…is a wonderful induction stove, which everyone should be forced to use, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on on a whiny transgender at the airport.
And, no, I’m not going to mention the mass shooting by the wacko gender confused. You’re welcome to discuss yourself.
Read: If All You See… »
I mean, how dare the GOP do this!
Two key Biden nominees cave to GOP pressure campaign: Why it matters
Two of President Biden’s picks for top administration posts have withdrawn their nominations in the past month, both caving to Republican pressure campaigns while also failing to get enough support from enough moderate Democrats.
Phillip Washington, Biden’s pick to lead the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), withdrew his nomination this week amid criticism that he doesn’t have enough experience in the area. And earlier this month, Gigi Sohn, Biden’s pick to serve as the top telecommunications regulator for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), withdrew her name after facing months of controversy.
Both have served as blows to the president, as the FAA has been struggling with high-profile mishaps and the FCC lacks a regulator to help push through Biden’s internet agenda.
The politically charged environment going into the 2024 election cycle, coupled with the Democrats’ narrow majority in the Senate, has also put Biden’s picks under increased pressure.
“The withdrawals, in my view, stem from a combination of factors — a very tight Democratic majority so that almost every vote counts, absences of key Democratic senators due to health, and persistent and effective Republican attacks,” said Anne Joseph O’Connell, a federal bureaucracy expert at the Stanford Law School.
Several Democrats opposed them, as well, including Joe Manchin, Jon Tester, and Kyrsten Sinema
“Withdrawals happen in every administration. These two have meaningful consequences — a continued 2-2 split at the FCC and lack of a confirmed leader at the FAA as safety and other issues plague air transportation,” she added.
Yeah, well, we really do not need more who are completely and unwholly unqualified, even for an appointee. Like Mayor Pete. Washington was grilled in a Senate hearing, and truly had little knowledge of aviation safety, and was unable to answer basic questions on aviation issues. It’s not a position for on the job training.
As for Sohn, Ted Cruz said “Her record demonstrates extreme partisan bias, multiple conflicts of interest, and I don’t think she has the votes to be confirmed. I don’t know why the White House is wasting its time with the nomination.” She’s hyperpartisan, she’s against free speech and freedom of the press for those who do not toe the Progressive line, she benefited from copyright violations, and shows disdain for rural Americans.
So, bad choices. We already see how unqualified and unserious Pete Buttigieg is. We do not need more box checkers.
Read: GOP Pressure Causes Two Biden Appointees To Drop Out »
Even if you don’t have a gas stove, you’ve thought about it, which is just as bad
Climate change: trees grow for extra month as planet warms – study
Global warming is changing the way trees grow, new research suggests.
Researchers studying hardwoods in northwest Ohio say a century of warming has extended their annual growing season by a month on average.
The scientists from Ohio State University compared recent observations to detailed notes a local farmer began taking in the 19th Century.
They say the research has implications for how well different types of trees will cope with future climate change.
Between 1883 and 1912, farmer Thomas Mikesell made meticulous notes on local tree growth, precipitation and temperature in his home town of Wauseon, Ohio.
Our planet has warmed by 1.1C since the industrial revolution about 200 years ago. With most of that occurring in recent decades, researchers say Mikesell’s observations are a near unique pre-warming dataset to compare with modern times.
Wait, go back to that first paragraph: “research suggests.” That is virtually meaningless. The research should either say it is occurring or not occurring. Plus, it’s in a very limited area. In fairness, though, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was correct, because you can expect growing seasons to be longer during a Holocene warm period. And shorter during cool periods. Which the Earth was coming out of. Of course, this is being positioned as Bad
Trees are vital in sucking planet-warming carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, and the researchers said a longer growing period probably meant they did more of that. But they warned that higher, fluctuating temperatures may also stress trees in ways so far unknown.
No matter what, everything is Doomy in Warmist World.
Read: Horror: Trees Grow An Extra Month Because You Have A Gas Stove »
Before another dime is spent on Ukraine there needs to be an accounting of where it’s all gone so far. Here’s Senator Josh Hawley
Where’s all the Ukraine money going? This person can help find the truth
Over the last year, our leaders have sent a mind-blowing amount of money to Ukraine. If Congress cares about making sure that cash is well spent, they should go on record about it.
This week, the Senate will vote on my amendment to set up an inspector general to track every single taxpayer dollar going to Ukraine. Who could oppose that?
Since Russia’s invasion began in February 2022, Congress has lavished Ukraine with $113 billion in aid spending – including both weapons and direct payments to the Ukrainian government. That’s almost four times the annual budget of my home state of Missouri. And it doesn’t look like they’re poised to turn off the spigot anytime soon.
To be clear, that’s the wrong call. America needs those resources elsewhere – to stop the cartels on our southern border; to deter China in the Pacific. It’s long past time for our European NATO allies to step up and take primary responsibility for Europe’s security. Continued spending on Ukraine isn’t serving the American interest.
But set that aside. Everyone – especially Washington Republicans – should at least agree that Americans deserve to know how their money is being spent.
Astoundingly, right now that isn’t the case. Despite repeatedly asking for more funding for Ukraine aid, the Biden administration hasn’t rigorously kept track of the money. That’s right: billions upon billions of American dollars are pouring into a war-torn country without any serious oversight.
Yes, we should know. His amendment would require a special inspector general to see where it all went and track any further allocations. The big question here is “will there be 60 votes to move it forward?” Will Democrats vote for it, or all vote against? Will all Republicans vote for it, or will a few of the squishes vote against it?
Read: Senate Will Vote On Having Inspector Track All The Money Going To Ukraine »
Well, of course he does. Do you want to give up your modern lifestyle? Do you want to stop driving, stop flying, stop eating meat, turn your AC up to 80 and heat down to 60, etc and so on? No, you don’t, and neither do the vast majority of Warmists, especially the rich Elites, who live even bigger lifestyles
The rich can buy “climate offsets”… the rest of us can enjoy energy poverty#DefundTyranny #EnergyFreedom https://t.co/94b04a54rS
— Chip Roy (@chiproytx) March 27, 2023
Yeah, they’re working harder to enact the scam they created. Sure thing, Sparky. That was just part of a much longer interview with Ben Adler.
BEN ADLER: There are some people who don’t want to change their lifestyle. We’re going to have to switch at some point from gas for heating and cooking to electricity if we’re going to reach net zero.
JOHN KERRY: Unless somebody were able to provide that with zero carbon intensity, I mean, if you can do that. Now that’s not doable today. So yes, gas at a certain point becomes a serious challenge here. Let’s say you’re going to take a coal plant, you want to shut it and you’re going to do gas instead.
For about the next seven, eight years or so, that’s something that you could do because it’s an immediate 30% to 50% reduction in the emissions. But after that period of time, we have to meet the net zero 2050. So you’ve got to be able to reduce gas emissions also. That’s the challenge for the industry.
Kerry claims you won’t have to change your lifestyle, but, we all know that’s mule fritters, because they’re saying things will change our lifestyles. He says that Biden will throw out a ton of executive orders affecting cars and trucks of all weights, and more. They’re going after gas stoves, air conditioners, washing machines, refrigerators, and more. But, hey, no changes.
Read: Climahypocrite Climate Czar John Kerry Says It’s Just Fine That The Elites Are Climahypocrites »
…is an area flooded by carbon pollution sea rise, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Joshuapundit, who is back, and discusses the 2 state solution.
Read: If All You See… »
This should be interesting, and probably full of legal gobbledegook. Is encouraging someone to commit a federal crime free speech?
US Supreme Court examines law against encouraging illegal immigration
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday will consider whether a federal law that made it a crime for a person to encourage illegal immigration violates constitutional free speech protections in a case involving a California man who deceived immigrants through a phony “adult adoption” program.
The justices are due to hear arguments in an appeal by President Joe Biden’s administration of a lower court’s decision to strike down the decades-old provision, part of a larger immigration statute, as overly broad because it may criminalize legitimate speech protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.
In invalidating the law, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the 2017 conviction of Helaman Hansen for violating the provision, which bars inducing or encouraging noncitizens “to come to, enter or reside” in the United States illegally, including for financial gain.
Hansen also was convicted of mail and wire fraud and sentenced to 20 years in prison. He is out of prison while his appeal is pending.
Federal prosecutors accused Hansen of deceiving immigrants in the United States illegally by promising them between 2012 and 2016 that they could gain American citizenship through an “adult adoption” program operated by his Sacramento-based business, Americans Helping America Chamber of Commerce.
It’s interesting that the Biden admin/DOJ want to support the provision (I’m assuming it is Title 8, U.S.C. 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)), as Democrats are constantly encouraging/inducing people to come to the U.S. illegally and stay illegally.
The prosecution said Hansen persuaded at least 471 people to join his program, charging each of them up to $10,000 even though he “knew that the adult adoptions that he touted would not lead to U.S. citizenship.” Hansen and his program collected more than $1.8 million through the scheme, authorities said.
In its February 2022 ruling striking down the law, the 9th Circuit ruled that it criminalizes even commonplace speech such as telling immigrants who are in the country illegally, “I encourage you to reside in the United States,” or advising them about available social services. The 9th Circuit upheld Hansen’s other convictions and ordered that he be resentenced.
Hansen should be in jail for the fraud in that 1st paragraph. As to the free speech portion, people are rarely prosecuted for it, but, we know how the liberals on the Court will vote. What will the Constitutional Conservatives rule? On one hand, you have a stringent belief in the 1st Amendment provision of free speech, and Congress did make a law. However, there is no free speech when it comes to encouraging/inducing people to commit an illegal act. However, this is usually held when encouraging someone to commit a felony, and illegal entry is not a felony, at least not the first offense. We should have the ruling by June.
Read: SCOTUS Looks At Whether Law Against Encouraging Illegal Immigration Violates Free Speech »
I have to wonder how many Warmists have given up their own SUVs? How about the employees at the Financial Times?
We should regulate SUVs out of existence
About 15 years ago, travelling along an eight-lane highway in Alabama surrounded by SUVs and trucks, I thought: we aren’t going to stop climate change. At least back then the problem was mostly an American one. Now huge cars have gone global. SUVs last year accounted for a record 46 per cent of the world’s car sales, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). If we’re serious about keeping the planet liveable, we have to regulate and tax huge cars out of existence.
Let’s not turn this issue into anything so boring as a culture war. If you feel an automated rant coming on about metropolitan elites persecuting ordinary folk, remember that huge cars are mostly driven by the rich. In the UK, for instance, the average SUV costs more than the median full-time pre-tax salary of about £33,000 — leaving aside petrol. Generally, it’s the rich who emit most CO?. Getting rid of huge cars is about reducing emissions first and road accidents second. (snip)
Petrol-fuelled SUVs still massively outsell the supposed big new things on the roads, electric vehicles. Even electric SUVs won’t do much to prevent dangerous climate change because they require outsized batteries, given their bulk and relative inefficiency. And manufacturing a car battery consumes as much energy as making the e-car itself.
In short, we need to legislate away huge cars such as the Ford F-series truck, the US’s bestselling passenger vehicle for 41 years running. After all, we ban other dangerous substances, and sometimes even not very dangerous substances, such as marijuana. We already regulate cars themselves in all sorts of ways. Jurisdictions from California to France have scheduled the end of sales of new internal-combustion-engine cars, while cities like London bar dirty cars from certain zones. In the US, efficiency regulations apply to the range of vehicles sold by a manufacturer. But why not limit the size and emissions of individual car models? Some European countries already tax big cars, but in a climate crisis we need more radical action.
But, see, this really wouldn’t be green authoritarianism, because you can drive around in tiny Approved vehicles
It’s true that regulating away huge cars would be a restriction on freedom. Many people want huge cars. Psychologically, an SUV is a second home. But eliminating these civilian tanks wouldn’t exactly be green authoritarianism. Even with smaller cars, people could still drive wherever they wanted, as quickly as before. SUVs hardly qualify as a necessity compared with two other big emitters, planes and cows. If we banned planes, which account for only about a quarter of the emissions of passenger vehicles, longer-distance travel would practically cease. Banning cows will become a serious option once we can deliver large quantities of cheap, nutritious plant-based milk and fake beef, but we aren’t there yet.
See?
Read: Climate Cult Wants Government To Ban SUVs And Big Vehicles »
I wonder what they have on her? Or what they’re paying her?
Ocasio-Cortez posts first TikTok in support of the app, says ban ‘doesn’t feel right’
As a potential TikTok ban looms, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) gave her response in a unique way: by posting her first video on the social media platform.
“This is not only my first TikTok, but it is a TikTok about TikTok,” Ocasio-Cortez said in her introduction, adding “Do I believe TikTok should be banned? No.”
The New York Democrat said banning the popular video-sharing app would be an “unprecedented” move.
“I think it’s important to discuss how unprecedented of a move this would be. The United States has never before banned a social media company from existence, from operating in our borders,” she said in her video. “And this is an app that has over 150 million Americans on it.
“They say because of this egregious amount of data harvesting, we should ban this app. However, that doesn’t really address the core of the issue,” Ocasio-Cortez said in her video.
What does she want instead?
“In fact, the United States is one of the only developed nations in then world that has no significant data or privacy protection laws on the books,” she argued, later adding “So to me, the solution here is not to ban an individual company — but to actually protect Americans from this kind of egregious data harvesting that companies can do without your significant ability to say no.”
She wants massive government control over social media companies…which would put the data in the hands of the U.S. government. Kinda like what China is doing. Strange, eh?
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., was criticized for defending TikTok after it was revealed the app’s Chinese-owned parent company gave six-figure donations to the Black and Hispanic caucus non-profits.
Fox News Digital previously reported that disclosures show ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, funneled six-figure contributions to nonprofits aligned with the congressional Black and Hispanic Caucuses. ByteDance donated $150,000 to both the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation and Congressional Hispanic Caucus Foundation in December, its lobbying contribution report shows.
Jake Denton, who handles tech policy for the Heritage Foundation, noted on Twitter Sunday that AOC is a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute (CHCI) advisory council.
“What a coincidence!” Denton wrote, responding to Ocasio-Cortez’s video defense of TikTok initially shared Saturday.
Some Democrats are in support of banning Tiktok, then you have some like Jamaal Bowman and Robert Garcia….wait, aren’t they part of those caucuses?
Personally, I’m not for a ban, except on government devices. If private citizens want to be dumb and use it, giving the Chinese government all their data, well, that’s on them for being stupid.
Read: AOC Stooges For Tiktok »
…are shoes made of horrible petroleum, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Outside The Beltway, with a post on making cheap booze expensive.
It’s fit girls week.
Read: If All You See… »
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
