Brandon Limits White House Christmas Party For Regular Folks, Still Doing Party For Dem Big Wigs

By William Teach December 15, 2021 – 6:45 am

If everyone is vaccinated, why can’t they go to a party? Wasn’t that rather the point of getting vaccinated?

Report: White House Cancels Christmas Parties After Hosting Holiday Bash for Democrats

Biden Brain SuckerPresident Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden on Tuesday canceled White House Christmas parties over Omicron variant coronovirus fears, according to the Daily Mail.

While Joe Biden, Vice President Harris, Jill Biden, and Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff will host the Democrat National Committee’s (DNC) holiday party elsewhere in Washington, DC, Tuesday evening, the Bidens have canceled many of the traditional White House Christmas celebrations that afford private citizens a glimpse into the mansion’s Christmas cheer.

“In the coming days, we will host a limited number of Holiday Open Houses, inviting guests to see the Christmas decorations in person at the White House,” Jill Biden’s spokesman, Michael LaRosa, told the Daily Mail.

The White House typically invites many private guests for a self-guided tour of the first family’s residence, where photos are taken under the presidential seal among elaborate Christmas decorations and iconic art.

So, what’s limited? Half the normal? Maybe they’re worried about Joe showing up and saying stupid things. Meanwhile

(MarketWatch) Persistent inflation, a tough midterm-election outlook for Democrats and an ongoing grapple with the COVID-19 pandemic are shaping up to be some of President Joe Biden’s biggest challenges as he prepares to enter the second year of his presidency.

At the same time those and other factors are contributing to what at least one analyst says is Biden’s toughest task in the months ahead: persuading his fellow citizens that the U.S. is moving in the right direction.

“The biggest challenge for Biden is to convince the American people that the United States is on the right track,” said Ed Mills, Washington policy analyst at Raymond James. Inflation, COVID, geopolitical risk and fractured American politics all contribute to gloom among Americans — and heighten chances that voters will move toward the president’s opponents, says Mills.

Only 31% say the U.S. is on the right track. It doesn’t help that the producer price index keeps jumping up up up, and Brandon is not only doing nothing to help, but, doing lots to hurt. He’s instilling zero confidence in consumers. He wanted the big seat, and he’s messing everything up. His focus is on Build Back Better, which would make things worse, and everything unrelated.

Read: Brandon Limits White House Christmas Party For Regular Folks, Still Doing Party For Dem Big Wigs »

Posted in Christmas, Economy, Joe Biden | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

People’s Republik Of California’s Tourism Industry To Tackle ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach December 14, 2021 – 3:00 pm

Because that’s really the problem with California

California tourism industry tackles climate change

Perhaps more than any sector of the North Bay and state’s economy, the tourism and hospitality industry and its ability to lure visitors is being severely tested by climate change.

“As an industry, we must acknowledge the climate threat to tourism and live up to California’s well-deserved reputation as the best steward of the environment by encouraging responsible travel and adopting green practices,” Caroline Beteta, CEO of Visit California, said in a Nov. 4 statement. “The opportunity to act has never been greater.”

Beteta’s message is not hyperbole. In 2019, before the pandemic, the state’s tourism industry contributed $145 billion to California’s economy, capping a decade of annual revenue growth. But that growth stalled in 2020, dropping by 55%.

The state’s tourism officials are examining how evidence of climate change – such as season after season of wildfires and drought – colors the way potential visitors see wine country.

Right, right, because that’s what the problem is. Couldn’t have anything to do with the Chinese coronavirus and the state’s restrictions, could it? Since this is a bay area publication, all the poop, urine, used drug needles, and homeless has no bearing, right? Or the high rate of theft, including autos? The smash and grabs? It’s rather doubtful that wildfires, which are almost always caused by people (intentionally and unintentionally), is having any bearing on this. Maybe the high costs of everything? Visitors do not care about drought.

Napa Green’s certification program is on the cusp of being extended to the hospitality sector, said Gallagher, who sits on the organization’s board of directors.

It will start with hotels.

“We intend to move forward with that this spring with a pilot program, where we will look at different sizes and classes of lodging properties all throughout the valley,” Gallagher said. “We’ll have one pilot participant (each) in Calistoga, St. Helena, Yountville, in the city of Napa and in American Canyon, as well as the unincorporated county.”

In other words, the cost of a hotel room and the food will go up up up.

The work involves shifting Sonoma County Tourism’s focus from promoting the wine country destination as an ideal getaway, to emphasizing the need to preserve the region’s natural resources. It’s a messaging effort targeted toward visitors with the same mindset, Vecchio said.

“It was no longer going to be a numbers game, no longer about just touting the number of people who came into Sonoma County,” she said.

That’s good, because this will limit people coming. It’s like a beach touting it’s “green” cred, rather than the beach and all the stuff you can do there. People come for the wines, not the lectures. Anyhow, good luck with this.

Read: People’s Republik Of California’s Tourism Industry To Tackle ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Economy, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 14, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is an Evil fossil fueled vehicle causing big tornadoes, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on parade organizers getting upset over a float.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 21 Comments | Trackback URL

Survey Finds Most Employers Won’t Have Vaccine Mandate If Biden’s Is Shot Down In Court

By William Teach December 14, 2021 – 10:30 am

This is rather a big switch. Not that long ago a majority of businesses were talking about implementing a vaccine mandate. Now, in mid-December, that’s changed

Survey finds 75% of employers won’t have vaccine ban if US mandate is struck down

More than two-thirds of U.S. employers recently surveyed have no plans to make vaccination a condition of work, if courts ultimately strike down the Biden administration’s mandate for large employers.

According to the survey of 1,000 randomly selected members of the Society for Human Resources Management, 75% said they’re not likely to implement either of the mandate’s central directives — full vaccination or weekly testing — should a permanent court ruling make the measure illegal.

“The majority of employers and HR professionals that we chatted with are really in wait-and-see-mode,” Annemarie Schaefer, SHRM’s head of research, told Yahoo Finance. “So they don’t even know what to expect.”

Fifty-one percent of employers with 100 or more employees who responded to the survey indicated they will hold off on vaccination policy decisions until the legal challenges are settled. (Fifty-three percent of the 1,000 respondents employed more than 100 workers.)

There was a lot of support for this early on from businesses, that seems to have cooled off.

According to SHRM, employers subject to the mandate cited numerous challenges to implementing it. Seventy-three percent said the legal challenges made implementation difficult, while 65% said the rule poses challenges for managing employee morale. Fifty-nine percent cited record keeping requirements as sticking points, while 56% cited employee retention concerns.

And, perhaps, once Brandon’s un-Constitutional mandates are shot down, there might be more companies that do implement their own versions, be it requiring vaccination, masking and testing for the un-vaxxed (you’d think they might have done this long ago if it was Important), or both. I suspect most will look and say “we’ve barely had any issues in almost two years, there’s no need to complicate things.” In a business with around 100 employees in the building I’ve only seen the COVID notice perhaps 8-10 times since this began, and none have gotten seriously ill. A couple have been due to being around a family member who had it, so, they sat out and got tested.

Without Brandon’s mandates most will just work to get back to normal while Brandon tries to extend things out.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court declined to take up the health care mandate for NY State, which has no religious exemptions. They did not say why, but, really, this is the right decision. It’s a state thing, not a federal thing.

Read: Survey Finds Most Employers Won’t Have Vaccine Mandate If Biden’s Is Shot Down In Court »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, Constitution, Joe Biden | 23 Comments | Trackback URL

Russia Says “Nyet” On UN Resolution Linking Climate Crisis (scam) And Security (oh, and India)

By William Teach December 14, 2021 – 7:00 am

Kinda crazy when the only rational nation is Russia, which, as the old saying goes, even a broken clock is correct twice a day (oh, and India)

Russia vetoes UN resolution linking climate change, security

Russia on Monday vetoed a first-of-its-kind U.N. Security Council resolution casting climate change as a threat to international peace and security, a vote that sank a years-long effort to make global warming a more central consideration for the U.N.’s most powerful body.

Spearheaded by Ireland and Niger, the proposal called for “incorporating information on the security implications of climate change” into the council’s strategies for managing conflicts and into peacekeeping operations and political missions, at least sometimes. The measure also asked the U.N. secretary-general to make climate-related security risks “a central component” of conflict prevention efforts and to report on how to address those risks in specific hotspots.

“It’s long overdue” that the U.N.’s foremost security-related body take up the issue, Irish Ambassador Geraldine Byrne Nason said.

So, stupid climate cult stuff, interjecting ‘climate change’ into the mix rather than focusing on what the actual security issues are. The headline is something else, and forgot something. Is ABC prejudiced against Indians?

But India and veto-wielding Russia voted no, while China abstained.

So, kinda click-baity headline, trying to make it seem like the only nation against was Russia. How many will make it down to the 7th paragraph to see that India also voted against? Sure, they don’t have veto power like Russia, but, what, are they chumps?

Their envoys said the issue should remain with broader U.N. groups, such as the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Adding climate change to the Security Council’s purview would only deepen global divisions that were pointed up by last month’s climate talks in Glasgow, Scotland, the opponents said. The talks ended in a deal that recommitted to a key target for limiting warming and broke some new ground but fell short of the U.N.’s three big goals for the conference.

Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia complained that Monday’s proposed resolution would turn “a scientific and economic issue into a politicized question,” divert the council’s attention from what he called “genuine” sources of conflict in various places and give the council a pretext to intervene in virtually any country on the planet.

India and China questioned the idea of tying conflict to climate, and they predicted trouble for the Glasgow commitments if the Security Council — a body that can impose sanctions and dispatch peacekeeping troops — started weighing in more.

This is rather like real environmental issues: slapping climate doom into the mix makes it much, much tougher to deal with the real issues.

Read: Russia Says “Nyet” On UN Resolution Linking Climate Crisis (scam) And Security (oh, and India) »

Posted in Global Warming, UN | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

U.K. Poll Shows One In Three Want The Unvaccinated Locked Down

By William Teach December 14, 2021 – 6:45 am

Why? Why would they need this if vaccines protect the recipient from the Chinese coronavirus? What’s the point of the vaccines if they do not protect from COVID?

Unvaccinated should be forced into Covid lockdown, one in three people believe

One in three people believe that those who remain unvaccinated should be forced into a lockdown until the Covid-19 pandemic has passed, according to a poll.

A survey by ORB found significant public support for applying harsher measures to those who have not been jabbed, in a finding one researcher suggested stemmed from the unvaccinated being wrongly “blamed and ‘othered'”.

The poll comes after Boris Johnson said it was time to have a “national conversation” about “ways in which we deal with this pandemic”, adding: “I don’t think we can keep going indefinitely with non-pharmaceutical interventions, I mean restrictions on people’s way of life, just because a substantial proportion of the population still sadly has not got vaccinated.” (snip)

The ORB survey of 2,067 adults found that 35 per cent believed that those who remain unvaccinated should be forced into a lockdown until the pandemic has passed, while 48 per cent disagreed. Almost one in three (32 per cent) of people disagreed that those who are unvaccinated should have the same access to hospital procedures, compared to 55 per cent who agreed.

Well, that seems like a good thing, that the majority do not want to essentially throw the unvaxxed into compulsory “jail.”

Separately, 59 per cent said it should be compulsory for all workers to be vaccinated, as is due to be the case in New York from later this month. The same proportion (59 per cent) agreed that those who are refusing to take the vaccine should not be allowed into restaurants, pubs and cinemas, while more than two in three people (68 per cent) would support pub or restaurant owners who ban unvaccinated people from their venues.

If I’m vaxxed (and I’m boosterized™), I could care less about you. If you want to take the chance, that’s on you. I’ll get a flu shot. Usually. If you don’t want to, that’s on you.

Alex de Figueiredo, a research fellow at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said: “Countries around the world have made freedom conditional on vaccination. We are now seeing countries which have vaccine passport or mandate policies unable to control rapidly rising infections. Instead of considering whether these policies are effective, it seems many politicians and journalists are blaming and ‘othering’ the unvaccinated … These policies will likely seed division, distrust, and could have profound consequences for trust in the government or public health policies.”

“Freedom conditional on vaccination.” Yet, they continue to try and find ways to limit the freedom of even those who are vaccinated. The UK is much different from the U.S. on freedoms. The citizens might want to consider limiting their government now, because we’re having a tough enough time here in the U.S.

Read: U.K. Poll Shows One In Three Want The Unvaccinated Locked Down »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus | Comments Off on U.K. Poll Shows One In Three Want The Unvaccinated Locked Down | Trackback URL

Climate Cult Wants America Sanctioned For Being A Climate Heretic

By William Teach December 13, 2021 – 2:58 pm

Well, I have to admit, after all the years watching this stuff, this is a new one

Dear countries at the Madrid climate talks, we’re a rogue superpower. Sanction us, please.

A sinister rogue state poses a clear and present danger to humanity. In fact, an opportunity for the international community to stand up to this scofflaw nation just opened this week.

This rogue state isn’t Iran, Venezuela or any other country the U.S. foreign policy establishment typically demonizes — it’s the United States itself.

The global scientific community is clear that our warming climate, driven primarily by burning fossil fuels, threatens the future of humanity. Yet many of the world’s major economies continue to increase their support for fossil fuel production. Trying to phase out fossil fuels while continuing to extract them is, to put it mildly, ineffective.

(lots of whining about how Evil America is, even without Trump)

What better forum to start publicly naming and shaming the rogue U.S. regime than at the U.N. climate talks underway in Madrid? It will reflect poorly on self-proclaimed climate leaders worldwide if they allow a climate rogue state like the United States to attend the climate talks like a “normal” country.

Go ahead, sanction the U.S. Let’s see what happens when you need our money, skill, and military.

Read: Climate Cult Wants America Sanctioned For Being A Climate Heretic »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 13, 2021 – 1:00 pm

…is a calm, rising ocean that will soon wipe out all coastal cities, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on the Left’s message to the woman who oppose gender confused athletes.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: Showing Boobs On The Beach Could Go To The Supreme Court

By William Teach December 13, 2021 – 10:30 am

Will the Supreme Court take up the issue? Might they be amused enough that people will spend gobs of money on this? I have my doubts, because it really seems more of something that is a 10th Amendment issue, not a federal constitution issue

Could Ocean City’s topless ordinance head to the Supreme Court? The latest legal battle

The constitutionality of Ocean City’s law banning women — and not men — from sunbathing topless could potentially go before the U.S. Supreme Court after the attorneys representing five women in the case petitioned the nation’s highest court earlier this month.

The petitioners are asking the Supreme Court to review the Aug. 4 federal appeals court ruling, which determined that Ocean City’s law is constitutional.

This petition was filed Dec. 1, and the court has until Jan. 7 to respond, according to the U.S. Supreme Court docket.

While the Supreme Court hears only a small percentage of cases petitioned, this move continues a new chapter in the ongoing debate over what is protecting “moral sensibility” or violating gender equality in Maryland’s largest beach town.

In 2017, Ocean City passed a law banning only women from exposing their breasts in public. It came after one of the plaintiffs in the case, Chelsea Eline, contacted Ocean City police and said it was her right to go topless.

Eline and four other women then filed a lawsuit against the town in 2018, claiming that the ordinance violated their constitutional rights.

A federal judge first ruled in April 2020 that the town’s ordinance was legal and did not violate the U.S. Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, as the plaintiffs argued.

It doesn’t seem to violate, more importantly, the Maryland Constitution, because the federal Constitution really doesn’t say much of anything about not being able to pass any laws that keep people from walking around on the beech with the boobs hanging out. What’s next, showing full nudity? Walking around the streets with boobs hanging out? There’s always been morality laws and rules in society, some which are wrong, some which are just simple propriety.

After losing in federal court, which, really, should have never heard the case, referring it back to state court, they lost at the federal court of appeals

In this decision, Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. wrote that Ocean City’s elected leaders are within their rights to enact laws that protect public sensibilities.

“The judicial legacy of justifying laws on the basis of the perceived moral sensibilities of the public is far from spotless. Some government action that we now rightly view as unconstitutional, if not immoral, has been justified on that basis,” Quattlebaum wrote. “Even so, in this situation, protecting public sensibilities serves an important basis for government action.”

Some people just have this sense of Moral Outrage that they aren’t allowed to do everything they want in public, and want to force everyone to comply with their demands. And, no, restricting women to keeping their boobs covered at the beach is not the same as making them wear a full body covering nor telling blacks they can’t ride at the front of the bus. But, they’re still petitioning the Supreme Court

This latest move asks the court to declare that Ocean City’s ordinance violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution “because the discriminatory gender classification contained in the ordinance does not further an important governmental interest, and is not narrowly tailored to achieve its objective.”

It’s a pretty big stretch. But, amusing.

Read: Good News: Showing Boobs On The Beach Could Go To The Supreme Court »

Posted in Constitution, States Rights | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

LA Times Advocates To Close Nuclear Power Plant, As There Are Better Ways To Fight Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach December 13, 2021 – 7:00 am

Yet, none of those “better ways” are ready to go, but, hey, let California be the experimental group so we can see what happens. And lets start by requiring the LA Times building to run solely on renewables

Editorial: No, California shouldn’t extend the life of its last nuclear plant. There are better ways to fight climate change

California is approaching an energy crossroads. In three years, its last nuclear plant will begin to power down and the state will lose its largest single source of emissions-free electricity.

A 2018 law requires state regulators to “avoid any increase in greenhouse gases” as a result of closing the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant on the Central Coast. But if they don’t move more quickly to replace its electricity with renewable energy from wind, solar and geothermal, the void will almost certainly be filled by burning more natural gas, which increased last year to account for nearly half of California’s in-state electricity generation.

California can’t allow the retirement of Diablo Canyon’s nuclear reactors to prolong its reliance on gas plants or increase planet-warming and health-damaging emissions. But the state’s preparations for shutdown of an around-the-clock power source that supplies more than 8% of California’s in-state electricity generation have not inspired confidence; there have been no assurances that an uptick in carbon emissions will be avoided.

That uncertainty has created an opening for a new push to extend Diablo Canyon’s life. A recently launched campaign, whose supporters include former U.S. Energy secretaries Steven Chu and Ernest Moniz, and fashion model and nuclear influencer Isabelle Boemeke, wants California to abruptly reverse course and keep Diablo Canyon operating for another 10 or even 20 years.

8% doesn’t seem like a lot, but, what does it get replaced with? They need energy from somewhere

But the idea is misguided, and at this point remains largely divorced from reality. The plant’s closure should instead serve as an impetus for California do more to accelerate the shift to renewable energy and set a realistic course to meet the state’s target of getting 100% of its electricity from carbon-free sources by 2045.

So, the better idea is to close it, not replace with natural gas, and just wait another 25 years for “renewables” to be operational. Great plan!

Read: LA Times Advocates To Close Nuclear Power Plant, As There Are Better Ways To Fight Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Energy, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove