2021 Was A Doomy Year For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach January 14, 2022 – 2:54 pm

Especially that winter storm in the Southwest

Weather events cost the US $145bn in 2021 as climate change took hold

Global temperatures in 2021 were the sixth-warmest on record while the US experienced its fourth-warmest year and suffered 20 severe natural disasters that inflicted damage costing more than $145bn, according to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Even though 2021 temperatures were slightly cooler than the previous two years, the western US was still devastated by a number of wildfires that caused damage costing more than $10bn.

Every single one of those wildfires were caused by people being stupid and starting the fires, intentionally or unintentionally.

Other severe weather events included the Texas winter storm in February, inflicting $24bn in damages, and Hurricane Ida in late August, that caused destruction costing $75bn.

“Unfortunately, we expect to see more of these extremes in a warmer world,” said Russell Vose, head of climate monitoring for NOAA. “And some of these events were made much worse by global warming, such as the heatwave in the Pacific Northwest.”

See? Harsh winter storms are caused by you driving a fossil fueled vehicle and releasing greenhouse gases. Here’s where it gets really interesting

Two factors contributed to make 2021 slightly cooler than the previous two years: the La Niña weather pattern across the Pacific as well as the resumption of economic activity that causes aerosols in the atmosphere.

Aerosols, which are small particles suspended in the atmosphere, can have a cooling effect as they reflect back some sunlight.

“In 2020, we estimated that lockdowns had increased the temperature of the planet slightly, due to the clearing out of nitrates and other aerosols,” said Gavin Schmidt, director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. “So 2021 would have been a relatively cool year, even without La Niña.”

So, if La Nina was a big driver, why can’t nature be the primary driver, rather than “carbon pollution”? Further, there are other things that do drive localized temperatures from mankind. Certainly, in rural areas you don’t have this problem, but, in big cities you will. Urban heat island effect/land use from mankind has a localized effect. You should have had more radiative cooling with fewer particulates in the air. And those particulates are at lower levels than the greenhouse gases.

A similar study from Nasa, also released this week, found that 2021 was tied with 2018 for sixth-warmest year globally, due to a different baseline and methodology.

Why are we using different baselines and methodologies? Sounds like the climate cult is trying to get the outcome they want, rather than letting the science, data, and facts determine the outcome.

Read: 2021 Was A Doomy Year For ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 14, 2022 – 1:00 pm

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

The blog of the day is Da Techguy’s Blog, with a post on who didn’t hide the effects of hydroxychloriquine.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 22 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrats Preparing New COVID Proposals To Make Up For “Biden Shortfalls”

By William Teach January 14, 2022 – 10:30 am

We’re almost two years into the national freakout and Democrats have Ideas!

Dems try to make up for Biden COVID shortfalls with new proposals

Congressional Democrats are trying to backfill for perceived shortfalls in the Biden administration’s coronavirus response with a wave of new bill filings.

Why it matters: The legislative spurt is a reflection of the dread Democrats feel ahead of this fall’s midterm elections. Republicans are already trying to capitalize on the discontent.

Driving the news: Reps. Don Beyer (D-Va.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.) and Joe Morelle (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday introduced a bill that would require the federal government to provide universal free testing.

Khanna, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Reps. Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.) also introduced a bill on Wednesday to provide three N95 masks to every American.

What they’re saying: “The rapid spread of the Omicron variant over the past weeks suggests that Americans are in a dramatically more vulnerable position than we had anticipated being just last month. There is no time to waste,” the letter said.

Yet, they didn’t do this when America was dealing with the rapid spread of the much more deadly Delta variant. They just kind let it ride, and looked to pass more legislation that empowered the federal government and helped elected Democrats, while also spending time on their silly January 6th witch hunt. What will testing do, other than let people know they have the Chinese coronavirus? Why send N95 masks now? Locking the barn door, you know.

Joe Biden Angry One Third of Americans Are Not Wearing Masks During Pandemic

President Joe Biden complained that Americans had stopped wearing masks during the coronavirus pandemic, promising to send better-fitting masks to Americans for free.

“About one-third of Americans report they don’t wear a mask at all,” Biden noted disappointedly.

The president spoke about masking during a speech on his video set across the street from the White House on the ongoing battle against the coronavirus.

“I think it’s part of your patriotic duty,” he said about mask-wearing although he admitted, “it’s not that comfortable” and “it’s a pain in the neck” to wear them.

It’s such a part of your “patriotic duty” that he failed to wear one during his little speech

Biden announced he was developing plans to send more free masks to Americans so they would be encouraged to wear masks more often.

If you send me a turtleneck, I won’t wear it. As for one third, it’s probably a heck of a lot more than that

Nine states — California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Washington — require most people to wear masks in indoor public places, whether or not they have been vaccinated against COVID-19. Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico have similar orders in place.

Connecticut has an indoor mask mandate that extends only to the unvaccinated, and Rhode Island has a hybrid order that requires face-covering for all in large venues but gives smaller businesses leeway based on patrons’ vaccination status. Washington is the only state with an outdoor mask order, requiring face-covering at outside events attended by 500 or more people.

You know that once you get outside of the hardcore Democrat areas of Washington and NY, no one is wearing masks. You do have some individual cities and counties, like here in Raleigh and Wake County, that require masks. But, most people will not wear one if they are not required to, unless they are a crazy Democrat, who probably wears one when alone in the car, and maybe at home. Does Biden actually think people who don’t have to mask will mask? Think they will wear N95s that, by his own words, are uncomfortable? And aren’t made for small children? That have to be replaced, at the most, once a week? Especially when Biden seems to not wear a mask while he’s inside quite often, despite his own executive order?

Hey, I wonder if the masks will come with a message about being provided by Democrats or something?

Read: Democrats Preparing New COVID Proposals To Make Up For “Biden Shortfalls” »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, Democrats, Joe Biden | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

People’s Republik Of California To Spend $37 Billion On Climate Crisis (scam)

By William Teach January 14, 2022 – 7:00 am

Staying on the west coast, California will piss away the people’s money on a scam, all while unemployment claims skyrocket, inflation is rampant, housing prices are even higher than normal, homelessness is continuing to go up, and people are streaming out of the state, among other issues. All while still dealing with skyrocketing COVID infections and the issues from COVID

Here’s how California plans to spend $37 billion fighting climate change

When she first came to work in California during the Trump era, Lauren Sanchez says, the state’s climate budget was typically a few billion dollars a year, with much of that money automatically going to a couple of high-profile projects, including the bullet train through the Central Valley. That left climate policymakers and advocates fighting over a few hundred million dollars.

How times have changed. The latest budget proposal, unveiled this week by Gov. Gavin Newsom, includes $22 billion in new climate funding. It also allocates money from last year’s budget, for a total of $37 billion in climate spending over six years.

Sanchez, Newsom’s senior climate advisor, says it’s more than the large dollar figures that make this year’s budget different.

That leftover $15 billion sure could have helped California citizens, including those who the state is trying to take COVID relief payments back from, right? Those who lost their businesses from COVID restrictions?

She told me the proposed funding is laser-focused on equity, which means supporting the low-income communities and people of color hit hardest by extreme heat, shrinking water supplies and more extreme wildfires. She said the budget also reflects an “all of society, all of government response” to the climate crisis, with investments in education, healthcare and affordable housing.

Global warming is usually associated with despair, not hope. But with the right strategies and investments, Sanchez said, California can create sustainable jobs, unleash clean energy innovation and protect the most vulnerable from rising temperatures.

This really has nothing to do with Science, eh?

The governor proposed $6.1 billion in new funds to help Californians ditch gasoline, including $256 million in clean car rebates and other programs for low-income families, $900 million to build electric vehicle chargers in low-income neighborhoods and $419 million for “community-based transportation equity projects.” Those projects could include electric van pools for farmworkers, for instance, or infrastructure to support electric bikes or scooters — whatever local communities determine they most need.

Why would the “poor” need chargers in their neighborhoods when even middle class folks will have a tough time affording an EV? No chance they’ll be vandalized, eh?

Public schools would get $1.5 billion for green transportation, which state officials estimate is enough to convert about one-third of the bus fleet to electric. Passenger rail is another big winner, with Newsom proposing $4.2 billion for high-speed rail — aka the bullet train — and $3.25 billion for other transit and train projects, with some of that money carved out for Southern California.

The trains most people won’t take?

Half a billion dollars would go to “active transportation” projects that encourage walking and biking, along with $100 million for pedestrian and bicycle safety. Another $150 million would establish the Reconnecting Communities: Highways to Boulevards pilot program to convert underutilized highways into “multi-modal corridors” that could include walking paths and affordable housing — an effort to address the racist history of highway expansion that my colleague Liam Dillon has been writing about.

Good grief. “Active transportation”. That’s a new one. There’s a whole bunch of climate crazy, including

Sanchez was especially excited to talk about proposed investments that might not normally be considered part of a climate plan, but which she sees as critically important for helping Californians cope with — and work to prevent — rising temperatures.

One of those investments is $1 billion for new housing — and not just any housing, but “infill” housing within developed areas, rather than sprawling new subdivisions that create the need for long car trips. Newsom wants to spend $500 million building homes on “prime infill parcels in downtown-oriented areas.” Another $300 million would go to the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, which funds “land-use, housing, transportation and land preservation projects.”

In other words, stuffing low cost housing and all the urban blight that comes with it into middle class areas. You can bet it won’t happen in the richer neighborhoods.

7. Maybe Tesla will come back

Doubtful. Anyhow, have fun, California citizens. You voted for this, don’t be surprised when the money is wasted, they force you out of your fossil fueled vehicle, and raise your taxes, which goes great with energy costs skyrocketing, making everything else skyrocket.

Read: People’s Republik Of California To Spend $37 Billion On Climate Crisis (scam) »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Democrats, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Moonbat Recommends California Ban Parenthood

By William Teach January 14, 2022 – 6:45 am

I figured there was no point in a post on Biden losing on his employer vaccine mandate, you’ve surely already heard and read it at this point. I’m sure he’ll try something else. How about some true leftist insanity instead? I really was not sure about this, but

From the link (which I did first run into on Yahoo News)

If California is ever going to achieve true equity, the state must require parents to give away their children.

Today’s Californians often hold up equity — the goal of a just society completely free from bias — as our greatest value. Gov. Gavin Newsom makes decisions through “an equity lens.” Institutions from dance ensembles to tech companies have publicly pledged themselves to equity.

But their promises are no match for the power of parents.

Fathers and mothers with greater wealth and education are more likely to transfer these advantages to their children, compounding privilege over generations. As a result, children of less advantaged parents face an uphill struggle, social mobility has stalled, and democracy has been corrupted. More Californians are abandoning the dream; a recent Public Policy Institute of California poll found declining belief in the notion that you can get ahead through hard work.

My solution — making raising your own children illegal — is simple, and while we wait for the legislation to pass, we can act now: the rich and poor should trade kids, and homeowners might swap children with their homeless neighbors.

Now, I recognize that some naysayers will dismiss such a policy as ghastly, even totalitarian. But my proposal is quite modest, a fusion of traditional philosophy and today’s most common political obsessions.

You can see why I was unsure if this was satire or real. It is so over the top, that it’s hard to reconcile with reality, but, Modern Socialists are getting more and more bold in what they say and write, as we can see from their ‘climate change’ insanity.

The left’s introduction of anti-racism and gender identity in schools faces a bitter backlash from parents. Ending parenthood would end the backlash, helping dismantle white supremacy and outdated gender norms. Democrats also would have the opportunity to build a new pillar of the safety net — a child-raising system called “Foster Care for All.”

Again, that’s so crazy that you have to wonder if writer Joe Matthews was reading to much The Onion and Babylon Bee.

Over on the right, Republicans are happy to jettison parents’ rights in pursuit of their greatest passions, like violating migrant rights. Once you’ve gone so far as to take immigrant children from their parents and put them in border concentration camps, it’s a short walk to separating all Americans from their progeny.

Weird, because Obama did this first, and Biden still has them in camps.

Perhaps such coercion sounds dystopian. But just imagine the solidarity that universal orphanhood would create. Wouldn’t children, raised in one system, find it easier to collaborate on global problems?

Yikes! If I go through columns at various outlets and his twitter feed, this looks completely serious.

Read: Moonbat Recommends California Ban Parenthood »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: Solving ‘Climate Change” Leads To A Nationalized Financial System

By William Teach January 13, 2022 – 2:53 pm

Well, gee, I thought this was simply about reducing carbon emissions and saving the planet. No?

Climate change mitigation is creating a roadmap to a nationalized financial system

A Biden administration executive order issued in May required the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) and its member agencies to report on the risks that climate change pose for the financial sector and to recommend the measures needed to mitigate the purported risks.

The October report garnered little press attention even though it represents the first step in the administration’s plan to use Dodd-Frank Act powers to effectively nationalize and thoroughly politicize the financial system. Existing statutes will be used to promulgate new financial regulations that will allow the administration to control the allocation of investment capital under the pretext of controlling financial sector systemic risk.

What could possibly go wrong? Further, I’d like an apology from all those Warmists and Skeptics who said I was crazy in saying that this has little to do with science and everything to do with governmental power

The real paydirt for climate change doomsayers is transition risk. Transition risk is the risk that someday in the future, new information will convince government policymakers and consumers that the climate has reached “a tipping point” and that drastic steps must be enacted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions if humanity is to be saved from a global warming catastrophe.

According to this scenario, governments will respond by enacting policies that prohibit activities that generate emissions to prevent “The Day After Tomorrow” from happening. Households and financial institutions will immediately try to sell any asset linked to emissions-generating activities causing massive ”fire sale” losses for households and financial institutions. The crisis will intensify as these losses cascade through the financial system.

And Los Federales take over.

The real goal is to control the allocation of capital in the financial system using the regulatory powers of FSOC members. The regulatory agencies will impose new rules that restrict financial institutions’ ability to fund greenhouse gas emission-intensive activities. They will require businesses to disclose government-approved measures of their greenhouse gas emissions and then take steps to discourage investments in business or consumer loans linked to high greenhouse gas emissions.

But, don’t call Warmists authoritarian, you know. Remember when Biden and all those around him said he was a moderate? How you feeling about this stuff now, right side #NeverTrumpers?

Read: Good News: Solving ‘Climate Change” Leads To A Nationalized Financial System »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Economy, Global Warming, Joe Biden | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 13, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…is sky full of carbon pollution created clouds, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on a killing over $20.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Surprise: Grocery Store Shelves Are Empty Again

By William Teach January 13, 2022 – 10:30 am

Hey, remember this?

Stetler and lots of other liberals were doing this while attempting to protect Biden (even though CNN contradicted Mr. Potato). It’s not getting any better

Grocery stores still have empty shelves amid supply chain disruptions, omicron and winter storms

The new year hasn’t stopped ongoing food shortages.

Shortages at grocery stores across the country have grown more acute in recent weeks as omicron continues to spread and winter storms have piled on to the supply chain struggles and labor shortages.

The shortages being reported nationwide are widespread, impacting produce and meat as well as packaged goods such as cereal.

While items are harder to find, many also cost more with rising inflation.

The consumer price index jumped 7% last year, the fastest pace since 1982, the Labor Department said Wednesday. That’s up from 6.8% annually in November, which was also a nearly four-decade high.

The Lidl I go to was decently stocked, though seemed down on milk, bread, and eggs. The Walmart near me was wiped out on milk, juice, eggs, yogurt, and lunch meat the other day.

As the world reaches the two-year mark of the COVID-19 pandemic, more items are becoming scarce because of global supply chain disruptions such as congestion at ports and shortages of truck drivers and service workers.

Part of the scarcity consumers are seeing on store shelves is due to pandemic trends that never abated – and are exacerbated by omicron. Americans are eating at home more than they used to, especially since offices and some schools remain closed.

And Biden is doing what, to help? Mostly getting in the way, implementing rules and regs that hurt.

U.S. groceries typically have 5% to 10% of their items out of stock at any given time; right now, that unavailability rate is hovering around 15%, according to Consumer Brands Association President and CEO Geoff Freeman.

So, you might not notice it as much for some things, but, take a look at the quantity. Where there might have been 10 on the shelf, you now have 5. Anyhow, the article goes through many items which are in short supply, like cream cheese, baby food, cat and dog food, chicken tenders (wasn’t a problem last night at Lidl, but, there were a lot less on the rack), toilet paper (wasn’t a problem at Lidl. Didn’t look while I was at Walmart last week), and others. But, you’re also getting into pricing

I noticed ground beef prices way up. And there are fewer sales on stuff at the grocery store (and other places). You can thank China for all this, for messing around with a coronavirus then releasing it, intentionally or unintentionally. Again, though, Biden is making things worse.

Read: Surprise: Grocery Store Shelves Are Empty Again »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, Economy, Joe Biden | 25 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Only Five Percent Are Looking To Buy An Electric Vehicle

By William Teach January 13, 2022 – 8:21 am

For all the talk from Biden and other Democrats, such as California gov Newsom, about making people buy EVs, there’s not a lot of interest in doing so. For all the manufacturers who are talking about how many EVs they’re going to be producing, consumers are not clamoring for them. Which is why the two biggest automakers, Toyota and Honda, the ones who make the best vehicles, the ones who pay the best attention to what consumers want, are not really involved with this whole EV push. They’re happy to make good, reliable, dependable, affordable, long lasting, great residual fossil fueled vehicles and hybrids

Does Anyone Even Want an Electric Car?

electric vehicleWhatever the technological promise or pitfalls of electric vehicles, the real challenge lies in getting consumers eager to buy them. And that’s proven to be at least as difficult as making batteries last and building out a comprehensive charging infrastructure. A new report from the big-time, grownup-pants Deloitte consulting firm indicates just how big an undertaking that is proving to be.

Deloitte’s “2022 Global Automotive Consumer Study” goes into granular detail about the buyer expectations that will drive the automotive market in the coming years. It’s all based on a survey of 26,000 consumers in 25 countries. Road & Track has been reliably informed one of those countries is the United States, which is still located in North America. The whole report is available at this link as a PDF.

Much of what Deloitte reports is unsurprising. People still vastly prefer personal vehicles over public transportation; are willing to embrace high technology as long as they don’t have to pay for it; still want to buy new vehicles in-person and not over the internet; and are fine with electric vehicles as long as they’re affordable and at least as good as those relying on internal combustion.

Of course, consumers also know EVs aren’t. When the least expensive one is a Mini at $31k with a range of 110 miles, that doesn’t fly. Not when they can get the top end Civic, the Touring model, for less. Same for Toyota and their Corolla. Especially not when so many are going into SUVs, including the subcompacts (like the HRV, CHR, Kona, Crosstrek, and others), which were the fastest growing segment of car sales prior to COVID. People were moving from compact cars to the subcompact SUVs, which are the same size.

The big insights come with the subject of intentionality. That is what consumers expect to buy next. In the U.S., fully 69 percent of consumers expect their next vehicle to be powered by internal combustion. Another 22 percent will go for some sort of hybrid. But still, amid all of this, only about five percent of Americans expect their next vehicle will be a fully-electric, battery-fueled machine.

Oops! The average price of an EV is $54000. You can get a fully loaded Accord or Camry hybrid for around $37K, and know it will last, and you won’t get range anxiety.

Governments are driving forward with aggressive plans for converting the vehicle fleet to alternative fuels. What prominently emerges from the Deloitte report is that ambitions are one thing, and reality is something else.

It is. Just because you build it doesn’t mean they will come. Further, forcing everyone into an EV is not the job of the American government. Not their business. Not their duty.

BTW, just for comparison, that photo above, which I’ve used plenty of times, is a BMW i3. MSRP starts at $45K (also looks to be cancelled for 2022 model year). I see an ad at the moment at Carvana for a 2018 with 32k miles for $23990. So, it dropped about 50% in this used car climate, while my 2018 Accord Sport with 26k miles is worth almost what I paid for it. Meaning that when it goes on a lot for sale it will sell for as much if not more than MSRP. EVs do not hold value, because few want them used.

Read: Bummer: Only Five Percent Are Looking To Buy An Electric Vehicle »

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

Senate Democrats Switch Tactics, Want To Have A Public Debate On Federal Voting Takeover Bill

By William Teach January 13, 2022 – 8:00 am

Well, this is interesting. Shouldn’t there be a public debate on any big bill? Shouldn’t elected officials be telling their constituents what the bill does? Shouldn’t they be have a long debate on the floor of Congress?

Dems switch strategy on voting bill as Biden pushes action

Senate Democrats are trying to force a public showdown over their sweeping elections legislation, aiming to launch debate on a key party priority even though there’s no assurance the bill will come to a vote.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer outlined the plan in a memo obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, on the eve of President Joe Biden’s visit to meet privately with Senate Democrats about the path forward. It still leaves the Democrats in need of a way to force a vote on the legislation, now blocked by a Republican filibuster.

“We will finally have an opportunity to debate voting rights legislation — something that Republicans have thus far denied,” Schumer wrote in the memo to his Democratic colleagues, which described a workaround to avoid a Republican filibuster that for months has blocked formal debate over the legislation on the Senate floor. “Senators can finally make clear to the American people where they stand on protecting our democracy and preserving the right of every eligible American to cast a ballot.”

They’ve had plenty of time to debate it. They could debate it on the floor of the Senate. Easy. Because saying they want to debate now makes it look like they were hiding things. And they were. They really will not like what Republicans have to say in rebuttal. Besides the notion that if the bill passes and is signed by Brandon, Constitutional lawsuits will fly fast and furious.

The strategy does little to resolve the central problem Democrats face — they lack Republican support to pass the elections legislation on a bipartisan basis, but also don’t have support from all 50 Democrats for changing the Senate rules to allow passage on their own. But the latest tactic could create an off-ramp from their initial approach, which was to force a vote by Monday on Senate filibuster changes as a way to pressure Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona to go along.

Not sure how, since the GOP won’t vote for it, Manchin and Sinema won’t vote for it, and there are reports that several other Democrats do not support killing the filibuster. They know that there’s a good chance the GOP takes the Senate in 2022, and, if not then, they’ll get it in the future.

By setting up a debate, Schumer will achieve the Democrats’ goal of shining a spotlight that spurs senators to say where they stand. The floor debate could stretch for days and carry echoes of civil rights battles a generation ago that led to some of the most famous filibusters in Senate history.

And how many citizens will get behind the federal government taking over all state and local elections? These people in far off D.C. with little connection to the average citizen controlling all voting. Senate Democrats are overestimating the support. Especially when things like Voter ID is popular, and required in 35 states. Biden is out there going thunder and brimstone (and lies, plenty of those), which should tell you a lot about the Democrats intentions, because they really cannot discuss the bill on what it actually does, just demagogue rhetoric. Is the public clamoring for this? Not in the least. They care about the collapsing economy.

Marco Rubio had an interesting speech on why this bill is bad, which includes

They don’t seem concerned that Americans will be fired or not allowed into a restaurant without papers, a vaccine card. The real problem is how dare you ask them to produce a voter I.D., a photo I.D. in order to vote. That’s the real problem.

How can this be? How can there be such an enormous disconnect between what real people in the real world care about and are talking about on the daily basis? And what we’re going to spend time talking about here in the speeches over the last week, it isn’t about the Capitol riot. Everyone agrees the Capitol riot was terrible and shouldn’t have happened. I think most everyone does.

But these are some of the same people that downplayed it. Over 700 riots, thousands of cases of looting that happened in America in the summer of 2020. It most certainly isn’t about election laws passed in the last year. They’ve been pushing these same bills with different titles and names, they’ve been pushing all of this for the better part of a decade.

I wonder what this is all about

Because it’s about power. Not just the power to change election laws. We’ve seen it. It’s about the power to tell you what you’re allowed to say. It’s about the power to tell you where you’re allowed to go. About the power to tell you what you’re allowed to do. It’s about the power to intimidate, destroy, smear, to call a racist, bigot, hater — anyone who dares get in your was I or disagree with you. It’s about the power to do that. Let me tell you something, I was raised by and have lived my entire life alongside people who lost their country, the country of their birth to power-hungry people just like that. I warn you, do not stand by and allow it to happen to this one.

Couldn’t be, right?

Read: Senate Democrats Switch Tactics, Want To Have A Public Debate On Federal Voting Takeover Bill »

Posted in Constitution, Democrats, Elections, Joe Biden, States Rights | Comments Off on Senate Democrats Switch Tactics, Want To Have A Public Debate On Federal Voting Takeover Bill | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove