…are clouds building into Extreme Weather, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Bookworm Room, with a post on America’s loss of self control.
Read: If All You See… »
…are clouds building into Extreme Weather, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Bookworm Room, with a post on America’s loss of self control.
Read: If All You See… »
Do the climate cult members ever really have answers?
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., left one Biden administration official without words Wednesday when he pressed him to answer one simple question: How much would spending $50 trillion in American taxpayer money to become carbon-neutral lower global temperatures?
“If we spend $50 trillion to become carbon-neutral by 2050 in the United States of America, how much is that going to reduce world temperatures?” Kennedy asked Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee hearing.
Turk appeared unable to provide a specific number, and instead began arguing that the U.S. needed to do everything it could to reduce carbon emissions before being interrupted by Kennedy pressing for an answer to the question.
This is something they should have an answer to, right? Not deflecting away?
“How much, if we do our part, is it going to reduce world temperatures?” Kennedy asked again.
“So, we’re 13% of global emissions right now,” Turk responded, before Kennedy jumped in again, saying, “You don’t know, do you? You don’t know, do you?”
“You don’t know, do you, Mr. Secretary?” Kennedy asked as Turk appeared to continue dancing around the question. “If you know, why won’t you tell me?”
“If we went to zero, that would be 13% —” Turk said.
“You don’t know, do you? You just want us to spend $50 trillion, and you don’t have the slightest idea whether it’s going to reduce world temperatures,” Kennedy said.
He still tried to deflect after that, and Kennedy pointed out that this is taxpayer money. Would you spend your money on things with absolutely no idea what it will get you? Because this isn’t about the climate it’s about controlling people.
WATCH: @SenJohnKennedy Destroys Dep. Energy Secretary – Exposes Climate Change Fraud By Asking One Question
KENNEDY: "If we spent $50 trillion to become carbon neutral…How much is that going to reduce world temperatures?"
SEC TURK: "This is a global problem."
KENNEDY: "You… pic.twitter.com/eja5PJzM00
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) May 4, 2023
Read: Deputy Energy Secretary David Turk Has Tough Time Answering Simple Question On ‘Climate Change’ »
He has a stance beyond “it’s my way or the highway” and “spend baby spend”?
White House Surprised by Lack of Support for Its Debt Stance: Report
As President Biden prepares to meet next week with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and other congressional leaders to discuss raising the debt limit, The Washington Post’s Jeff Stein reports that the White House has been surprised that business groups and budget hawks that it thought would be in its corner in this fight are instead siding with Republicans.
The White House has insisted that Congress should raise the debt limit without conditions, as it has done before, and that the risk of a debt default should not be used as leverage to force spending cuts, which can be discussed as part of budget talks. Republicans insist they won’t raise the borrowing limit without some concessions to address the country’s fiscal outlook.
Stein cites a range of groups, from the Business Roundtable and Chamber of Commerce to the Bipartisan Policy Center and the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, all of which have come out in favor of negotiations between the administration and House Republicans. None have pushed for the clean debt limit increase that Biden is seeking.
Um, what made Biden and his regime folks think that budget hawks would take his side? Biden’s all about spending willy nilly with no repercussions. Why would budget hawks want that? Why would business groups want extreme spending which will jack up inflation and the cost of living, which will cause Americans to spend less on goods and services? Are those in the regime that divorced from reality? Yeah, I guess that’s rather rhetorical.
He adds that administration officials were “stunned” by a statement from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calling the House Republican debt limit bill a “realistic and extremely welcome first step.” Biden officials reportedly saw that as encouraging further brinkmanship over the debt limit. “We were livid,” one told the Post.
Or, the Biden regime could come to the table and work on a reasonable and responsible budget, considering this comes from the taxes taken from the American citizens.
Republican strategist Liam Donovan told the Post that the White House made a bad bet on GOP dysfunction. “But with the passage of a GOP debt limit proposal, any industry group or think tank that is more interested in keeping the economy on the rails understands that the path of least resistance is for Biden to sit down with McCarthy and come to a deal that allows everyone to save face,” he said.
This is rather hard when Biden only works about 30 days a week and is gone every weekend.
Read: Brandon Surprised That No One’s Really Supporting His Debt Stance »
Interestingly, the LA Times editorial board fails to mention if they have replaced their own fossil fueled vehicles with EVs. Also, a pretty big admission
Editorial: Replacing the Chevy Bolt with electric SUVs would be a climate tragedy
Can we pour one out for the Chevy Bolt?
When the small electric hatchback came onto the market six years ago, it was a game changer: The relatively affordable battery-powered vehicle with 238 miles of range on a single charge demonstrated the mass-market potential for EVs.
The Bolt has only grown in popularity, as its range improved, gas prices spiked and sticker price cuts made it one of the cheapest electric vehicles on the market. If you can find one for the suggested retail price of $26,500, you could get it for less than $20,000 dollars, after the $7,500 federal tax credit.
But last week, General Motors CEO Mary Barra announced the company will end production of the Bolt at the end of the year as it reconfigures the Michigan plant where it is made to build large battery-powered pickup trucks. Not only does it echo GM’s decision a generation ago to kill off the EV1, its first fully electric vehicle, but the Bolt’s demise is a disappointment for consumers and a step backward in the fight against climate change, including President Biden’s goal of cutting the nation’s air pollution in half by 2030.
Would this be the same Biden who takes a huge amount of fossil fueled travel weekly, and doesn’t travel in an EV?
Discontinuing a small, lower-cost EV like the Bolt to make room for bigger, more expensive models will make it harder for Americans to afford to go electric. This the wrong direction to be heading when the U.S. needs to replace polluting gas- and diesel-powered cars and trucks with clean, zero-emissions vehicles quickly.
In other words, the LATEB is telling us that EVs are mostly too expensive for most people to afford, unless you get a tiny vehicle (the Bolt is 163 inches long with an interior space of 67 cubic feet. The Honda Civic sedan is 169 inches, with 99 cubic feet) with a small combined range of 259 miles. When completely optimal. And it slow charges.
“The industry has decided that if they’re going to have to make EVs, they might as well make the same gigantic behemoths that they’ve been making before,” said Dan Becker, who directs the Center for Biological Diversity’s Safe Climate Transport Campaign.
As far as SUVs go, that’s what people want. Most do not want sedans. I personally think it is a mistake ending the Bolt. Maybe redesign it, make it a bit bigger. The Bolt is the size of a subcompact, which most manufacturers have stopped making in the US due to low sales.
That’s not too reassuring. Consumer groups are right to be worried that discontinuing lower-priced models like the Bolt will reduce options and shut out an entire segment of drivers who want to buy electric cars but won’t be able to afford them.
So what can be done to push back against ballooning sizes and price tags?
Obviously, more government!
That makes it more important than ever that California continue to modernize and streamline its clean vehicle rebate programs, which have been hampered by long waiting lists, inconsistent and insufficient funding that have prevented people from buying electric cars. The state recently increased incentives for low and moderate-income Californians to buy zero-emission vehicles, allowing them to apply for rebates of up to $7,500. But more can be done to smooth out these programs, such as making them redeemable at the dealership or point of sale rather than forcing car buyers with limited incomes to wait months for reimbursement.
Nice to know that the EB doesn’t understand how tax incentives work. Most will not get $7,500 in cash. Does anyone think the dealers want to take what are essentially vouchers, knowing that it will take months for them to get reimbursed? And where is all this cash coming from?
Read: LA Times Is Very Upset Over Dumping Bolt For SUV EVs »
…are tropical trees that will soon grow wild in the Arctic, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is American Greatness, with a post on Sotomayor taking $3 million from a book publisher and not recusing herself.
Read: If All You See… »
The question rarely asked is “why the need to go Woke?” Why not simply just sell your product/services?
It’s Not Just Bud Light. How Companies Are Fighting Back Against the War Over ‘Woke.’
A Bud Light is no longer just something you grab when you feel like a beer. A conservative outcry over Bud’s marketing campaign with a transgender activist has put the brand into the center of a culture war over so-called corporate wokeism.
To many people, Bud was simply getting with the times by embracing activist Dylan Mulvaney, recognizing LGBTQ consumers, and following the lead of brands such as Coca-Cola (ticker: KO), Nike (NKE), and Hershey HSY -0.03% (HSY). But the conservative backlash against Bud Light produced a 26% drop in beer sales in a week.
Companies from BlackRock (BLK) to Walt Disney DIS 0.26% (DIS) are under siege as political attacks on progressive corporate policies heat up ahead of the 2024 elections. Some companies are fighting back—notably Disney—and there is scant evidence of firms retreating from environmental, social, and governance, or ESG, initiatives.
Well, what happens is their sales drop. People just want the products/services without all the extra stuff. What’s happening with Anheuser Bush wasn’t so much about patronizing the gender confused, but, first, featuring a deranged wackjob pretending to be a little girl in a manner that completely mocks women, and women were not happy. Second, their idiot marketing head dissing the people who make up the core of Bud’s sales, instead of attempting to add more who’ll drink it. Third, they didn’t really apologize, so, people do not forgive.
Do these brands think it helps to replace women with gender confused men?
The kerfuffle over Bud Light illustrates the growing challenge for companies as they try to expand sales with new customers without alienating core consumers or political constituencies. Bud parent Anheuser-Busch put two executives who had come up with the marketing campaign involving Mulvaney on leave. That, in turn, prompted calls on the left to boycott the company’s products. When it comes to Disney, patrons wonder why their kids are being exposed to trans madness and adult sexual issues? They do not want sexual stuff regardless of whether it is straight or LGBT shown to kids, much less indoctrination material. They want their kids to be kids.
Why the need to go Woke to attract new customers? Figure out a way without pissing off your existing customers.
While episodes like this blow over, they can have a chilling effect on companies’ willingness to talk about social or environmental goals. A study released in October by South Pole, a climate consulting firm, found that 72% of the 1,200 private companies it surveyed had set emissions targets in line with global climate goals—but a quarter of those businesses don’t plan to publicize their plans or achievements “beyond the bare minimum.” South Pole dubs this behavior greenhushing and says it makes climate targets “harder to scrutinize.”
Does anyone believe that most of the companies are doing more than paying lipservice? Are any giving up the use of fossil fuels for their operations? Anyhow, it’s a long, long article, worth the read.
And, speaking directly on Bud Light
‘There’s No Game Plan’: Bud Light Sales Collapse amid Backlash to Dylan Mulvaney Campaign
In-store sales of Bud Light dropped 26 percent in the final week of April following consumer pushback in the wake of the company’s decision to partner with transgender social-media personality Dylan Mulvaney.
Figures released by Bump Williams Consulting, a firm that specializes in the alcohol beverage market, found Bud Light sales have progressively slumped throughout the month of April. In the second week of the month, they were down 11 percent and plummeted 21 percent the following week.
The idiots in marketing said “hey, this sounds good” without considering the impacts.
Read: Companies Are Fighting Back Against The War On Woke Or Something »
But, see, Kerry is Spreading Awareness, so, he apparently gets a full pass for his climahypocrisy
Climate Envoy John Kerry’s Jet-Set Spending Is Getting Plenty of Cloud Cover
John Kerry leads an international jet-set life that might exhaust a runway model. If President Biden’s special envoy for climate was not in Washington or relaxing at his mansion near Nantucket Harbor, he could be found in Brazil, Panama, the Bahamas, or Germany. And that’s just in February and March.
While Kerry trumpets his meetings and appearances around the world, the State Department wraps the rest of his efforts in a cloak of secrecy usually reserved for CIA black box operations. It has refused to specify lists of people he is meeting with and who is advising him as he circles the globe. His office has stonewalled requests for budget and staffing information from legislators and government watchdog groups. In response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed last year by RealClearInvestigations for a breakdown on how the climate envoy’s roughly $16.5 million 2022 budget was spent, the State Department said it could not comply with the request until April 2025, months after both the 2024 election and the expiration of President Biden’s current term.
Didn’t Biden say his administration would be uber-transparent? Here’s the White House on Feb 4, 2021 on their core principles
(b) Transparency. In a democracy, the public deserves as much transparency as possible regarding the work of our national security institutions, consistent with legitimate needs to protect sources and methods and sensitive foreign relationships. The revitalization of our national security and foreign policy workforce requires a recommitment to the highest standards of transparency.
Hmm.
The secrecy surrounding Kerry’s work is reaching a boiling point with the threat of a congressional subpoena.
Frustrated that Kerry’s office ignored two previous requests for detailed information about its budget when his party was in the minority, Republican Rep. James Comer, who now heads the House Oversight Committee, sent what he labeled a final courtesy letter on April 25 and added that a subpoena would accompany the next request if Kerry’s “powerful, unchecked position” continued to hide the information.
“The State Department has not provided any meaningful updates to Committee staff inquiries on the status of producing these documents,” Comer wrote. “Envoy Kerry is engaging in activities that skirt congressional authority, threaten foreign policy under the guise of climate advocacy, and could undermine economic health. Yet, Envoy Kerry and his office are refusing to be transparent about their activities, spending, and staffing with the Committee – and the American people.”
Like with the document on Biden’s bribery, it’ll be a tough slog to get cooperation, and Republicans will have to play hardball. But, will they?
Read: House Oversight Committee Would Like To Know About High Flying John Kerry’s Travel »
Is this something? Is this something that will go somewhere, or, will the Congressional Republicans go wimpy like usual? Obviously, most of the big U.S. media, like the NY Times, Washington Post, ABC News, et al, are either not covering this or putting it way down the page
Whistleblower accuses Joe Biden of taking bribe from foreign national
Two senior Republicans are demanding the FBI release a document in which a whistleblower alleges Joe Biden took a bribe from a foreign national when he was vice president.
Iowa senator, Chuck Grassley and James Comer, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, claim the document “includes a precise description of how the alleged criminal scheme was employed as well as its purpose”.
Congressman Comer, whose committee is investigating the Biden family’s business dealings, has issued a subpoena for the document.
“The information provided by a whistleblower raises concerns that then-Vice President Biden allegedly engaged in a bribery scheme with a foreign national,” he said.
Mr Comer added: “The American people need to know if President Biden sold out the United States of America to make money for himself.
“Senator Grassley and I will seek the truth to ensure accountability for the American people.”
And how long will the FBI stonewall Congress? Grassley doesn’t have the power, as he’s in the minority in the Senate, but, the GOP can hold FBI officials in contempt if they refuse to pony up the subpoenad document toot sweet.
Speaking on Fox News, Mr Grassley added: “We really need to know what steps did the Justice Department and FBI take to investigate and to vet the document to determine if it’s accurate or not?
“And did the Justice Department and the FBI follow normal investigative procedures, or did they let political calculations interfere?”
Please. They probably demoted any agents involved and threatened them. We’ll see if this has legs.
Read: Whistleblower Says Biden Took Bribe While Vice President »
I can’t find in the Bible where it says to force Other People to practice what you preach while you don’t
Opinion: How a misreading of the Bible fuels many Americans’ apathy about climate change
Christian theology and global politics can make strange bedfellows. Consider the intimate relationship between fundamentalist expectations of Jesus’ return and market-driven disregard for the environment.
The affair became public back in 1981, when Ronald Reagan’s newly minted Interior secretary, James Watt — once known for suing the department he went on to lead — was testifying before a House committee. Watt was asked whether he was committed to “save some of our resources … for our children?”
You know if there’s a long setup, then the whole thing will be wackadoodle cult mule fritters. Several more paragraphs and
The Watt hearing brought public scrutiny to the relationship between religion and environmental policy, but it was not the end of the affair. American evangelicals are still disproportionately uninterested in climate change and other environmental issues. Their apathy is driven not only by their well-documented distrust of science but also by a specific eschatological belief that Jesus is coming soon to bring history to a rather climactic end. Most evangelicals believe this is simply what the Bible teaches, especially in the Book of Revelation.
Sigh. These people
And it’s not just evangelicals. Popular evangelical culture — including Hal Lindsey’s bestselling 1970 book “The Late Great Planet Earth” and, more recently, Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins’ blockbuster “Left Behind” novels (with movie spinoffs) — has led many more Americans to believe the Bible predicts our imminent end. Although evangelicals emphatically believe these predictions, and non-evangelicals decidedly do not, it’s broadly assumed that this is indeed what the Bible predicts.
In fact, Scripture says no such thing, either in Revelation or in any other book. This is widely known among historical scholars of the Bible but scarcely at all outside our ranks.
Most people are not looking to the Bible on ‘climate change’. They’re looking at what the leftists are reading and following, The Communist Manifesto, and realizing this is an authoritarian, doomsday cult scam.
If a significant portion of the voting public believes the end of our civilization is just 40 years off, why worry about the environment? Why support the Paris climate agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050? It’s no surprise that believers in the Second Coming are significantly more likely to oppose governmental attempts to fight climate change.
That this view is based on a misinterpretation of the Bible suggests that religious expertise has never been more crucial to humankind. Who would have thought that serious biblical scholarship could help preserve the ice caps and stem the rising seas? Could it thereby contribute to our collective salvation after all?
It can only help. Let’s spread the word before it’s too late.
Why would any of us believe your cultists when you do not practice what you preach?
Read: Climate Cult Trying To Use A “Misreading Of The Bible” »