planet may face in the future — including rising temperatures, heightened radiation, and increased acidification of oceans and soils”

A dishwasher can run between 120F and 180F. If these people think the Earth’s temperature is going to get there, they are more wackadoodle cult than we thought.

Volunteers who sign up to the “Extremophile Campaign” will be asked to take photos of any microbial growth around their home — “think slime, crusty mats, stringy growth,” the project’s website prompts — and answer questions about what they see.

If volunteers are getting this, well, they need lessons on cleaning. That’s just nasty. I’d hate to see their showers, toilets, and sinks.

Read: Who’s Up For Using The Slime In Your Dishwasher To Solve Hotcoldwetdry? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Senate Dems Avoiding Harris In “Blue Wall” States

By William Teach October 25, 2024 – 6:45 am

It’s almost like she’s an albatross

Senate Democrats running away from Harris in ‘blue wall’ states

Democrats running for the Senate in “blue wall” states that will be critical to determining the outcome of the 2024 election are running away from Vice President Harris, signaling that they are hoping to win over some of former President Trump’s voters to keep their seats.

And Democratic candidates in those states have been careful about criticizing Trump during the high-stakes debates. They have focused on policy and their own records without taking many — or any — shots against the Republican nominee.

Pennsylvania incumbent Sen. Bob Casey (D) has even embraced Trump’s tariff policies. His campaign launched an ad last week that described him as “independent” and touted how he “bucked” the Biden administration to protect fracking and “sided with Trump to end NAFTA.”

“There’s no party affiliation in Casey ads. I don’t recall seeing any that say ‘Democrat’ or anything like that. He’s running as an incumbent on his own record,” said Berwood Yost, the director of the Center for Public Opinion Research at Franklin & Marshall College.

“He’s trying to distance himself a little bit from an administration that is viewed negatively by the most part. He doesn’t want to be tied to that either through Biden or Harris,” he said.

He’s not the only one. And plenty of Democrats running for the House and state positions are avoiding Harris if they are in competitive races, because they know she won’t help them. This reminds me of how Democrats avoided Obama in 2012 and 2014, after they took a shellacking in 2010. In fairness, Obama was one of the best campaigners of all time. He was good. Really good. But, he was only good really for Obama. And Harris isn’t anywhere near as good as Obama. Obama had a PhD. Kamala is in 3rd grade.

Meanwhile, after hanging with Bruce Springsteen in Georgia on Thursday, here’s Friday

Seriously, why waste time in Texas? It’s great for Trump if she’s wasting time, but, this is a really, really dumb move with less than two weeks to go.

Read: Bummer: Senate Dems Avoiding Harris In “Blue Wall” States »

Posted in Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Blows Gasket On Trump Flirting With Ending Income Tax

By William Teach October 24, 2024 – 3:28 pm

They think they got Trump on this one!

Trump Flirts With the Ultimate Tax Cut: No Income Taxes at All

Former President Donald J. Trump has spent much of the presidential campaign brainstorming new, and sometimes untested, ways to cut taxes. In the election’s final stretch, he raised the possibility of going even further: eliminating income taxes entirely.

During a Fox News segment on Monday, Mr. Trump took questions at a barbershop in the Bronx. When asked if the United States could potentially end all federal taxation, Mr. Trump said the country could return to the economic policies in the late 19th century, when there was no federal income tax.

“It had all tariffs — it didn’t have an income tax,” Mr. Trump said. “Now we have income taxes, and we have people that are dying. They’re paying tax, and they don’t have the money to pay the tax.”

In June, Mr. Trump floated the idea of replacing federal revenue from income taxes with money received from tariffs. Mr. Trump has not provided specific details of how that would work, and it is unclear if he wants to eliminate all federal taxes, including corporate income taxes and payroll taxes, or only end the individual income tax.

LOL: “not provided specific details.” What specific details has Kamala offered on anything? She can barely articulate her sticky note ideas. Regardless, it seemed to work back then, till greedy Congress Critters decided they wanted more and more money for pet projects and to repay campaign contributors, as the federal government took more and more power that was not given by the Constitution. Most money should go to the state coffers, and just enough to run the assigned Constitutional duties of the federal government

Either way, both liberal and conservative experts have dismissed his idea as mathematically impossible and economically destructive. Even if Republicans control Congress, lawmakers are unlikely to dismantle the income tax system. Yet Mr. Trump’s combination of tax cuts and tariff increases has been central to his political pitch.

You know who the Times cites as a conservative expert?

The potential for such an outcome helped prompt William McKinley, the 25th president, a Republican, whose support for tariffs Mr. Trump often celebrates, to ultimately moderate his position on tariffs. To help American exporters, Mr. McKinley had started to support the possibility of lowering tariffs in the United States in exchange for other countries doing the same before he was assassinated in 1901.

This is not the dunk the Times thinks it is. Really, though, a flat tax with a balanced budget amendment would be best, while paired with a massive reduction in federal government spending, coupled with a massive reduction in federal agencies and employees. Regardless, lower taxation plays well with citizens. Remove federal income tax and replace it with tariffs. It has zero chance of passing. There are too many squishy Republicans. The chances of even having a low tax rate with no deductions for anything, which would come out in citizen’s favor, won’t happen. Read the book Showdown At Gucci Gulf about the attempt at this under Reagan. It’s actually a ver good, interesting read on tax policy.

Also, the idea of tariffs is to force other countries to lower theirs on imported American goods. The NY Times thinks that everyone loves being taxed so that morons can misspend their hard earned money.

Read: NY Times Blows Gasket On Trump Flirting With Ending Income Tax »

Posted in Donald Trump, Taxation | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 24, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is an inland sea created by too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is American Greatness, with a post on Kamala’s inane talking points.

That’s Caroline Monroe from The Spy Who Loved Me.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 24 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove