50% Of Americans Think Ukraine War Has Harmed National Security

By William Teach March 24, 2023 – 7:00 am

Really, do many really care about Ukraine? Or the “war” going on? Does it affect them? Or, are they more worried with the continuing inflation that we were told was transitory? Are they tired of Los Federales pissing away money and arms in an attempt to start WWIII? Whatever happened to the anti-war left, and groups like ANSWER and Code Pink?

(Rasmussen) More than a year after Russia invaded Ukraine, half of U.S. voters think the war has harmed America’s national security and many want to see a negotiated peace.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 50% of Likely U.S. voters believe the Russian invasion of Ukraine has made America’s national security situation worse – up from 42% last September.

Just 14% now  say the Russian invasion has made U.S. national security better, and 28% think it has not made much difference. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

No one in the administration offers up much in the way of Reasons for why we’re giving Ukraine so much money and weapons, other than a nebulous “Democracy, baby!” What’s in it for us? How long will it last? What more will we give them?

Republican lawmakers press Biden to send cluster bombs to Ukraine -letter

Four Republican members of Congress urged U.S. President Joe Biden to send cluster munitions to Ukraine, alleging in a Tuesday letter to the White House that the administration fears doing so would be seen as an escalation by Russia.

Ukraine is seeking the MK-20, an air-delivered cluster bomb, to release its individual explosives from drones, and 155 mm artillery cluster shells, Reuters reported earlier this month. Kyiv had urged members of Congress to press the White House to approve sending the weapons.

The letter criticized Biden for “reluctance to provide Ukraine the right type and amount of long-range fires and maneuver capability to create” a breakthrough against Russian forces.

The letter was signed by Jim Risch, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Roger Wicker, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Mike McCaul, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Mike Rogers the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

I can’t criticize Democrats on this if I do not criticize Republicans, because a goodly chunk of the Elites in both parties are pushing this.

Read: 50% Of Americans Think Ukraine War Has Harmed National Security »

Posted in Current Affairs | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Vox: We Can’t Really Blame The Los Angeles Tornado On ‘Climate Change’, But, Hey, We Can Strongly Hint It

By William Teach March 23, 2023 – 3:44 pm

Well, you had to know that the climate cultists would be out and about linking climate doom with the tornado, right? It’s what they do. And then they jump in their fossil fueled vehicles to get some food delivered to the store by fossil fueled trucks

Yes, there was just a tornado near Los Angeles. Is climate change to blame?

In a rare turn of events, a town southeast of Los Angeles was hit by a tornado on Wednesday, marking the latest extreme weather the region has fielded in recent months.

Tornadoes aren’t unheard of in California, but they are less common compared to other parts of the country, with fewer than 10 typically observed in the state per year, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Wednesday’s tornado — which affected the town of Montebello and damaged 17 buildings — was also especially strong, and is the most severe to affect the region in 40 years, per the National Weather Service.

The tornado followed another weaker tornado, which touched down Tuesday in Carpinteria, a town northwest of Los Angeles, and months of other extreme weather in the state.

So, wait, tornadoes in the southern part of the People’s Republik Of California are rare, but, do happen. The LA Times says they are not as uncommon  as you think.

There’s likely a connection between the storms that California has experienced and this week’s tornadoes. The atmospheric rivers and the rain they brought probably helped lead to increased moisture in the air, which enabled the recent tornadoes to form in the region, says Perry Samson, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Michigan. “You’ve got the conditions for instability set up by these atmospheric rivers,” Samson told Vox.

The increased intensity of atmospheric rivers may also have links to climate change, many climate experts say. It’s too early to draw conclusions about the relationship between climate change and the tornadoes, however. “You can’t tie it to climate change, because it’s a one-off thing,” says Jase Bernhardt, a professor of geology, environment, and sustainability at Hofstra University.

The moisture has nothing to do with it: it’s the rotation, though tornadoes are mostly associated with thunderstorms. Which happened before fossil fueled vehicles. Anyhow, they cannot tie it in, you know

What is more established, though, is that it’s unusual for the Los Angeles area to experience this type of weather phenomena at this magnitude. “This is stuff you see in Ohio, Arkansas … Not Montebello,” one witness said, according to CNN.

But, they can strongly intimate that the tornadoes were your fault for failing to give your money and freedom to Government.

While climate change’s relationship to these tornadoes is uncertain, what is evident is that thunderstorms and tornadoes of this magnitude are uncommon in this region, and that this week’s events were a product of the right conditions being in place. Those include warmer, humid air near the ground and drier, cold air higher in the atmosphere. The warmer air contributing to recent extreme weather could also become more common as global warming worsens, as could storms. Climate change leads to warmer air, and “warmer air can hold more moisture,” which can mean more precipitation, per the New York Times.

See? Your fault.

Read: Vox: We Can’t Really Blame The Los Angeles Tornado On ‘Climate Change’, But, Hey, We Can Strongly Hint It »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 23, 2023 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful greenspace that would be perfect for solar panels, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Sultan Knish, with a post on interesting data on where murders occur.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Only 34% Would Consider An EV Purchase For Their Next Vehicle

By William Teach March 23, 2023 – 10:30 am

The demand is skyrocketing, eh?

One-third of Americans would consider EV purchase -Reuters/Ipsos poll

Just over one-third of Americans would consider buying an electric vehicle for their next model, a new Reuters/Ipsos poll found.

The seven-day poll completed on Monday found 34% of all respondents would consider an EV, while 31% said no. Among Democrats 50% said they would consider an EV, while 26% of Republicans and 27% of independents said they would consider.

There are now more than 80 EV models for sale in the United States. EVs represented nearly 6% of all U.S. sales in 2022, with EV sales up by more than 60% last year.

President Joe Biden wants 50% of all new vehicles sold in 2030 to be EV or plug-in hybrid models. Tesla Inc is the leading EV maker in the U.S., but other top-selling models include Ford Motor Co’s Mustang Mach-E SUV, General Motors Co’s Chevrolet Bolt and Hyundai Motor’s Ioniq 5.

Remember, that’s just people who would consider it, not those actively looking to purchase. Heck, I’d consider it. Most of my driving is short trips around town, including to work. Every once in a while I head down to the Smithfield factory outlets, maybe to the one in Mebane. If the range was good enough I’d be OK with the trips to Wrightsville beach 2-4 times a summer. Long distance up to NJ? Well, that could add an hour or more to the trip, but, I usually fly.

The poll found 56% of respondents would be willing to pay no more than $49,999 for an EV. In August, the Biden administration won a significant expansion of $7,500 electric vehicle tax credits and other battery and EV manufacturing incentives to shift the industry toward electric models but EVs are still often significantly above $50,000.

So, a goodly chunk of the respondents were apparently upper middle class and rich folks. I’m sure as hell not willing to pay that much. More like in the low to mid $30k’s. And that might be more than what a lot of folks want.

The poll also found that 35% wanted an EV that offered 500 or more miles of electric driving range per full charge, a distance few EVs offer today. Another 37% wanted a minimum of 300 miles.

EVs are pretty much play cars for the rich, and that won’t be changing anytime soon. Look at the manufacturers who have fully embraced this push. Most people do not want car payments in the $600’s and up, nor to finance a vehicle for 7+ years. And, if they’re so great, why do most of the people pushing this not drive them?

Read: Only 34% Would Consider An EV Purchase For Their Next Vehicle »

Posted in Global Warming | 24 Comments | Trackback URL

Good Grief: Paper Calls To Charge Fossil Fuels Companies With Homicide

By William Teach March 23, 2023 – 7:15 am

I have to wonder, as always, if all the people at Harvard who were involved with this paper have given up their own personal use of fossil fuels. If they’ve advocated that the school ban all private fossil fueled vehicles at the school, ban fossil fueled flights for sports teams and researchers

New climate paper calls for charging big US oil firms with homicide

Oil companies have come under increasing legal scrutiny and face allegations of defrauding investors, racketeering, and a wave of other lawsuits. But a new paper argues there’s another way to hold big oil accountable for climate damage: trying companies for homicide.

The striking and seemingly radical legal theory is laid out in a paper accepted for publication in the Harvard Environmental Law Review. In it, the authors argue fossil fuel companies “have not simply been lying to the public, they have been killing members of the public at an accelerating rate, and prosecutors should bring that crime to the public’s attention”.

“What’s on their ledger in terms of harm, there’s nothing like it in human history,” said David Arkush, the director of the climate program at consumer advocacy group Public Citizen and one of the paper’s authors.

The paper is rooted in part in the growing body of evidence fossil fuel companies knew of the harm their products caused and misled the public about them.

Attorneys general and cities have used that information to sue oil companies for financial damages caused by rising seas, wildfires and heat. But the new paper argues that oil companies’ climate research and continued fight to delay climate regulations amount to a “culpable mental state” that has inflicted harm on people, including death.

“Once you start using those terms, you come to realize that’s criminal law,” said Donald Braman, a law professor at George Washington University and Arkush’s co-author. “Culpable mental state causing harm is criminal conduct, and if they kill anybody, that’s homicide.”

The rest of the article doesn’t get any saner as it goes on. But, hey, don’t laugh. Somebody throws that kind of crazy idea, it gets traction, and is repeated by news outlets. People will demand it. Look at the gas stove craziness.

Read: Good Grief: Paper Calls To Charge Fossil Fuels Companies With Homicide »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Could The Trump Grand Jury Fail To Indict Him?

By William Teach March 23, 2023 – 7:00 am

With the grand jury being cancelled Wednesday, something funny could be going on

LARRY KUDLOW: Alvin Bragg is in danger of being overruled by his own grand jury

As you know by now, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg cancelled the grand jury meeting that was scheduled to take place today in New York, was expected to hear from at least one additional final witness and many thought would announce an indictment of former President Donald Trump.

Now, Bragg, of course, is a renegade, left-wing radical DA, the author of no-bail, no jail, soft-on-crime policies in New York City backed by the far-left George Soros. (snip)

The Wall Street Journal editorial board, which has been highly critical of Mr. Trump’s post-presidency, said it’s impossible to overstate Bragg’s bad judgement. I myself on Monday referred to it as a zombie case and an abuse of power. Now, why has Mr. Bragg, who is overcome by the Trump derangement syndrome, cancelled today’s grand jury hearing?

Well, nobody knows for sure, I guess, but one could wildly speculate that Bragg has no case. He’s in danger of being overruled by his own grand jury. Why?

Well, in yesterday’s grand jury testimony, lawyer Bob Costello, who used to represent Trump lawyer turned arch-nemesis Michael Cohen, destroyed Cohen’s credibility. Cohen, of course, is already a convicted perjurer and Costello told the grand jury that Bragg withheld important email evidence that would’ve destroyed the idea that Cohen was representing Trump with respect to payments to Stormy Daniels or anything else to Stormy Daniels.  Here’s what he told Fox News’ Sean Hannity last night. Take a listen:  (snip)

Bragg put six emails into the official record, but Costello testified that there were actually 321 emails and they show that the story Cohen is telling now to the grand jury is completely different from what he told Costello years ago. In fact, there’s strong reason to believe that Cohen was acting on his own, not representing Trump.

So, 315 missing emails, and Kudlow says one source claims Bragg is having trouble convincing his own Grand Jury on the charges, even in uber-liberal NY. Can you imagine the utter and complete Democrat meltdown if no charges are filed? It will be epic. Perhaps not as fun as hearing “we the jury find the defendant, Donald Trump, not guilty of all charges.

Read: Could The Trump Grand Jury Fail To Indict Him? »

Posted in Donald Trump, Unhinged Tools | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: All Those New Fossil Fueled Projects Are Cementing In Climate Doom

By William Teach March 22, 2023 – 3:00 pm

Say, what’s the carbon footprint of the Los Angeles Times? How much in the way of fossil fuels do they use to gather and distribute the news? How many employees have given up their own use of fossil fueled travel? How many in LA have given up their use of fossil fuels? You aren’t building homes and businesses without them. This is the editorial board (non-paywalled at Yahoo News)

Editorial: We’re cementing climate denial with every fossil fuel project

A new United Nations report comes to a definitive but familiar conclusion: We’re not doing nearly enough to prevent disastrous levels of climate change.

What’s this “we”, sparky? What have y’all done?

But one frustrating reality underscored by the report is how much we remain in denial about fossil fuels.

The U.N’s scientific assessment, approved by 195 nations, says that existing and planned fossil fuel infrastructure — all of the coal-fired power plants, oil wells and gas-powered vehicles already built or on the way — will generate enough greenhouse gas pollution to warm the planet by a catastrophic 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, this century.

China has been permitting new coal-fired power plants at a staggering rate of two per week. President Biden last week approved the massive Willow oil drilling project in Alaska, giving ConocoPhillips permission to extract as much as 600 million barrels of oil over 30 years and breaking his campaign promise of “no more drilling on federal lands. Period. Period. Period. Period.” (Yes, he said it four times for emphasis.)

Oil companies, meanwhile, are backing off their commitments to fight climate change and transition to renewable energy as they rake in record profits from soaring fuel prices. In California, the permitting of new oil drilling continues unabated after petroleum companies spent $20 million to get a referendum to overturn a state law banning new wells near homes and schools. Global energy-related carbon emissions reached a record high last year, and another U.N. climate conference in Egypt last fall ended without an agreement to phase out fossil fuels.

The people telling us to stop using fossil fuels are they themselves using way more than the average American, especially with all their private jet flights. Until they practice what they preach, they can blow it out their asses

From local government to heads of state, officials at all levels should exercise whatever authority they have to dismantle the dangerous machinery of fossil fuels and replace it quickly with clean, renewable energy. Whether it’s accelerating the end of gas-fired plants, oil drilling and internal-combustion cars, or clearing the way for vehicle electrification and wind and solar energy production and transmission, there are thousands of opportunities to avoid the very worst possibilities for our future.

Funny how government authoritarianism always seems to be the answer, rh?

Read: Bummer: All Those New Fossil Fueled Projects Are Cementing In Climate Doom »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 22, 2023 – 1:00 pm

…is an area flooded from too much carbon pollution Bad Weather, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Weasel Zippers, with a post on the Treasury Secretary saying the economy is doing well.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Inflation Is Transitory: Fed Looks To Raise Rates To Highest Since 2006

By William Teach March 22, 2023 – 10:30 am

Remember when we were told 2 years ago that inflation was temporary? That it wouldn’t last? That the economy was just fine? Sure, we all understand that the politicians do not want to be really negative, but, the way everything was positioned was that it was all in your mind. Yet

Federal Reserve ‘between a rock and a hard place’ as interest rate decision looms

Federal Reserve officials will convene this week for one of the central bank’s most uncertain policy meetings in years.

Forced to balance the consequences of a banking crisis and inflation that remains well above target, the Fed is expected to raise interest rates by another 0.25% when it releases its latest policy decision at 2:00 p.m. ET Wednesday afternoon. This move would bring the Fed’s benchmark interest rate range to 4.75%-5%, the highest since 2006. Fed Chair Jerome Powell will hold a press conference at 2:30 p.m. ET to explain the Fed’s decision.

“They’re in between a rock and a hard place,” said Wilmer Stith, bond portfolio manager for Wilmington Trust. “There’s a banking crisis and it’s really a very tenuous, uncomfortable position for the Fed to be in.”

During his semi-annual testimony before Congress in early March, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said strong economic data would likely push interest “higher than previously anticipated.” (snip)

Still, as of Tuesday morning, data from the CME Group showed investors placing an 85% chance on the Fed raising rates by 25 basis points on Wednesday.

“If they stop and reverse [rate hikes], that could cause markets to believe they’re not fighting inflation when inflation is still a problem, giving you higher mortgage rates and funding costs for corporations and just a tighter vice on the economy,” Stith said.

The problem here is that it is significantly reducing loans. Auto loans are way down, as people refuse to pay for the too-high used car prices (even if they have come down) at those higher interest rates. It’s so bad that a lot of dealers refuse to quote rates based on credit: you’ll just be told “let’s submit to the banks, let them tell us.” It’s cooling off small business loans and home loans. Home equity loans and personal loans.

In December, the Fed’s SEP suggested rates would peak in a range of 5%-5.25% during this rate hiking cycle. Powell’s testimony earlier this month suggested this outlook is what would need altering from the central bank.

Yeah, but what you end up with is loans that are much higher. When someone with an 810 credit score is seeing 5.99 as the best rate, when they would have had 3.99 two years ago, they hold off. As for the banks, if they are so mismanaged, let them fail. Where are all the regulators? Oh, right, they’re concerned with DEI and ‘climate change’. Regardless, raising the rates has not helped the economy, food, consumer goods, etc, are still way higher, and most are not coming down.

Read: Inflation Is Transitory: Fed Looks To Raise Rates To Highest Since 2006 »

Posted in Economy | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Federal Judge Rules Against Brandon’s Waters Of The USA Rule

By William Teach March 22, 2023 – 7:00 am

Just like when the Obama admin tried this, it was vast over-reach by los Federales and an attempt to control vast swaths of privately owned property, including people’s yards, hence, their homes. It’s really not surprising that a judge ruled against it

Federal judge delivers blow to Biden’s climate agenda: ‘Destructive federal overreach’

A federal judge blocked the Biden administration from implementing environmental regulations redefining how water sources are protected, but which opponents have argued were an example of overreach.

In his decision published late Sunday, Judge Jeffrey Brown ruled that the so-called Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule announced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in late December “poses irreparable harm” to residents of Texas and Idaho, the two states that challenged the regulations in the lawsuit filed on Jan. 18. Brown declined to issue a nationwide injunction, but noted 25 other states have challenged the rule in two separate ongoing lawsuits.

While I continue to battle the rule in court, this preliminary injunction is a major blow to the Biden Administration’s radical environmental agenda,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement Monday. “The unlawful rule would have saddled Texans across the state with crushing new regulations, slowing our state’s economic development and limiting our job growth. (snip)

The rule ultimately opens the door for the federal government to regulate wetlands, lakes, ponds, streams and “relatively permanent” waterways, largely mimicking a pre-2015 environmental rule set during the Obama administration which implemented the changes in an effort to curb water pollution. The regulation is a broad interpretation of which water sources require protection under the Clean Water Act.

That little stream that runs through your backyard would be under the control of the federal government. A stream that appears when it rains? It would be under federal control. It’s beyond egregious, but, not unexpected from Progressives (nice Fascists): they want control of everything at the federal level.

Will the Brandon admin appeal? We shall see.

Read: Federal Judge Rules Against Brandon’s Waters Of The USA Rule »

Posted in Global Warming, Joe Biden | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove