Unhinged Warmists Take Fossil Fueled Trip To Hamptons To Protest

By William Teach July 12, 2022 – 3:00 pm

Nothing says “Do Something about the climate emergency” more than taking fossil fueled trips to protest. Where were they all when Obama was having a fancy party, with lots of big shots flying in on private fossil fueled jets?

Screaming Activists Occupy Ritzy Beach Towns

Left-wing activists affiliated with New York Communities For Change (NYCFC) launched disruptive protests over the weekend in several beach towns as part of the organization’s “#OccupyTheHamptons” demonstrations.

NYCFC protested on behalf of “climate action & green, social housing for all,” according to its Twitter page. Activists criticized wealthy Hamptonites as “directly responsible for the results of climate change” while sporting banners calling for governments to “tax the rich,” footage posted to Twitter shows.

First, protesters blocked off Southampton’s Main Street on Friday afternoon, when many weekenders travel to the Hamptons.

And then

How gauche, wearing jeans and sneakers on the beach. Then they drove over to the “billionaires row” homes to annoy them. And then

The group erected a wooden structure in the airport’s main entrance and placed one of its activists on top of it. They also blocked the entrance with seated protesters so that cars could not circumvent the structure, NYCFC Twitter footage appeared to show. Others participated in “tax the rich” chants and held signs, one of which read “the 1% is stealing everyone’s future,” other footage posted to the NYCFC account shows.

Overall, 16 were arrested. And, they simply show that the climate crisis scam is a scam. It’s hardcore leftist policy masquerading as environmentalism.

Read: Unhinged Warmists Take Fossil Fueled Trip To Hamptons To Protest »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach July 12, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible carbon pollution lawn, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is This ain’t Hell…, with a post on feel good stories.

Yes, lawns are bad in Warmist World, as the First Street Journal points out.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

53% Of Democrats Want Supreme Court Abolished

By William Teach July 12, 2022 – 10:30 am

They should take the poll when Democrats get a big win, see how that goes, because Democrats seem to blow in the wind on how they support the way our system of government is set up

Majority of Democrats, young people want to abolish Supreme Court: poll

A majority of Democrat voters believe the Supreme Court is a racist, sexist institution that ought to be abolished, according to a new poll commissioned by the Heartland Institute. And in a clear threat to the court’s future, almost as many young people aged 19 to 39 feel the same way.

The national survey of 1,025 US voters split strongly down party lines, with 53% of Democrats in favor of abolishing the current Supreme Court and replacing it with a “new, democratically elected . . . court with justices chosen by the American people directly,” and 33% “strongly” in favor. Just 21% of Republicans and 38% of independents favored the proposition.

A majority (54%) of young people aged 19 to 39 wanted the court abolished. Overall, just 37% of total voters agreed, according to the Rasmussen poll conducted on July 6 and 7, almost two weeks after the Supreme Court overturned the Roe v Wade decision on abortion.

And 100% of these people are idiots. If they want to do this, try passing a Constitutional amendment. Of course, if they lose at the ballot box, they won’t like electing Supreme Court justices, either. Democrats say they love “democracy”, except when they lose, and then they caterwaul since 2000 about losing the election, and make up a BS narrative about Russia Russia Russia in 2016.

While 67% of Democrats believe the court is a “fundamentally sexist institution that favors men over women,” just 18% of Republicans and 36% of independents agreed.  (snip)

On the question of race, 56% of Democrats believe the court is “a fundamentally racist institution” compared to 14% of Republicans, 29% of independents and 34% of total voters.

Of course they do, because this is the world they live in. Everything is like this for them.

On the radical proposition of a constitutional amendment to give the United Nations the power to reverse Supreme Court decisions on decisions it believes violate human rights, fewer than half (47%) of Democrats were opposed, with 39% in favor with 11% undecided.

Among Republicans, 77% were opposed to UN oversight and 17% were in favor. Just 37% of total voters favored the idea, but young voters aged 19 to 39 were more positive, with 48% in favor, compared to 27% of those aged 40 to 64 and 9% of those aged over 64.

So, 39% of Democrats, 17% of Republicans, and 48% of young people are morons.

“What this poll shows is that a majority of Democratic voters are utterly delusional about public policy and completely out of step with the vision most Americans have of their country,” said Justin Haskins, the Heartland Institute’s Editorial Director.

“Not only do most Democrats now have radical opinions about alleged racism and sexism at the Supreme Court, but they also want to substantially pack the court and even abolish it in its existing form–reforms opposed by the vast majority of other demographics.” (snip)

“More than a half-century of liberals running America’s K-12 schools and colleges has clearly paid off,” said Haskins.

It’s just like the Talking Point about doing the Senate differently, because it’s not fair that small states have the same representation as large states. They do not understand the Constitution, and why the federal government, and the Legislative Branch, are set up that way. Schools failed them, as do news outlets, talking heads, and elected Democrats.

Read: 53% Of Democrats Want Supreme Court Abolished »

Posted in Constitution, Democrats | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Duck Speak: Hotcoldwetdry Is White Colonization Or Something

By William Teach July 12, 2022 – 7:15 am

Written by an uber-white woman, Erin Fitz-Henry, the Deputy Coordinator – Anthropology, Development Studies & Social Theory, The University of Melbourne. She’s pale enough to have a joke written about her not being able to be seen in the snow. Just another loony tunes white elitist white-knighting for minorities, because, let’s be honest, these people do not think much of “minorities”, particularly black people, and do not think they can survive without the helpful hand of white elites and government

Climate change is white colonisation of the atmosphere. It’s time to tackle this entrenched racism

“Climate change is racist”. So reads the title of a recent book by British journalist Jeremy Williams. While this title might seem provocative, it’s long been recognised that people of colour suffer disproportionate harms under climate change – and this is likely to worsen in the coming decades.

However, most rich white countries, including Australia, are doing precious little to properly address this inequity. For the most part, they refuse to accept the climate debt they owe to poorer countries and communities.

In so doing, they sentence millions of people to premature death, disability or unnecessary hardship. This includes in Australia, where climate change compounds historical wrongs against First Nations communities in many ways.

This injustice – a type of “atmospheric colonisation” – is a form of deeply entrenched colonial racism that arguably represents the most pressing global equity issue of our time. Several upcoming global talks, including the Pacific Islands Forum this week, offer a chance to urgently elevate climate justice on the global agenda.

This is totally about science, though, right? They want climate reparations and so much more. It’s all very insane. I wonder if these Warmists are willing to give up their own money and modern lifestyles?

(climate duck speak)

Read: Duck Speak: Hotcoldwetdry Is White Colonization Or Something »

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

Lunatic Leftist Judge Rules Many Minnesota Abortion Restrictions Are Unconstitutional

By William Teach July 12, 2022 – 7:00 am

Will this now go to the Minnesota supreme court? Will pro-life Minnesotans attempt to push a vote on a constitutional amendment? You know this judge has to be a leftist, since they never mention the party affiliation. Many of his previous big rulings have leaned left and towards Big Government

Minnesota judge strikes down numerous state abortion restrictions

A judge in Minnesota struck down several state laws restricting access to abortions Monday, finding they violated the state’s constitution.

In a 140-page ruling, state District Judge Thomas Gilligan of Ramsey County issued a permanent injunction blocking a variety of restrictions, including a 24-hour waiting period and a requirement that only doctors perform the procedure. He said they run afoul of a 1995 state Supreme Court ruling that abortion is protected under the Minnesota Constitution.

Gilligan, who has presided over the case for three years, wrote that “this court concludes that Minnesota abortion laws relating to mandated physician care, hospitalization, criminalization, parental notification, and informed consent are unconstitutional.”

He found that the “laws violate the right to privacy because they infringe upon the fundamental right under the Minnesota Constitution to access abortion care and do not withstand strict scrutiny,” adding: “The parental notification law violates the guarantee of equal protection for the same reasons. The informed consent law also violates the right to free speech under the Minnesota Constitution, because it is misleading and confusing, and does not withstand intermediate scrutiny. Accordingly, this court is declaring those laws unconstitutional.”

Just because it was considered a right, though not specifically in the Minnesota Constitution, does that mean that pretty much anyone can perform one? How about leaving the parents out? Minors are, under the law, unable to give consent for sexual relations. Minors are unable to give consent for medial procedures. Yet, they can get an abortion without parental notification? These people are insane

House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt, a Republican, urged state Attorney General Keith Ellison to appeal the ruling, which he said in a statement “will put lives at risk by allowing non-physicians to perform abortions and second or third trimester abortions to be performed in non-medical settings.”

“Republicans will continue to defend common-sense pro-life laws that protect the health and safety of mothers, and work to overturn this reckless decision that puts mothers’ lives at risk,” Daudt added.

Not sure Ellison will do a damned thing, since he is an avowed leftist and supporter of abortion. This is, though, exactly what the Supreme Court ruling was about: it’s a state issue. It will surely be appealed. But, Democrats will never stop fighting for the ability to kill the unborn for their own poor life choices.

Read: Lunatic Leftist Judge Rules Many Minnesota Abortion Restrictions Are Unconstitutional »

Posted in Current Affairs, Unhinged Tools | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

With Energy And Inflation Running Rampant, Dems To Focus Taxes And Climate Crisis (scam)

By William Teach July 11, 2022 – 3:00 pm

What are people worried about? The price of food and goods going up, high gas and energy prices, rising interest rates, lack of goods, basically, economic issues. The stuff they talk about at the kitchen table. And Democrats?

Dems’ climate and tax agenda to consume Congress in July

Democrats are taking tangible steps towards a deal on their party’s signature spending bill, expecting the proposal to dominate the rest of July and hoping it could reshape their political fortunes after six months of stasis.

Talks between Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) are beginning to yield concrete results on a potential climate, tax and prescription drugs package. Schumer told Senate Democrats recently that if he can reach a deal with Manchin, the bill could be on the floor as soon as this month, according to a person familiar with the negotiations.

Negotiators are still ironing out key details, but Democrats are signaling that as soon as next week they will begin arguing their case to the Senate rules chief on why the package should pass with a simple majority in the chamber. No one is getting their hopes too high in a party still reeling from Manchin’s rejection of Build Back Better, Democrats’ previous version of the legislation.

Will Manchin vote for legislation that will increase the cost of life for his constituents?

Democrats solved the easiest piece of their puzzle this week: finalizing a prescription drug pricing reform deal from last year, which both lowers prices and is expected to raise at least $250 billion in revenues. Democrats submitted that piece to the Senate parliamentarian for review, trying to ensure it doesn’t run afoul of the strict chamber rules that govern whether legislation can pass with a simple majority, known as budget reconciliation.

If it’s good legislation, why not just pass it on its own?

Shaving down the $555 billion energy package from the abandoned Build Back Better bill is proving tougher; Manchin is looking at energy spending of around $300 billion and ultimately new subsidies for electric vehicles could be cut, according to a second person familiar with the negotiations. Democrats are also trying to prevent health care premiums from skyrocketing this fall, and they need to detail tax increases and enforcement that would both pay for the bill and reduce the deficit, priorities of Manchin’s.

Passing this would simply increase the cost of living for the Average America. Way to focus on what’s real, Dems.

Read: With Energy And Inflation Running Rampant, Dems To Focus Taxes And Climate Crisis (scam) »

Posted in Democrats, Energy | Comments Off on With Energy And Inflation Running Rampant, Dems To Focus Taxes And Climate Crisis (scam) | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 11, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…is a place turned into a desert from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Weasel Zippers, with a post on Biden being heckled yet again in Delaware.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

In Wake Of End Of Roe, FDA Considers OTC Birth Control Pills

By William Teach July 11, 2022 – 10:30 am

Hey, look, Democrats rediscovered contraceptives!

F.D.A. to Weigh Over-the-Counter Sale of Contraceptive Pills

More than 60 years after the approval of oral contraceptives revolutionized women’s sexual health, the Food and Drug Administration has received its first application to supply a birth control pill over the counter — just as the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade has put access to contraception more squarely at the heart of the clash over reproductive rights.

What clash regarding contraceptives? Republicans have been saying for most of this century that abortion and abortion pills are not contraceptives, that men and women should practice responsible, protected sex.

A Paris-based company, HRA Pharma, said it will announce on Monday that it has asked the F.D.A. to authorize its pill, which is available by prescription, for over-the-counter-sales in the United States. Cadence Health, another pill manufacturer that has been in close dialogue with the F.D.A. about switching its pill to over-the-counter status, said it hopes to move closer to submitting an application in the coming year.

The timing of HRA Pharma’s F.D.A. submission, just weeks after the Supreme Court decision, is “a really sad coincidence,” said Fre?de?rique Welgryn, the company’s chief strategic and innovations officer. “Birth control is not a solution for abortion access,” she said.

Well, actually, it is, because if you practice protected sex you don’t get pregnant. It’s 2022, these things are pretty advanced, and we have some very good scientific knowledge.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which struck down Roe and eliminated the constitutional right to abortion, included a concurring decision by Justice Clarence Thomas suggesting that the 1965 decision that established a right to contraception should also be overturned. On Friday, President Biden denounced the Dobbs ruling as “an exercise in raw political power,” and vowed to expand access to reproductive health care.

First, he’s just one judge, none of the others are saying the same thing. Second, there’s zero suits in the courts that could work their way to the Supreme Court. Third, he wrote ““In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” What he meant was that the Supreme Court shouldn’t invent a Right where none exists in the Constitution. That it should be the Legislative Branch which can pass a law on this. The rest of the court is not interested in doing this, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh adding in his concurrence, “Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

Supporters of reproductive rights are also calling on Mr. Biden to have the F.D.A. move quickly on its review of over-the-counter contraceptives in light of the Dobbs decision. Dana Singiser, a founder of the Contraceptive Access Initiative, a nonprofit advocacy group, said the experience with Covid-19 shows that the F.D.A. “can work with urgency during a public health emergency, which is what women are facing right now with the overturning of Roe v. Wade.”

Of course, Biden is not interested in being involved. Like with most things.

Roughly half of all pregnancies in the United States are unintended, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization that supports abortion rights. Reproductive-rights activists view an over-the-counter birth control pill as an easy and effective tool for women in rural, poor and historically marginalized communities to avoid unwanted pregnancies, which in turn reduces the abortion rate.

Word salad included. If you’re having unprotected, irresponsible sex, why are you surprised when you get pregnant? If you drive like a fool, wearing no seat belt, why are you surprised when you get seriously hurt?

Long, long article, but, the question here is “will Democrats push to stop this?”

(USA Today) Most American women favor making the birth control pill accessible over the counter. According to a 2017 Kaiser Family Foundation survey, three-quarters of women of reproductive age support over-the-counter access to birth control pills.

So why hasn’t it happened? It must be that awful, religious-right-dominated GOP that’s standing in the way, right?

Actually, not so much.

Republicans, in fact, have repeatedly tried to make birth control pills available without a prescription, only to face opposition from . . . Democrats and Planned Parenthood.

Easily obtained contraceptives would interfere with all the money PP makes off abortions and insurance money rake off, and, if there are fewer abortion Democrats cannot yammer on about the “right to an abortion.”

Planned Parenthood is also a big donor to Democrats, who have worked to block over-the-counter birth control pills. And Democrats have fought hard, partly because they — and drug companies — want birth control pills to be subject to health insurance reimbursement, though only the more privileged among Americans get that.

Will Dems block the approval at the FDA?

Read: In Wake Of End Of Roe, FDA Considers OTC Birth Control Pills »

Posted in Current Affairs | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

What Say To Bubbles Around The Earth To Solve ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach July 11, 2022 – 7:00 am

What could possibly go wrong?

MIT scientists think they’ve discovered how to fully reverse climate change

Scientists at MIT think they may have finally found a way to reverse climate change. Or, at the least, help ease it some.

The idea revolves heavily around the creation and deployment of several thin film-like silicon bubbles. The “space bubbles” as they refer to them, would be joined together like a raft. Once expanded in space it would be around the same size as Brazil. The bubbles would then provide an extra buffer against the harmful solar radiation that comes from the Sun.

The goal with these new “space bubbles” would be to ease up or even reverse climate change. The Earth has seen rising temperatures over the past several centuries. In fact, NASA previously released a gif detailing how the global temperature has changed over the years. Now, we’re seeing massive “mouths to hell” opening in the permafrost.

Wait, go back a second: if the solar radiation (which is necessary for life on Earth, to a degree) is coming from the Sun, doesn’t that mean the main driver is nature, not Mankind? Certainly, there couldn’t have been enough “carbon pollution” back in the 1880’s, nor industrialization to make much of a change.

Researchers at MIT have taken that same basic concept and improved it, though, by changing out inflatable silicon bubbles for the spacecraft that Angel originally proposed. Being able to reverse climate change would be a huge step in the right direction. Shielding the Earth from the Sun’s radiation would only be one part of it, though. We’d still need to cut down on other things, too.

I can see this going horribly wrong. It’s really just a pie in the sky plan that has zero chance of being implemented, at least not for centuries, at which point the Earth will be back to a Holocene cooling period anyhow. The bigger point is, again, the big nuclear furnace the Earth revolves around, which has always been a primary driver of the climate.

Read: What Say To Bubbles Around The Earth To Solve ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Hot Take: The Tax Code Is Raaaaacist

By William Teach July 11, 2022 – 6:45 am

It’s very amusing, but, not in a good way, when uber-white Progressives like The Hill’s Emily Brooks white-knights for black people, and, really, say that blacks just cannot succeed without the help of The Government. And progressive white people, of course

America will never achieve racial justice without reforming our broken tax code

As inflation continues to impact working-class Americans across the country, reports show that Black Americans are being hit the hardest. On top of the massive economic inequalities caused by the pandemic, rising costs for housing, food, and gas are making it virtually impossible for Black communities to improve their financial conditions in material ways.

My grandfather — as a young person — met people who had been wealthy slave owners before the Civil War. It has only been a few generations since more of America’s wealth was derived from enslaved people rather than farmland or factories. We have come a long way since then.

What, exactly, does her grandfather knowing people who owned slaves have to do with anything? In Progressive Grievance World, though, it seems they’re all living like it’s 1850

Unfortunately, there is still a very long way to go. Black Americans continue to face systemic discrimination in virtually every corner and every institution in America. One of the most salient yet overlooked places where Black Americans encounter bias, however, is our nation’s tax code. Its preferential treatment of existing wealth over income leaves the Black community at a permanent disadvantage when compared to their significantly wealthier white counterparts.

As a result of decades of racist federal policies like redlining, Black Americans hold nowhere near the level of wealth that white Americans do. The ratio of white-to-Black wealth in America today is 6 to 1; for every dollar the average white American holds, the average black American holds only 17 cents. If Black Americans held a share of national wealth that was equal in proportion to their share of the population, they would hold $12.68 trillion in total wealth instead of $2.54 trillion, which puts the total racial wealth gap at $10.14 trillion. Unsurprisingly, this has led to a situation where Black Americans are overrepresented among the poor and underrepresented among the rich, making up 26% of the poorest fifth of the country and just 3% of the richest fifth.

Um, OK? But, the tax code applies to all colors equally. If you make between $40,526 to $86,375 your rate is 22%. The tax code doesn’t know your skin color. In Progressive World, everything is raaaaacist. Emily makes quite a few leaps of Liberal Logic in attempting to link rich people being rich to the tax code being bad for blacks.

Despite the complexities of the matter, there’s one simple solution that would help address this problem. Wealthy, predominantly white investors should be asked to pay taxes just like people who work for a living while workers should be given some more financial breathing room. We should be making it easier, not harder, for Black workers (and workers of all races) to save and spend their hard-earned cash and build better lives for themselves, their families, and their communities, while asking more from the ultra-wealthy who can easily afford to pay more.

They do. They pay a hell of a lot more monetarily in taxes. Sure, the percent may seem lower, but, they feed more money back into the economy, create businesses and jobs, give to charities. Emily is also upset that they do not pay full taxes on capital gains. I’m really not sure how this would create any sort of equality/equity, it’s just penalizing people who had nothing to do with slavery.

I myself am a wealthy, white investor living in the Upper East Side of Manhattan.

Nowhere in this piece does Emily mention that she is paying full boat on her taxes, forgoing deductions, paying full boat on capital gains. Because, let’s be honest, this is all about Virtue Signaling without doing a damned thing in their own lives.

Read: Hot Take: The Tax Code Is Raaaaacist »

Posted in Liberal World | 14 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove