Happy Sunday! Another fine day in the Once And Future Nation of America. Getting a bit of rain, the bunnies are all over the yard, and the Dodgers are on a win streak. This pinup is by Romain Hugault, with a wee bit of help.
What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15
No Tricks Zone notes EVs are like COVID vaccines: sold on wildly unrealistic exaggerations
Never Yet Melted discusses radical feminism looking to redefine conceptions of time and space
And last, but, not least, Pacific Pundit highlights a California law about to make the supply chain worse
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
Starting with The Daley Gator (back at a new URL), which has Daley Babe. And more Daley Babe. And Linkage. And more during the week.
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?
The Pennsylvania state Senate advanced a proposal Thursday that would amend the state constitution to include clear language that states there is no constitutional right to abortion.
The proposal, advanced by the Republican-led upper chamber, states that there is no constitutional right to a taxpayer funded abortion or any right whatsoever to abortion in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
The amendment was added on to a bill that included many constitutional amendments, including on that would require Pennsylvania residents to show legal identification in order to vote in state elections.
The Pennsylvania state constitution does not give the governor the power to veto constitutional amendments, nor do constitutional amendments require the governor’s support to be enacted.
Amendments to the constitution in Pennsylvania are passed after they’re proposed in the state’s House or Senate and then approved by the majority in each chamber during two elective sessions.
The amendment also must be published for Pennsylvanians to see at least three months prior to the next election, and then be approved by the majority in the state’s House and Senate once more following the election.
Afterwards, to finalize the outcome of the amendment, it would then go to the Pennsylvanians’ ballot for a vote.
So, it won’t be fast. Unless the GOP loses either the House or Senate, it will pass in two consecutive sessions. Then, it must go to a ballot. Would they have to wait till 2024, or, could they call a special election? They’ll need to get it passed ASAP, before August 7th, as election day is November 8th.
Obviously, the Democrats do not like this
Pennsylvania Sen. John Costa (D) stated that the Republican bill was “designed to prevent abortions in this commonwealth.” He wrote on Twitter that “the governor is elected statewide to have a final say on the issues that impact citizens statewide,” and claimed that the proposal was a political work-around.
Pretty sure that the power of making law is invested in the General Assembly and The People, not the governor. And Democrats do not like that this could be a Pa. constitutional amendment, because they do not like when people have the opportunity to vote against what Democrats want. You know they’ll sue. I wonder which other states will push amendments.
More: looks like Kansas will have a vote very soon
(Wichita Eagle) Kansas voters will decide Aug. 2 whether the state constitution should include the right to an abortion. A vote no would continue that right. A vote yes would remove it, and Kansas lawmakers would be free to further restrict abortion, including banning the procedure. (snip)
I have a big problem with all the out of state money, regardless of what it supports. Out of state people/entities need to mind their own business. We’ll see what happens in August. Anyone else think that we’ll be watching the vote count, and, if it starts supporting a Yes vote, all of a sudden things will start getting weird, with voting stopped in some places, ballots suddenly appearing, etc?
Donald Trump had nothing to say and said it all the time.
President Joe Biden has more to say and rarely says it.
Or at least that’s what a lot of his fellow Democrats seem to think.
Following the shooting in Highland Park, Illinois, on the Fourth of July, there is growing criticism from members of Biden’s party, who accuse the president of not saying enough about this important issue. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre says Biden has approached the continuing gun violence issue with “passion” and “fury.” Some of his fellow Democrats, however, have reportedly begun to doubt both of those. Some of that criticism comes from Congress, where it is obvious they mistake “fury” for action. It would also explain why Congress often seems so furious and yet takes so little action.
Biden has done himself no favors because even the press (which, until recently, was still in a honeymoon with the White House) says he continuously hides from the public. He’s had just one full news conference at the White House — during the pandemic, with relatively few reporters present — and he routinely avoids putting himself in situations where the press can ask him questions.
It really doesn’t get much better for Joe
Donald Trump used the Oval Office as an interactive bully pulpit and battering ram — screaming and ranting and raving at the press while taking questions in a variety of venues that he believed gave him an advantage, whether in his infamous “chopper talk” sessions on the South Lawn, in pool sprays or elsewhere. Trump could make an ass of himself anywhere, always did and still does.
But today, the president of the United States is a role played by a septuagenarian in a reality show.
In other words, Trump spent a lot of time yammering and talking with the press. And yes, berating them. But, he did show up time and again, while Joe hides
For the first time since January, I was given permission, along with perhaps two dozen other reporters, to walk into the South Court Auditorium and serve as a temporary audience during a presidential reality show episode. Of course, that’s not how it was billed. But the auditorium has morphed into a Hollywood sound stage over the last 17 months. During previous administrations, the room was pressed into service as anything from an overflow work space to an auditorium hosting presidential press events. The first COVID briefings under Trump took place in that auditorium, before approximately 200 members of the press corps.
And now? Not many, and Joe doesn’t take questions. He looks like a talk show host
I swear, at one point I thought the president might turn, look at the audience and say, “We’ll have more with irate governors after this important commercial message . . . ”
If this had happened under Trump, he would have been late, combative and surly. He would have accused us at least once of being the “enemy of the people,” called us “fake news” at least twice and might have personally insulted a reporter just for good measure. But he’d mix it up with questions, not caring if they were pro or con. He was ready to fight with anybody. That was Trump’s game plan. After he got comfortable in any venue in the White House, he stayed and fouled the nest. At first, there was no chopper talk. Then, after trying it once and being invited back, he kept doing it. After he showed up in the Brady Briefing Room to discuss the pandemic, with a little more than a year left in his term of office, he was again invited back.
But, he did talk, right? Take questions? Interact?
Joe Biden accidentally reads the part on the teleprompter that says "repeat the line" when they wanted him to say the line again lmfao pic.twitter.com/pS3GdXPe5N
I don’t remember Trump making all these gaffes. Remember how the press used to give George W. Bush crap for his mispronounced words? Bush at least showed up, took questions, answered
That’s an oldy but goody. Biden can’t even speak using a teleprompter in an utterly scripted event
If Biden is actually incapable of occasionally taking unscripted questions from a wide variety of journalists, then the Democrats should be looking hard for someone who can — though they should heed the warning of history and avoid creating a Kennedy vs. Carter moment, as in 1980, that divides the party and allows a demon seed like Ronald Reagan to fall through the cracks and take root. In short, if the Democrats are going to proceed without Biden, it has to be at his initiative, or at least appear to be so. (Wink, wink.) The Democrats definitely don’t need a competitive primary season where the incumbent president is fighting for survival. But given that this is the Democratic Party, they might just do that.
Oops. It’s an incredible piece, well worth reading the whole thing.
Building wind and solar farms is an important part of building a new green grid, but a calm night stops their energy generation cold. It’s just as important to research and build green energy storage — and to that at scale requires federal intervention as soon as possible, suggests a new report from MIT.
“The Future of Energy Storage” is part of a series looking at the transition of power sources in America, and this one is particularly relevant given the momentum currently enjoyed by the solar and wind industries. Too much renewable energy sounds like a good problem to have, but if it can’t be relied on as a city or region’s main or only source of electricity, they’re going to feel the need to hedge their bets with a coal plant or something like it.
Wait, it’s unreliable? I wish I had mentioned that before
The solution is basically batteries: store excess power when the sun is out and the wind is high, and run off them at other times. It’s hardly a revelation, but the increasing reliance on what the study calls “variable renewable energy” means that what battery capacity we have isn’t nearly enough. We’ll need to increase it by orders of magnitude and across the country (and eventually the world, of course — but not every country is equally prepared to make this shift).
But the problem is this: Wind farms and solar make money, while storage facilities … don’t. Sure, they might break even on the long term, but they aren’t the easy money that solar farms have become. The most efficient and green energy storage options, like pumped hydro, are incredibly expensive and limited in the locations they can be built. While the most easily accessed technologies, like lithium-ion batteries, are widespread but neither capacious nor organized enough to serve as a grid supplement.
They’re also very expensive, and, since the greenie-weenies restrict our ability to mine the materials required to build the massive batteries, rather difficult to create
This is where the Department of Energy needs to step in, MIT says. The federal government has the means both to subsidize the utilization of existing storage options and to fund intensive research into new and promising ones. A hydrogen energy storage system could be a game changer, the report notes, but it isn’t going to fund itself. Like other critical infrastructure, it must be paid for up front by the feds and paid off over time.
So, basically, the Government needs to build them, and pay for the monetary loss incurred with the batteries. Because why would the private sector build them if they are going to lose money? These energy companies are making nice bank on the expensive cost of the wind turbines and solar farms. I will say, though, that I have said for a long time that if the feds want to spend taxpayer money on the “green” stuff (I’ve also stated many times that I am in favor of clean energy), spend it on research and development.
And then there’s the matter of the cost of the energy itself. The report warns that even with adequate storage, the cost of power would fluctuate far beyond the norms we’ve established today with our consistent (but dirty) fuel-based sources of energy. Maybe peak power today costs twice as much as off-peak power — but in 10 years, that gap could be much wider. On one hand, the low-end cost would be nearly zero — but peak power might be far more expensive.
Wait, it’s expensive? Huh. Who knew?
The U.S. is at a good point for the feds to step in, and if they do so it will be watched eagerly by other countries working on making a similar leap. The report notes that India, for a number of reasons, is also facing a growing power and emissions crisis, and the U.S. may serve as a useful test bed for proving out technologies that could serve their larger population similarly well.
And then the feds have compete control over your energy usage. They’ll know what you use, and we can all trust the federal government to do the right thing, to take a light touch, to leave you alone, right? Really, this is not sustainable or affordable at this time, and it will be a long time before it is, unless there is some breakthrough.
A state judge has entered an injunction that will block Gov. Tom Wolf’s second-term crusade to ramp up Pennsylvania’s role in the worldwide struggle against climate change.
Commonwealth Court Judge Michael Wojcik’s ruling prevents, for now, the state from entering the multi-state Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. The policy was to take effect this month.
Environmental groups decried the ruling, and Gov. Wolf’s spokeswoman, Elizabeth Rementer, said the Department of Environmental Protection will appeal Wojcik’s decision to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
“While only temporary, the court’s decision is yet another roadblock and stalling tactic from RGGI opponents,” said Jessica O’Neill, lead attorney for PennFuture, Clean Air Council, Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council. “The impact that RGGI will have on the health, safety and welfare of our members, our climate and our environment cannot be overstated. Simply put, RGGI will save lives, create jobs and lower Pennsylvania’s carbon footprint at a time when we need it most.
Was joining RGGI authorized by the duly elected Pennsylvania general assembly?
“The court made the right choice today in pausing implementation of RGGI,” said Sen. Gene Yaw, R-Lycoming County, “and I am optimistic that we will succeed on the merits of the case. We need to pursue climate solutions that encourage collaboration with our energy sector, not regressive and unconstitutional taxes meant to destroy it and leave us reliant on foreign oil and gas for decades to come.” (snip)
In Pennsylvania, the Legislature’s Republican majorities and coal producers have strenuously battled Wolf’s plan, arguing that the price of the credits is in actuality a tax because it will raise end-of-line electricity costs, which the state’s Constitution says can only be levied with legislative approval. It also amounts to an agreement with other states.
“These kinds of course-setting decisions are reserved for the Legislature,” the state Senate’s attorneys argued this spring, calling for the administration’s push to be halted.
And in Pennsylvania, it is also clear, the plan will not pass the Republican-led House and Senate at this time.
Warmists, though, do not care about the law, or the Constitution of Pennsylvania. They want to jam their beliefs on Everyone Else, while refusing to live the life. Kinda like how all the big shots in the Chinese and Russian communist parties advocated for equality and workers rights and stuff, then killed tens of millions, brutalized and stuck tens of millions more, impoverished them, etc, all while living high on the hog.
Race relations were actually pretty good before Obama came into office, at which point things started to get bad. For most people, it really is fine. They don’t think about it that much, they don’t engage in it, they don’t talk about it. They just see another human being. But, there are some really vocal people who seem intent on starting a race war, and the anti-white people are as bad as the racists in what’s left of the KKK/ They constantly say negative things about white people, denigrate them, assault them, tear them down, but, if you say something about non-white people, oh, then you’re the raaaaacist
An academic article, styled as a “love letter” that seeks to provide the “consciousness needed to eradicate whiteness,” was published by the International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education.
“We must actively and collectively help to do the work of disrupting, dismantling, and eradicating whiteness,” California State University East Bay professor G.T. Reyes says in his call to teachers.
Titled “A love letter to educational leaders of Color: “CREWing UP” with critical whiteness studies” the article called on scholars, including white scholars, to “fully humanize themselves by abandoning whiteness, destroying it, and sending it to its grave.” Reyes quoted another article when he said that this is the “greatest act of love whites can show.”
The summary of the article, archived here, explains that the letter is addressed to scholars of critical whiteness studies and intends to engage in “intentional healing rooted in humanizing, revolutionary, and decolonial love” as it prepares them to oppose whiteness.
These people only want to see things in terms of skin color, rather than, say, content of character. They want to generalize everything. All they’ll end up doing is creating more strife. And, let’s be honest, this is primarily pitting blacks against whites. Asians and Latinos aren’t really involved, and most do not want to be dragged into it. And, so much of critical race theory is anti-Asian and anti-Latino, primarily being pro-black. If these people want to create strife and hatred, well, there’s a hell of a lot more white people in the U.S. than blacks. We would prefer not to be involved, though.
That’s so special. When do we get the rule for reducing Joe’s footprint, as he’ll be taking yet another fossil fueled helicopter ride to Delaware, followed by a large convoy of vehicles. How about Transportation Secretary Mayor Pete, who took a fossil fueled flight to Los Angeles (again)?
A proposed rule released by the Biden administration Thursday would require states and cities to set carbon emission reduction targets for transportation.
The draft rule would require state transportation departments and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) with National Highway System mileage within their boundaries to both measure their transportation-related emissions and develop reduction targets.
This would build on existing regulations that require those institutions to track other forms of air pollutants. Transportation is the single largest source of carbon emissions.
Under the terms of the rule, both state departments of transportation and MPOs would be required to report their progress on meeting their emissions goals twice a year. The proposal contains no specific requirements for the goals, saying it would allow states and cities to determine which targets “are appropriate for their communities and … work for their respective climate change and other policy priorities.”
On first glance, one could say “by what right does the federal government have to dictate this? It’s not assigned in the Constitution as a power.” However, all those roads paid for with federal money could be argued to give the feds the authority. I wouldn’t be surprised if a whole bunch of states sue the minute it’s enacted, using the result of the recent West Virginia v EPA ruling. They can claim that the money is actually that of the state citizens, taken by the IRS, so, it’s a state issue. Should be interesting
“With today’s announcement, we are taking an important step forward in tackling transportation’s share of the climate challenge, and we don’t have a moment to waste,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a statement. “Our approach gives states the flexibility they need to set their own emission reduction targets, while providing them with resources from President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to meet those targets and protect their communities.”
If the states that will oppose this are smart, they’ll ask what the plan is for Pete, Joe, and others who believe in this scam, and point out their high use of fossil fueled travel. Those states will also either ignore this rule, saying “go ahead and try to force us”, or, perhaps just send a plan in that says “we see no need to make any changes. That’s our plan.”
But, yeah, this is exactly the kind of big rule that WV v EPA was all about, requiring the Legislative Branch to get involved.
…is a horrible pool constructed with evil concrete, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Gen Z Conservative, with a post on Brandon looking to federalize and protect abortion access (which will see immediate lawsuits)
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.
What a difference an administration makes.
Building wind and solar farms is an important part of building a new green grid, but a calm night stops their energy generation cold. It’s just as important to research and build green energy storage — and to that at scale requires federal intervention as soon as possible, suggests a new report from MIT.
A state judge has entered an injunction that will block Gov. Tom Wolf’s second-term crusade to ramp up Pennsylvania’s role in the worldwide struggle against climate change.
An academic article, styled as a “love letter” that seeks to provide the “consciousness needed to eradicate whiteness,” was published by the International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education.
A proposed rule released by the Biden administration Thursday would require states and cities to set carbon emission reduction targets for transportation.
