NY Times Says Drivers Will Catch A Break This Memorial Day Weekend Or Something

By William Teach May 29, 2023 – 6:45 am

The Times wants you down on your knees thanking Biden and the Democrats (available at Yahoo without paywall)

Gasoline Prices, a Source of Pain Last Year, Have Come Way Down

Americans who fill up their cars this Memorial Day weekend will catch a break — at least compared with a year ago, when gasoline prices were soaring.

The national average price for regular gasoline is a full dollar a gallon lower than a year ago. Drivers paid over $4.60 in May 2022, and prices had reached $5 by the second week of June. This week, they paid just over $3.50 a gallon for regular gasoline, according to AAA, the motor club.

Many energy experts said they expected prices to stay around these levels for much of the summer, barring a major disruption to global oil supplies.

What was it in May 2021, as the Biden economy kicked in? $3.07, which is a bit higher than 2018 and 2019. 2020 was an aberration at $1.96. It was $2.40 when Trump left office. So, anyhow, you’re supposed to be thrilled that it is $3.50 now. Seriously, bow, peasants!

Because gasoline prices are posted on street corners on big colorful signs, they can have a powerful psychological impact on consumers, especially on middle- and lower-income people who tend to drive older, less fuel-efficient vehicles and spend a larger proportion of their income on energy than affluent people.

“Who wouldn’t be happy to save the money?” said Eddie White, 46, who uses his pickup truck to make deliveries and offer rides through Uber. Filling up at least once a day, White, who lives in the Houston area, said he was saving roughly $420 a week. He is using that money to pay for classes that will help him become an insurance adjuster.

“Save money.” So, if I double your costs, then give you a 30% break, you’ll be happy, right?

Prices spiked last year after Russia invaded Ukraine in February. Oil traders had expected Russian exports to fall because of the sanctions imposed on the country by the United States and its allies in response to the invasion.

Still pushing this garbage, eh? Yes, yes, the price of oil is set internationally, so, it can cause problems here in the U.S. even though we get virtually no oil from Russia. However, prices were already going up prior to the Russian invasion.

Patrick De Haan, the head of petroleum analysis for GasBuddy, a company that tracks gas prices, said he expected the national average price for regular gas to stay under $4 a gallon this summer. He estimated that consumers would spend $1.6 billion less than last year on gasoline over Memorial Day weekend. The Energy Department recently estimated that the average national price for gasoline this summer would be $3.40 a gallon, about 20% lower than last year.

But, that’s about $1.6 billion more than when Trump was president. Which also means food and goods are much more. Hooray!

Read: NY Times Says Drivers Will Catch A Break This Memorial Day Weekend Or Something »

Posted in Economy, Joe Biden, Journalistic Malpractice | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 28, 2023 – 1:00 pm

…is a calm ocean from too little wind due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

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

It’s a cleaning out the folder type of week.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach May 28, 2023 – 8:34 am

Patriotic Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another great day in the Once and Future Nation Of America. A bit of rain going on, the Dodgers are doing OK, and it’s a good day to remember all those brave service members who gave their lives to protect even the people who hate them. This pinup is by Arthur Sarnoff, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Pacific Pundit covers how much Target’s stock has dropped after going groomer
  2. Powerline discusses what the lunatics are celebrating instead of Memorial Day
  3. Sultan Knish notes we can’t have nice infrastructure because of environmentalists
  4. The Gateway Pundit covers trans lunatics threatening to bomb a Target
  5. The Last Refuge notes the feds dropping almost all charges against illegal who tried to ram White House gate
  6. The Other McCain features yet another aspiring rapper
  7. The Right Scoop shows AOC not have a good time at a constituent town hall
  8. This ain’t Hell... has some stupid people of the week
  9. Weasel Zippers covers MSNBC demanding Republicans denounce a story that doesn’t exist
  10. Green Jihad notes a study saying recycling is bad for the environment
  11. Not A Lot Of People Know That shows that EVs will increase tire pollution
  12. Watts Up With That? discusses a near normal hurricane season
  13. 357 Magnum says rock is here to stay
  14. American Greatness wonders when the NAACP will issue a travel advisory for Chicago
  15. And last, but, not least, Chicks On The Right notes just how bad public education is

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014). While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your Pinups for Vets calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me. I’ve also mostly alphabetized them, makes it easier scrolling the feedreader

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Two great sites for getting news links are Liberty Daily and Whatafinger.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Constitution By Poll: Most Americans Support Stronger Gun Laws

By William Teach May 28, 2023 – 7:00 am

Would these go with the 20,000+ laws already on the books? Would they restrict the rights of the law abiding, or go after the criminals?

Most Americans say they would support stricter gun control laws: poll

A majority of Americans in a new poll released on Friday said they would support stricter gun control laws.

Sixty-four percent said they were in favor of stricter laws, while 36 percent said they were opposed, the CNN-SSRS poll found.

A slightly smaller portion — 54 percent — said that such gun control laws would reduce gun-related deaths in the country, and 58 percent said they believe the government is able take effective action to prevent mass shootings.

Some 59 percent in the survey said they were in favor of banning semi-automatic rifles, while 94 percent said they would support taking measures to prevent convicted felons and those with mental health issues from owning guns.

Eight in 10 also said people under the age of 21 should be barred from purchasing any type of gun, the poll found.

OK, let’s flip this around: are these same people OK with limiting free speech and the right to protest peaceably? How about petitioning for redress of grievance? How about legislating away some of their rights against unreasonable searches and seizures for The Public Good? Or trying certain people twice? Maybe they’re OK with limiting witnesses for their defense? Perhaps the same press which gleefully looks to restrict 2nd Amendment Rights would be fine with limiting their own freedom?

Personally, I would be just fine with stricter laws against the criminals. There are certain things I’m fine with, like requiring gun training for a person’s first gun. I approve of requiring a background check for every purchase/transfer. And some others. However, I won’t agree to them, because if you give the Democrat gun grabbers anything they want more and more and more, because the end game is banning all private ownership. Seriously. The poll includes a look back from another poll back in 2017, which asks: A ban on the manufacture,
sale and possession of high-powered rifles capable of semi-automatic fire, such as the AR-15. 49% approved. That means they want all semi-auto rifles straight up banned.

The current question asks: A ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of rifles capable of semi-automatic fire, such as the AR-15. So, not just new purchases, all possession.

Our Rights are not subject to polling.

Read: Constitution By Poll: Most Americans Support Stronger Gun Laws »

Posted in 2nd Amendment | 27 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Moron Warmists Face Federal Charges Over Defacing Edgar Degas Exhibit

By William Teach May 27, 2023 – 5:14 pm

What took so long?

Feds charge climate protesters for allegedly defacing Edgar Degas exhibit at National Gallery of Art

Two members of a climate activist group were arrested and charged Friday for allegedly defacing an art exhibit at the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., during a protest last month.

Timothy Martin of North Carolina, and Joanna Smith of New York, both 53, surrendered to authorities after they were indicted on conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States and injury to a National Gallery of Art exhibit, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

On April 27, the pair, members of climate activist group Declare Emergency, allegedly entered the gallery and threw red and black paint on the case of the Edgar Degas sculpture “Little Danger Aged Fourteen,” according to prosecutors.

The pair then sat in front of the defaced exhibit with the paint still on their hands and posed for photos, which were later posted on Declare Emergency’s site, investigators said.

I love how they say “allegedly”, which there’s video and photos of this, and them admitting they did it.

Prosecutors said Martin and Smith’s alleged actions caused approximately $2,400 in damage and the exhibit was removed from public display for 10 days so that it could be repaired. (snip)

If convicted, Martin and Smith face up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

That monetary damage and intention makes it a felony. The question now is, will a loony lefty judge or prosecutor drop the charges?

I just wonder, how did Timothy, who lives in Raleigh, NC, and Joanna, of Brooklyn, NY, travel to D.C.? Did they walk? Bike? Take the train? Or a fossil fueled vehicle or plane? I’d almost be tempted to see Tim’s address and look for a fossil fueled car in the driveway. I won’t.

https://twitter.com/IceDave92/status/1651954562901725187

Pretty open and shut case, when morons film their crimes.

Read: Surprise: Moron Warmists Face Federal Charges Over Defacing Edgar Degas Exhibit »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 27, 2023 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible heatsnow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on Sam Brinton and the Sisters Of Perpetual Indulgence.

Doubleshot below the fold, check out neo-neocon, with a post wondering where Woke companies go from here.

Everyone seeing everything going OK with the server?

Read More »

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 22 Comments | Trackback URL

Connecticut House Passes New Slate Of “Common Sense Gun Reform” Measures

By William Teach May 27, 2023 – 10:30 am

That’s strange, as I thought all the gun control measures passed post-Sandy Hook were all that was necessary? No? In fairness, there are some components which crack down on repeat offenders

New Gun Regulations Clear Connecticut House: Extends Assault Weapons Ban and Restricts Open Carry

The House voted Thursday to advance a sweeping package of gun regulations including provisions expanding Connecticut assault weapons ban, increasing bail requirements for certain repeat gun offenders and largely prohibiting the open carry of firearms.

Proponents hailed the bill, which will head to the Senate on a 96-51 vote, the most significant update of Connecticut’s gun laws since a landmark law passed a decade ago in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

The bill consists of elements of legislation proposed by Gov. Ned Lamont as well as recommendations from a coalition of mayors from Connecticut’s largest cities.

Among its policies is a provision to ban the open-carry of guns. Stafstrom said the language was tailored to apply to only overt displays of firearms. “A so-called fleeting glance or just catching a bulge of a firearm is not enough.”

That would be called concealed carry, not open carry. Most engaged in open carry are law abiding citizens. Now they’ll be turned into criminals, and treated harsher than the actual criminals who the Soros-style prosecutors let go. This part will certainly see an immediate lawsuit if it passes the Senate (it will) and then be signed by the governor (it will).

The legislation broadens the assault weapons ban passed after the Newtown shooting to include more weapons with banned features as well as previously exempted weapons manufactured before September of 1994. Residents who already own these guns will have until next May to register them with the state.

Da, Comrade, so the state knows where they are, and can come get them during the next time the Democrats pass legislation. I’m betting few will register them. Anyhow, there is very little in the bill which goes after those who illegally own, possess, and/or use guns in the commission of crime.

The bill also includes a provision designed to ensure local police departments quickly process applications for gun permits. If a local agency takes more than 16 weeks to act on an application, the bill allows residents to submit the application directly to the state.

Sixteen weeks to process an application for a Constitution Right? How long is it taking now if they’re putting that limit in? While there are a few negative comments from Republicans, let me flip to PBS Connecticut

GOP Rep. Cara Pavalock D’Amato, who wore a white T-shirt with images of handguns and the words “Love guns” under her blazer, said during the debate that this latest proposal continues the state’s pattern of “chipping away” at the rights of legal gun owners. At four-foot-10-inches tall, the legislator said she personally relies on a gun to keep herself and her son safe.

“Having a firearm is my only shot if somebody is coming at me,” she said.

So many of these “common sense gun laws” hurt women. If someone like D’Amato is walking around with open carry, people with bad intentions will most likely leave her alone.

Republican Rep. Doug Dubitsky, an attorney, predicted this latest proposal will ultimately be overturned by the courts for violating both the U.S. and Connecticut constitutions.

“Courts are stepping in, finally,” he said during Thursday’s sometimes emotional debate. “This bill, like all the bills like it, are slow tyranny. And thankfully, tyranny cannot outrun the Constitution.”

Some many, some might stand. It does depend on whether severability is included in the bill. Section 15 of the Ct. Constitution does state “Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.” Pretty damned specific.

Read: Connecticut House Passes New Slate Of “Common Sense Gun Reform” Measures »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | Comments Off on Connecticut House Passes New Slate Of “Common Sense Gun Reform” Measures | Trackback URL

Your Fault: California Cliffs Crumbling Faster Or Something

By William Teach May 27, 2023 – 7:15 am

Who would have thought that cliffs in a seismic zone would crumble? That the seas would cause cliffs to erode? This never would have happened if you weren’t driving a fossil fueled vehicle

California’s cliffs are crumbling as climate change reshapes the coast

Among the coveted places to live in this city, if you have the money, is West Cliff Drive. How much longer that will be true is the question.

The cliff-top road is falling into the Pacific in large chunks, leaving gaping holes and closing lanes along a normally busy street. A process that has taken place over centuries is quickening after a rare series of winter and spring storms that brought abnormally high tides, potent surf and lots of rain.

The sea is taking back the land. It is happening at various speeds along much of California’s coast, changing the ragged western edge of the country and threatening neighborhoods, highways and ways of life.

For decades, California has built to the brink of the continent, a risk-reward calculus where the reward of a sparkling Pacific Ocean with your morning coffee easily trumps some future risk of a collapsing cliff. The cliffs, some more than 300 feet straight up, star in car commercials and TV shows, the edge-of-seat finales of action movies and, in real life, serve as the perfect takeoff point for paragliders.

If you build in places that are not stable, don’t be surprised. Or blame it on witchcraft, er, ‘climate change’.

But today it is some of the state’s most famed cliffs, overlooking about 500 miles of California’s coast, that are among those most imperiled by rising sea levels and more potent storms.

In Isla Vista, the site of University of California at Santa Barbara, apartment buildings regularly lose front patios and facades to the encroaching ocean, sliding down 200-foot cliffs toward the beach. A major coastal railroad track between Orange County and San Diego is closed frequently — most recently in April after new slides — as erosion undermines the ground beneath it. Repair costs for several sliding sections have reached $14 million so far.

Santa Barbara’s gauge, which is short term, shows barely any rise. Port San Luis, 90 miles away, which is long term, shows just .31 feet per 100 years of rise. Santa Monica shows .50 feet. That’s well below where a warm period should be. LA goes back to 1923, just .34 feet of rise. How is this Doom?

A year ago, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration predicted that sea level would rise 8 inches in California and along the West Coast within the next 25 years. At the same time, though, the state government is trimming funds for and discouraging cities from strengthening weak bluffs and cliffs with relatively short-term measures.

There’s one gauge that shows even a foot of rise per 100 years, North Split, and it has to be an outlier, because the next northern gauge, Crescent City, shows negative .27, and it goes back to 1933. San Francisco goes back to 1897, showing .64 feet. It’s all just apocalyptic Scaremongering, expecting weak minded cultists to just buy into it with zero evidence.

Read: Your Fault: California Cliffs Crumbling Faster Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

“Unorthodox” 500 Page Immigration Surprises Both Parties

By William Teach May 27, 2023 – 7:00 am

It’s 500 pages. Can’t wait to see what it does. Since I can’t find any media outlets trashing it, I’m betting it gives way more assistance to illegal aliens and Democratic Party priorities

Unorthodox immigration bill catches both parties by surprise

A new bipartisan immigration bill is spurring mixed reactions from lawmakers eager to reform the system following an unorthodox rollout that caught many by surprise.

The legislation, spearheaded by Reps. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) and Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), was unveiled Wednesday, with Republican sponsors wearing blue and some Democratic sponsors in red.

The 500-page Dignity Act is seeking to become the first bipartisan immigration bill to gain traction in a decade.

I have little hope with that name that it’s going to be more than an amnesty bill

The legislation includes significant resources for beefing up security at the border, a priority for the GOP, but primarily focuses on creating a 12-year pathway to citizenship at a $10,000 cost for those already in the U.S. — a priority for Democrats.

Hey, remember when Reagan agreed to amnesty for security, and the security barely materialized, and even more illegals streamed in? Who’s paying the $10K? You know it won’t be the illegals.

The legislation would also revise the process for seeking asylum, which has been at the center of the controversy around the removal of the COVID-era Title 42 rule, and create new immigration options for those seeking to come to the U.S.

Again, that the revisions are not being trashed tells me they are very generous. Going back to the previous The Hill article

Reps. María Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) and Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) see their legislation as having a better chance for success that the hardline GOP bill, charging undocumented workers a “1.5 percent dignity levy” in taxes and other fees that will pay for both border security and job training for American citizens.

LOL. They shouldn’t even be here, so, it really is looking more of amnesty. And one can certainly see the Biden regime waiving that fee. Or redirecting the money to other Progressive priorities

For those already in the U.S. with no criminal record, the legislation would allow undocumented workers to enter with “dignity status,” allowing them to work anywhere and travel abroad freely. They must pay $700 in fees a year for seven years — just under $5,000 dollars — while under the status. Meanwhile, their payroll taxes will drop from 7 percent to 1.5, as they will not be charged for contributing to U.S. government programs for which they are not eligible. She noted those under dignity status will be responsible for paying for their own health care.

So, yeah, amnesty. You know the fees will be waived, and we’re talking tens of millions of illegals (they keep saying 10 million. But, it was 15 million just a few years ago. During the Bush admin they were saying 15-25 million), and this will cause more to stream into the U.S.

Getting on the path to citizenship would kick off another five-year process for those with dignity status, one that takes five years and requires another $5,000. But it comes with a major snag — no one would have citizenship granted through the program unless the Government Accountability Office determines the border has remained secure for a year.

Is this like how Biden and his people say the border is currently secure?

For those seeking asylum at the border, the bill would establish humanitarian campuses, where migrants would be housed while they await a determination in their case — something the bill mandates must take place within 60 days rather than the years-long process many await in immigration court currently.

It really is all window dress for amnesty. A bill that’s 500 pages is going to give the Executive Branch a lot of leeway to do as they please. It would not be pretty. Just say no.

Read: “Unorthodox” 500 Page Immigration Surprises Both Parties »

Posted in Democrats, GOP, Illegal Immigration | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: SCOTUS Rules 9-0 Against Biden’s Waters Of The USA Rule

By William Teach May 26, 2023 – 3:53 pm

This had made liberals very mad…right up to the point where Los Federales decide to regulate the small pond on their own property. In fairness, this doesn’t directly smack around the rule, but, puts it on notice to just stop right now

Supreme Court rules against EPA in dispute over regulating wetlands

The Supreme Court on Thursday curtailed the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate certain wetlands that qualify as “waters of the United States” under the Clean Water Act, curbing what has long been seen as a key tool to protect waterways from pollution.

The high court ruled against the agency in a long-running dispute with Idaho landowners known as Sackett v. EPA. In an opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito, the court found that the agency’s interpretation of the wetlands covered by the Clean Water Act is “inconsistent” with the law’s text and structure, and the law extends only to “wetlands with a continuous surface connection to bodies of water that are ‘waters of the United States’ in their own right.”

While the majority acknowledged that weather and climate events like low tides and dry spells can cause “temporary interruptions” between bodies of waters covered by the law, the court said that wetlands protected under the Clean Water Act should be otherwise “indistinguishable” from other regulated waters.

Protecting wetlands is great. I’m all for it, though, if they are solely in a state that should be up to the state, not the federal government. Extending it out to just about any running water? No. Do you really want the EPA to regulate that small pond behind your house and make you get all sorts of permits? How about for temporary streams? It really is just a power grab

In a concurring opinion authored by Kavanaugh and joined by the three liberal justices, Kavanaugh argued the “continuous surface connection” test adopted by the majority “departs from the statutory text, from 45 years of consistent agency practice, and from this court’s precedents.”

By narrowing the scope of Clean Water Act, Kavanaugh warned some long-regulated wetlands will no longer be covered by the law, which will have “significant repercussions for water quality and flood control” throughout the nation.

I understand their reasoning, but, the EPA is contending that a small stream is navigable and under their purview and control, a massive stretch, as the EPA, and most federal agencies like to do. There would be no need for this ruling or even a case if the EPA wasn’t continuously attempting to grab more and more power.

The decision from the conservative court is the latest to target the authority of the EPA to police pollution. On the final day of its term last year, the high court limited the agency’s power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, dealing a blow to efforts to combat climate change.

It’s not about targeting their authority, it’s about reigning in their authority as deemed by law which the EPA wants to expand.

President Biden criticized the Supreme Court’s decision as “disappointing” and pledged to work with the Justice Department and relevant federal agencies to use their legal authority to protect the nation’s waters. Mr. Biden said the ruling puts wetlands and connecting bodies of water at risk of “pollution and destruction.”

What if the EPA decided to crack down on Biden’s properties using the same rule? I wonder how he would respond?

Read: Bummer: SCOTUS Rules 9-0 Against Biden’s Waters Of The USA Rule »

Posted in Environment, Global Warming | 13 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove