Who’s Up For Climate Cult Being Locked In By Law For Military?

By William Teach May 28, 2022 – 7:15 am

Hey, Democrats couldn’t defund the military in the 70’s, so, why not destroy it from within? They’re doing a great job, with all the Woke, social justice, CRT, calling every white person a white supremacist, forcing out competent and capable service members, letting in the gender confused, putting people with serious mental health issues and suicidal thoughts around military grade weapons, giving them trans services, and so on. This would be the final straw in making it worthless in defending the U.S.

Senator Wants DoD Climate Change Goals Locked into Law

As the military services roll out their climate change plans, a key senator is pushing to ensure the goals are met by enshrining them in law.

Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and an Army National Guard veteran, is introducing a bill Thursday that would set renewable energy goals for the Defense Department that match targets the military services have announced in recent months.

It’s important to codify the goals, Duckworth said, “so that it isn’t dependent on who happens to be secretary of defense.”

“We don’t want a project to get underway and then for it to wane,” Duckworth added in a phone interview with Military.com. “One of the things that needs to happen in order for the pivot away from fossil fuels to be effective is a long-term investment.”

In other words, she wants it baked in so a Republican president can’t say “to hell with this doomsday cult crap, we aren’t doing it.” Of course, Biden is completely ignoring all the laws on the border. Oh, and the Constitution, which requires the President and the Congress to protect the nation from invasion.

The bill would also codify goals to reduce emissions from Defense Department operations by at least 65% by 2030 and to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050; from installations procurement by 20% by 2024 and net-zero emissions by 2050; and from buildings on installations by 50% by 2032 and net-zero by 2045.

It would also set a goal of buying only zero-emission non-tactical vehicles by 2035, including zero-emission light-duty vehicles by 2027, and to work toward buying only zero-emission tactical vehicles by 2045.

China is loving this bill, along with other U.S. enemies.

Read: Who’s Up For Climate Cult Being Locked In By Law For Military? »

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

House Democrats To Investigate….Gun Makers In Wake Of Texas Shooting

By William Teach May 28, 2022 – 7:00 am

They could investigate why a door was left open. Why the police response was so messed up. Why no one reported all the threats and violence from the Texas shooter, the danger. Same as in oh so many cases. Nope, Democrats want to use the time of the U.S. Congress to score points to whip up their unhinged base

House Oversight investigating gun manufacturers after Uvalde mass shooting

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has opened an investigation into five gun manufacturers in the aftermath of the mass shooting at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school earlier this week that left 19 children and two teachers dead.

Driving the news: Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), who chairs the committee, sent letters to the companies Thursday. She requested information regarding the manufacturing, sale and marketing of semi-automatic rifles that have been used in many of the deadliest mass shootings in recent U.S. history. (snip)

What they’re saying: “Our country faces an epidemic of gun violence, which is now the leading cause of death for children in the United States,” Maloney said in a statement Friday.

“I am deeply concerned that gun manufacturers continue to profit from the sale of weapons of war, including the AR-15- style assault rifle that a white supremacist used to murder ten people last week in Buffalo, New York, and the AR-15-style assault rifle that was reportedly used this week in the massacre of at least 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas,” she added.

They continue to profit because people are willing to purchase the firearms. The gun manufacturers sure profit from selling firearms to the U.S. government, for, say, protection of members of Congress.

The big picture: Maloney sent the letters to Daniel Defense, Bushmaster, Sig Sauer, Smith &Wesson Brands and Sturm, Ruger & Company on Thursday, requesting they respond to several questions by June 2.

She’s skirting very close to the line of accusing them of criminal activity, and could be defamation. She might find herself on the wrong side of lawsuits. The letters include these questions

  1. What is your company’s annual gross revenue and profit from sales of semiautomatic rifles based on the AR platform and similar variants?  Please provide this information from 2012 to 2022.
  2. How many semiautomatic rifles based on the AR platform and similar variants have been sold by your company each year to distributors, retailers, consumers, and government agencies? Please provide this information broken down quarterly from 2012 to 2022.
  3. How much does your company spend annually on advertising and marketing semiautomatic rifles firearms based on the AR platformand similar variants? Please provide this information from 2012 to 2022.
  4. How much does your company spend annually on lobbying federal and state governments, either directly or indirectly? Please provide this information from 2012 to 2022.
  5. How much funding does your company provide to the National Rifle Association? Please provide this information from 2012 to 2022.
  6. Does your company monitor or track deaths or injuries caused by semiautomatic rifles based on the AR platform and similar variants that you manufacture? If so, please provide the total number of deaths and injuries that have resulted from the use of such firearms from 2012 to 2022. Please also identify whether these deaths occurred by suicide, accident, or homicide.
  7. Does your company monitor or track crimes attempted or carried out with semiautomatic rifles based on the AR platform and similar variants? If so, please provide the total number of crimes attempted or carried out with semiautomatic rifles based on the AR platform and similar variants from 2012 to 2022. Please also identify the type of crime, the location in which the crime occurred, and any other details tracked by your company.
  8. The Bushmaster XM-15 used in the Buffalo attack was easily modified by the shooter to accept high-capacity magazines. Does your company monitor or track crimes attempted or carried out with a modified firearm originally manufactured by your company? If so, please provide the total number of crimes attempted or carried out with a modified firearm manufactured by your company from 2012 to
    2022. In addition, what has your company done in this timeframe to prevent your firearms from being illegally modified after purchase?

She also wants a ton of other private company documents, such as marketing, analyses, and others. Hopefully, the companies either tell her to pound sand, explaining that she’s a public servant, not an Inquisitor, or show up without any requested material and tell her to pound sand, explaining she’s overstepped her boundary as a public servant. Because what Maloney really wants to do is create a soundbyte and thunder circus for the news and gun grabbers. What does any of this have to do with stopping nutjobs?

Read: House Democrats To Investigate….Gun Makers In Wake Of Texas Shooting »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Causing Elephants To Attack Humans

By William Teach May 27, 2022 – 2:48 pm

If only you had agreed to give up you money, freedom, and life choices to the climate cult this wouldn’t happened. Because elephants never attacked humans ever

Elephants Are Attacking Humans As Climate Change Pushes Them to the Brink

Elephants are known for being gentle giants. But climate change is beginning to take its toll, with attacks on humans increasing as global temperatures rise.

In India, 500 people are thought to be killed by elephants every year, mainly in crop-raiding incidents. In 2021, India Today reported that 3,310 people had died from elephant attacks in the last 7 years. As incidents like this increase, so has retaliation from villagers. In 2001, 60 elephants were found dead across North East India and Sumatra as crop poisoning became a popular form of retaliation.

In parts of Africa, elephants are increasingly entering farmlands in search of food and water, particularly during harvesting seasons. In 2018, a herd of 28 elephants destroyed 18 homesteads and fences, in Namibia village, Otjorute. Another notable incident in 2021 saw a group of elephants invading farms in Ngaremara, Northern Kenya. At the time, farmers threatened to kill the elephants, before animal welfare groups intervened.

Sounds more like people are encroaching on the elephants terrain, and elephants not putting up with this.

Elephants are known for their gentle nature, but they can become aggressive when they feel harassed, vulnerable or threatened. And climate change appears to be creating these conditions more and more frequently.

Niki Rust, an environmental social scientist specializing in human and wildlife conflict, told Newsweek that elephants do become more aggressive when temperatures increase—and last year saw some of the most extreme heatwaves across the globe, particularly in their native countries.

So, studies were done, checking the veracity of the claim? Oh, right, no, this is a doomsday cult, hence, they will jump right into blaming anthropogenic climate change. This whole piece is anecdotal, offers zero scientific proof. But, they do not care, because there are enough mushy headed climate cultists to caterwaul about the plight of the elephants.

Read: Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Causing Elephants To Attack Humans »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach May 27, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…are homes in the mountains to avoid the coming devastating sea rise, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Sultan Knish, with a post on Biden’s terror exemption for the blind Sheik’s terror group.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Team Brandon Slow Walks Restarting Shuttered Refineries

By William Teach May 27, 2022 – 10:30 am

People always talk about the Biden admin reacting to everything happening, rather than getting ahead of the curve. Of course, government getting ahead of the curve is difficult in any government. That’s just the setup. What is it called when an administration is not just reacting, but, reacting months and months and months behind? Even a year behind?

White House Eyes Restarting Idle Refineries to Tame Fuel Prices

Where's Joe BidenThe Biden administration is reaching out to the oil industry to inquire about restarting shuttered refineries, as the White House scrambles to address record high-gasoline prices that are setting off political alarm bells ahead of the midterm elections.

Members of the National Economic Council and other officials have inquired within the industry about factors that led some refining operations to be curtailed and if plans are underway to restart capacity, a person familiar with the matter said. The person, who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record, added no direct ask to restart operations was made.

The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The administration’s efforts come as the average price of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline stood at a record $4.60 Wednesday, just as the summer driving season is set to begin. In California, prices are more than $6 a gallon, according to AAA.

The pandemic shut down capacity by 4.5%. Doesn’t seem like much, but, it can make a difference. Many that closed due to the pandemic never reopened. Those that can reopen can take quite a bit of time to restart. The demand erosion created an issue with the refineries in the U.S. and around the world. Many do not want to restart, having shifted production to something else. Even if crude oil production was at full capacity, it is a matter of shipping it to the refineries, which are in short supply.

And Biden is a year behind on this. Really, though, you should expect the Biden admin to not want them online. They want high gas prices.

More than 1 million barrels a day of the country’s oil refining capacity — or about 5% overall — has shut since the beginning of the pandemic. Elsewhere in the world, capacity has shrunk by 2.13 million additional barrels a day, energy consultancy Turner, Mason & Co. estimates. And with no plans to bring new US plants online, even though refiners are reaping record profits, the supply squeeze is only going to get worse.

Remember, Democrats were not allowing new refineries to come online over the past 30-40 years, so, then we do have to rely on overseas refineries, who were also shuttered.

Read: Team Brandon Slow Walks Restarting Shuttered Refineries »

Posted in Energy, Joe Biden | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Biden’s DOJ Messing Up A “Historic” Climate Crisis (scam) Lawsuit Or Something

By William Teach May 27, 2022 – 8:20 am

This is very upsetting for Jacobin Magazine. Yes, the pure, ultra-Socialist magazine. They tell you what they want. They tell you they are Socialists. Even Biden’s actions are good enough for them

Biden Is Aiming to Destroy a Historic Climate Change Lawsuit

Any day now, a federal circuit court is expected to deliver a ruling that would allow a historic climate change lawsuit to proceed to trial.

If and when the case moves forward, however, it faces a major obstacle: President Joe Biden’s Justice Department.

The lawsuit, Juliana v. United States, was brought by twenty-one young plaintiffs in 2015 and seeks to establish a federal, constitutional right to a livable planet. If the case is successful, any federal policies that enable more fossil fuel development could be challenged as unconstitutional.

But the Obama and Trump administrations both vehemently fought the lawsuit, and now those close to the case say that Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) has indicated it will also use every procedural tool at its disposal to prevent the lawsuit from ever getting a trial.

“I have asked [them] very directly, if we win this motion, and we can move forward with the case, do you intend to go to trial?” Julia Olson, the lead plaintiff’s lawyer, told us. “Their response has always been something along the lines of, ‘It is our position that the court doesn’t have jurisdiction and that this case should never go to trial.’”

Well, the court really doesn’t have jurisdiction, hence why Obama’s DOJ worked to block it.

Juliana v. United States was ambitious from the start. The plaintiffs are asking a federal court system, stacked with right-wing judges backed by the fossil fuel industry, to enshrine a constitutional right to a livable climate. But the plaintiffs point to what they’ve pulled off thus far as evidence it’s achievable.

The courts have no standing to determine this. Period.

For example, Oregon district court judge Ann Aiken wrote in a procedural ruling on the case in 2016, “I have no doubt that the right to a climate system capable of sustaining human life is fundamental to a free and ordered society.” That was the first time a federal US judge declared that such a constitutional right existed.

And, the loopy climate cult judge is 100% wrong. But, it does beg the question “what are the conditions of this climate system?” What is the proper temperature? Weather systems? And how do we think we can control this when we’ve seen multiple cool periods during the Holocene, and multiple warm periods, many of which were warmer than today?

If it makes it to the Supreme Court, it will be shot down.

Read: Biden’s DOJ Messing Up A “Historic” Climate Crisis (scam) Lawsuit Or Something »

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

Democrats Aim For Modest Gun Control Measures That Wouldn’t Have Stopped Shootings

By William Teach May 27, 2022 – 8:11 am

It’s all about appearing to Do Something and getting the votes

Democrats aim for modest deal on guns

Senate Democrats say they are ready to accept a modest deal on gun-control legislation as they are eager to get something done in response to mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, even if it falls below their ambitions of previous years.

A bipartisan group of nine senators met Thursday afternoon to chart out a path for negotiations.

They say their top priorities are proposals to expand background checks and encourage states to set up red-flag laws to prohibit people deemed dangerous to themselves or others from owning firearms.

Democrats acknowledged from the outset that whatever deal they get is likely to be modest since it needs at least 10 Republican votes to overcome a filibuster. (big snip)

Nineteen states already have red flag laws on the books, including New York, where a 18-year-old shooter killed 10 people with an AR-15 assault rifle at a Buffalo supermarket. Connecticut enacted the nation’s first red flag law in 1999 but that didn’t stop a 20-year-old shooter from killing 26 people at Sandy Hook with a Bushmaster assault-style rifle.

Even though Texas really doesn’t have one, it wouldn’t have stopped that nutter as well. The kid was apparently violent and abusive and threatening. And “expanded background checks” wouldn’t have caught that, either, nor, potentially, the others. Laws only work if people pay attention to them, if law enforcement enforces them. How many people will you see who blow off stop signs today and face no consequences?

The question here is, “what happens if they get these laws?” Will Democrats attempt to implement a death by a thousand papercuts process to get even more and strong restrictions? The devil is in the details of the background checks proposal: does it require registration of all firearms with the government? Do the Democrats then want even tougher then tougher then tougher gun control which primarily hits the law abiding, rather than the criminals?

How about this proposal: if someone wants to sell their firearm privately, they should be required to fill out a form that shows the ID number of the gun, notes that the buyer must go get a background check within 2 days, and it be notarized and filed at either a county/city clerk office, police station, or Sheriff’s office. That puts the burden on the buyer, not the seller. It means someone has the papers, and can follow through.

How about locking the doors for entry into schools? Having armed security at the main entrance?

The Blumenthal-Graham bill would empower law enforcement officers to file a petition with a federal court requesting that someone deemed to be danger be prohibited from owning a firearm. Their proposal would allow that person a speedy hearing to protest the order.

“It’s a grant program,” said Graham. “We’re not federalizing this. We’re trying to incentivize best business practices at the state level.”

Yeah, they’re federalizing this, and, there’s no way it is speedy.

Read: Democrats Aim For Modest Gun Control Measures That Wouldn’t Have Stopped Shootings »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Renewable Energy Is A Threat To Biodiversity Or Something

By William Teach May 26, 2022 – 3:00 pm

It’s always something with this crowd, isn’t it?

Activists fear a new threat to biodiversity—renewable energy

A small Nevada wildflower named Tiehm’s buckwheat might still be living in obscurity if it had not happened to grow in soil full of lithium. As it is, that could prove its downfall.

Lithium is needed to make the high-powered batteries that are helping the world transition to electric vehicles. Demand is soaring, and mining companies are eager to take it out of the ground at several new sites in Nevada, already home to the only existing lithium mine in the U.S.

But Tiehm’s buckwheat is rarer than lithium. It grows only on approximately 10 acres of land at Rhyolite Ridge in southwestern Nevada—right where one of the new lithium mines is planned.

“One guy on a bulldozer could drive it extinct in one afternoon,” says Patrick Donnelly, the Great Basin Director for the Center for Biological Diversity and one of the flower’s biggest advocates.

He and some other conservationists see the flower and the mine as emblematic of a broad and disturbing trend: There is a growing conflict, they say, between efforts to address two environmental crises—a rapidly warming climate on the one hand, and a staggering rise in extinction on the other.

Mining isn’t the only way the renewable energy revolution is affecting landscapes, in the desert and elsewhere. In the past decade, solar- and wind-powered electricity generation has quadrupled in the U.S.— and that’s just the beginning of what experts say we need to do to transition away from fossil fuels and avoid the worst impacts of climate change. By 2030, Nevada plans to get half its electricity from renewable energy, in line with the Biden Administration’s goal to decarbonize the economy completely by 2050.

The result is what some activists describe as a renewable energy land rush putting rare species and untouched desert ecosystems at risk.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. How about we keep the good migrants who just want a better life and to be part of the American dream and deport the eco and climate wackos?

Read: Bummer: Renewable Energy Is A Threat To Biodiversity Or Something »

Posted in Energy, Enviroweenies, Global Warming | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 26, 2022 – 1:00 pm

…is a rising sea running over the land, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on the sanctions against Russia and the EU need for natural gas.

Does her head look too small, or is it just a trick of the light and pose? Because it doesn’t look photoshopped.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Unhinged Michael Moore: Who Will Ask To Repeal The 2nd Amendment?

By William Teach May 26, 2022 – 10:30 am

Is this the same Michael Moore who has his own armed security?

Liberal filmmaker Michael Moore challenges the media: Who will demand we repeal the Second Amendment?

Liberal filmmaker Michael Moore appeared on MSNBC Wednesday to urge the media to call for an end to the Second Amendment, after a gunman killed 19 students and two teachers at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.

Moore began his argument claiming that America had a violence problem, from the beginning of the country’s founding, starting with guns.

“We won’t acknowledge that we are a violent people to begin with. This country was birthed in violence with the genocide of the native people at the barrel of a gun. This country was built on the back of slaves with a gun to their back,” he told MSNBC host Chris Hayes.

Yeah, a goodly chunk of nations were built on “violence”. Such is life on Earth. The current France was built on a violent revolution. How many criminals were forced to go to Australia and Tasmania? How many African nations were birthed in violence? Canada doesn’t exactly have a stellar record with the “native” population. Funny, though, that people like Moore who seem to hate the U.S. won’t actually leave.

“Who will say on this network or any other network in the next few days, ‘It’s time to repeal the Second Amendment’?” he asked.

So, why isn’t he? Give it a whirl, Credentialed Media. See where that goes. It won’t turn out like you think.

“Look, I support all gun control legislation. Not sensible gun control. We don’t need the sensible stuff, we need the hardcore stuff that’s going to protect ourselves and our children,” he said.

Name it. Name what will stop criminals from being violent.

https://twitter.com/allinwithchris/status/1529281763482259456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1529281763482259456%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdeadline.com%2F2022%2F05%2Fmichael-moore-repeal-second-amendment-1235033193%2F

There are quite a few Democrats, including elected officials, who are saying we need to Do Something, yet, do not actually name what will work. Universal background checks? The Texas nutter passed a background check, it wouldn’t have stopped him

(The Federalist) Before we even knew how the killer of 19 children and two adults at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, had obtained his guns, Chris Murphy was engaging in his customary performative emotionalism on the Senate floor, literally begging Republicans to “compromise.”

Compromise on what exactly? Murphy has never once offered a single proposal that would have deterred any of these mass shooters. Literally minutes after his routine, Murphy was asked about the obvious mental illness prevalent among most of these shooters. “Spare me the bullsh-t about mental illness,” the Connecticut senator responded, “ripping” the GOP. “We don’t have any more mental illness than any other country in the world.” That’s how serious he is about compromise. (snip)

Chuck Schumer planned to introduce H.R. 8, an expanded background check bill, and H.R. 1446, a bill that would close the alleged “Charleston Loophole” (before he realized it wouldn’t be politically expedient.) “Alleged” because Dylann Roof, who murdered nine black churchgoers in Charleston in 2015, got a clean background check, not because of any “loophole,” but because local prosecutors had failed to respond to the FBI’s request for information. It was a case of human error, or negligence. So maybe Democrats should be promoting a “law-enforcement-should-do-its-job” bill. Because all “universal” background checks do is stop friends and families from gifting guns. Straw purchases are already illegal, as Schumer, Pelosi, and Murphy already know. And passing expanded background checks after a school shooting is tantamount to demanding stricter drivers tests after a hit and run. (snip)

Indeed, law-abiding Americans have no obligation to take ownership of a madman’s actions. Nor is there any reason for them to surrender their right to self-defense so that Chris Murphy, who, evidenced in many of his comments, is only interested in incrementally limiting gun ownership. That’s his right, of course. He should try and repeal the Second Amendment. Until then, however, Democrats interested in genuine compromise may want to offer realistic, productive, and germane ideas, rather than using another horrific tragedy to dunk on their political opponents.

Go for it. Try and repeal the 2nd. Or, better yet, offer up solutions that will actually deal with

Whether America is more prone to mental illness or not, these incidents are almost exclusively perpetrated by young men who have exhibited serious anti-social behavior. All of them break a slew of existing laws. All of them have either obtained guns illegally, or legally before having any criminal record. In many, if not most, cases, the shooter is already on the cops’ radar because he has threatened others or written insane, violent manifestos. In a study of mass shootings from 2008 to 2017, the Secret Service found that “100 percent of perpetrators showed concerning behaviors, and in 77 percent of shootings, at least one person – most often a peer – knew about their plan.”

There were plenty of warning signs for the Texas shooter, the Buffalo shooter, and so many others, and they were all ignored.

Read: Unhinged Michael Moore: Who Will Ask To Repeal The 2nd Amendment? »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 53 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove