…is a city area flood from carbon pollution Extreme Weather, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Jihad Watch, with a post on Iran saying it expects China Joe to repay the $1 trillion it lost under Trump’s sanctions.
Read: If All You See… »
The crazy Equality Act, which will certainly end up in front of the Supreme Court for violating the 1st Amendment regarding the religion clause (providing it even gets enough votes to make it past the 60 vote threshold), is chock full of crazy. And we still don’t have the $1,400 checks for Americans
7 Radical Demands in the Equality Act
House Democrats have passed the radical Equality Act once again, claiming it will merely amend federal civil rights law to ensure sexual orientation and gender identity are protected classes, even though the Constitution already provides protection for the rights of all American citizens, regardless of their “identity group.â€
If enacted, however, the Equality Act would have a major impact on children and their parents, potentially upending the culture as American families now know it. Lawsuits filed against Americans who adhere to the science of biological sex and the First Amendment rights of citizens would now have a federal law backing them up that states gender identity supersedes biological sex.
The Equality Act is legislative malpractice that turns equality on its head. It isn’t drafted as a shield to protect vulnerable minorities from unjust discrimination, but as a sword to persecute those who do not embrace new sexual and gender ideologies. https://t.co/YSWJpB6R7m
— Ryan T. Anderson (@RyanTAnd) February 19, 2021
Below are seven radical demands in the Equality Act: (there’s quite a bit of discussion at the article on each one)
The bill would end the federal legal recognition of complementary male and female sex in favor gender identity.
- The bill would eliminate the traditional right to privacy of women and girls in public facilities, in favor, instead, of gender identity.
- The Equality Act would eviscerate women’s and girls’ sports.
- The Equality Act would be used to mandate school curricula that affirm and promote sexual orientation and gender identity views.
- The Equality Act would be used to remove custody rights from parents who refuse to have their minor children undergo transgender medical interventions and procedures.
- Since the Equality Act exempts itself from the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, religious schools, hospitals, and adoption agencies could face federal sanctions for upholding their teachings with regard to life, sexuality, and marriage under the legislation.
- The Equality Act’s text that names a form of “discrimination on the basis of pregnancy†would be used to punish healthcare providers who refuse to perform an abortion or to outlaw policies that ban funding for the procedure.
Ryan Anderson, president of EPPC, called the Equality Act “legislative malpractice that turns equality on its head.â€
“It isn’t drafted as a shield to protect vulnerable minorities from unjust discrimination, but as a sword to persecute those who do not embrace new sexual and gender ideologies,†he asserted.
It’s also designed to destroy Christian religious beliefs (because Democrats are afraid to go after Muslim ones, because that would lead to violence). If this manages to pass the Senate and China Joe signs it, the lawsuits will be flying all over the place, and some will ask for an immediate ruling from the Supreme Court into the Constitutionality of the religion measures. If the crazy bill doesn’t include severability, it is done. And so much of it is wrapped up in controlling and limiting religion.
In a rational world, one where the Cult of Climastrology was treated as the cult it is, the EU governments would say “sure, cool, no problem, we’ll remove all funding for energy and fossil fueled vehicles/flights for the court, disallow all meat in the court building, and remove anything which puts out “carbon pollution.” Of course, since all these CoC European countries were so thrilled to sign the Paris Climate (scam) Agreement, why do they need to prove they are Doing Something?
European court: governments must prove climate change effort
A top European court is forcing 33 governments to prove they are cutting emissions in line with the requirements of the 2015 Paris climate accord.
The European Court of Human Rights has also rejected an attempt by those governments in the same case to overturn its decision to fast-track an ambitious climate change action brought by six young Portuguese activists.
The activists allege that the countries’ efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions are inadequate.
The governments had asked the court to drop its priority status for the case and hear their argument that the case is inadmissible, the activists’ legal representatives said in a statement Friday.
But in the latest legal victory for the activists, the court dismissed the governments’ arguments against an urgent hearing and denied their application to defer scrutiny of their climate policies, the statement said.
The governments now have until May 27 to submit their legal defense.
“This is another major step toward securing a decision from the court which compels (the) governments to take the urgent action necessary to safeguard the futures of the youth applicants and their generation,†said Gerry Liston of the Global Legal Action Network, an international nonprofit organization that challenges human rights violations and which is assisting the activists.
Interesting. The governments wanted the case basically dismissed. I thought they wanted to have to do all this climate crazy stuff? No? It’s more about ClimaVirtue Signalling, because they know it would destroy their economies? That their good with certain measures meant to control their citizens and others that are “look, we’re Doing Something” but do not want to go too far, which is what these Youths want and Paris demands?
The countries named in the complaint include the 27 member nations of the European Union plus the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Norway, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine.
If the activists win their case, the countries would be legally bound to cut emissions in line with the requirements of the Paris climate accord. They would also have to address their role in overseas emissions, including by their multinational companies.
Remember, Paris was “historic”. Funny how the majority of nations that signed it aren’t actually anywhere close to being in compliance. The governments should, in a non climacrazy cult world, would turn off all power to the schools that doesn’t come strictly from “renewables” and take away all funding for fossil fueled vehicles and flights. Let the kiddies charge their phones and such with solar power, limit their streaming of shows and all their narcissistic videos (because that’s Bad for ‘climate change’). See how the Youths like it.
Read: European Court Demands EU Governments Prove They’re Doing Something About Climate Crisis (scam) »
Rules? Pfffft. Rules are for Other People, not Democrats
Pelosi vows to keep minimum wage provision in House bill; Harris could act
The Senate’s chief parliamentarian ruled Thursday that a federal minimum wage hike should not be included in the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package, but that seemed to do little to deter House Democrats from pursuing the plan — against impossible odds.
In a statement obtained by Fox News, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough’s decision “disappointing.” Pelosi, like most Democrats, insisted that the wage-hike provision be kept in the bill and said it would “remain in the American Rescue Plan on the Floor tomorrow.”
Vice President Harris, as president of the Senate, can override the parliamentarian’s ruling, but the move is considered unlikely. Ron Klain, President Biden’s chief of staff, said in an interview this week that a Harris override was “not something we would do.”
MacDonough’s decision was seen as a devastating blow by the chamber’s nonpartisan arbiter to the Democrat cause. Senate Democrats wanted to avoid having to deal with a Republican filibuster and employ a process called budget reconciliation. Under the process, Democrats would be able to pass the bill in the Senate with a simple majority. But budget reconciliation comes with additional rules, including what provisions can be added to these bills.
The NY Times reports that this is a “critical defeat for Democrats in their bid to preserve China Joe’s $1.9 trillion bill as it cut a crucial piece backed by Progressives (nice Fascists)”. Excitable Rachel Maddow at MSDNC is freaking out about Republicans trying to kill the minimum wage hike that most Americans want. Isn’t there an old saying about the People voting themselves money? In this case, it wouldn’t be from the public treasury, but, from Other People’s businesses. Which would lead to reduced hours, reduced jobs, no overtime, more part time positions, fewer perks, cost of goods/services increases, and more.
Let me ask: if a $15 minimum wage increase is just so darned popular, why is that the Democrats have to include it in a bill that is so partisan that they have to attempt to pass it by using the shady reconciliation form? If it’s so darned popular, why not with a simple stand alone bill? Why would they blow off the Senate Parliamentarian ruling that explicitly states that it would be against the rules? Put it up for a separate vote. Have a debate on the House and Senate floors.
Because there are lots of things in the COVID relief bill that really doesn’t have that much in COVID relief in it. Unless you work for the federal government
Wow. The BidenBucks bill pays federal employees up to 15 weeks of paid leave at $1400 per week if they have to stay home to virtual school kids.
You get $1400 once. They get it every week for 15 weeks. Swamp takes care of swamp.https://t.co/4A7ktpm1Zc
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) February 25, 2021
Let’s have a debate on that, too.
Read: Despite Ruling That Minimum Wage Hike Is Against Rules, Pelosi Vows To Keep It In COVID Bill »
Hey, remember what happened when Long Beach, California passed a hero pay for grocery store workers law? That’s right, lots of stores announced their immediate closure. How’s this going to work in a whole county?
Los Angeles County passes ordinance requiring $5 ‘hero pay’ for grocery workers
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 Tuesday to adopt an urgency ordinance requiring national grocery and drug retail employers in unincorporated areas of the county to pay frontline workers an additional $5 per hour hazard or “hero pay” for the next 120 days.
Supervisor Kathryn Barger voted against the measure, to take effect at midnight Feb. 26, citing unintended consequences and a concern that the ordinance only covers a “small sliver” of the essential workforce.
Supervisors Hilda Solis and Holly Mitchell co-authored the motion calling for the temporary “urgency” ordinance that would apply to union and non-union store chains that are publicly traded or have at least 300 employees nationwide and more than 10 employees per store.
Solis pointed to store profits as one justification, though she referenced an analysis that includes retailers like Amazon and Home Depot, rather than just grocers and drug retailers. However, some of the national grocers listed, like Kroger and Albertson’s, enjoyed even higher profits, according to the Brookings Institution study.
Gross profit is not net profit, and lots of people where binge purchasing. It’s very easy to tell Other People what to pay their employees (while at the same time wanting to spend taxpayer money to hook up the teacher’s unions, right?), and perhaps their hearts are in the right place, but, that’s a heck of a lot of cost increase
“I have concerns about the unintended consequences that will result from this board directing salaries in the private sector. Stores can pass on additional labor costs to the public through price increases. However, they may also reduce the hours of the impacted workers or decrease the number of employees that they hire,” Barger said.
You can bet they’ll eliminate OT, reduce hours, and not fill job openings during that 6 months. Provided they do not close. This applies to the non-incorporated areas of Los Angeles county, so, it wouldn’t apply to the actual cities.
“Extra pay mandates will have severe unintended consequences on not only grocers, but on their workers and their customers,” CGA President and CEO Ron Fong said Tuesday. “A $5/hour extra pay mandate amounts to a 28% increase in labor costs. That’s huge. Grocers will not be able to absorb those costs and negative repercussions are unavoidable.”
We’ll have to see what happens.
NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio: Wear Two Masks Until June
On Tuesday, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio encouraged New Yorkers to wear two masks at least until June.
De Blasio urged citizens in the Big Apple to add a second mask to their personal protective equipment arsenal in a morning press conference. “Through June, keep doing exactly what you are doing,†he said. “Not just wear a mask, wear two.†De Blasio further obscured the timeline for the practice, admitting the local government may “continue that guidance for quite a while depending on what is going on.â€
Will Bill make it mandatory? It sure seems rather threatening: “wear 2 masks or we’ll keep the lockdowns going”. But, hey, this is the type of government New Yorkers voted for, so, they get what they wanted.
California’s coronavirus strain looks increasingly dangerous: ‘The devil is already here’
A coronavirus variant that probably emerged in May and surged to become the dominant strain in California not only spreads more readily than its predecessors but also evades antibodies generated by COVID-19 vaccines or prior infection and is associated with severe illness and death, researchers said.
In a study that helps explain the state’s dramatic holiday surge in COVID-19 cases and deaths — and portends further trouble ahead — scientists at UC San Francisco said the cluster of mutations that characterizes the homegrown strain should mark it as a “variant of concern†on par with those from the United Kingdom, South Africa and Brazil.
More reason to keep Big Government controlling us, eh? BTW, doesn’t it seem rather strange that COVID19 mutates so darned easily and fast? It’s almost like it was, dare I say, developed.
Read: COVID Today: Hero Pay In L.A., Double Masking, And California Variant »
Trackback URL
In the Democracy model of Political Theory 101, Socialism is to the Left, and features limited government interference in citizen’s lives (not like today’s Socialism), few restrictions on voting (you’ve heard of Direct Democracy, right?), and the primary part is Government having massive control of all things Economy, up to and including owning the means of production. Progressivism (nice Fascism), as part of the Authoritarian model, coincidentally includes massive control of the economy. Either way, using the climate crisis scam as a platform to achieve government dominance over private entities is ready made for them
SEC Opens Review of Corporate Climate Change Disclosures
The Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday said it would review how companies are disclosing the risks they face from climate change, as the agency looks to refresh its more than decade-old guidance on the issue.
The regulator will evaluate and speak with companies about the extent to which they are complying with current climate disclosure guidance, first issued in 2010, and eventually update it to build “a more comprehensive framework that produces consistent, comparable, and reliable climate-related disclosures,†the SEC said.
“Now more than ever, investors are considering climate-related issues when making their investment decisions,†acting SEC Chairwoman Allison Herren Lee said in a statement. “It is our responsibility to ensure that they have access to material information when planning for their financial future,†she said. (snip)
The SEC’s move Wednesday is part of a wider shift by financial regulators and policy makers regarding climate change, a priority for President Biden, who has called for companies to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions and get the U.S. to net-zero emissions by 2050.
Well, this should be a good four years with the Biden administration destroying companies for an imaginary problem, eh?
Read: China Joe’s SEC To Come After Companies For Failing To Disclose Climate Scam Risks »
…is a wonderful small greenspace far away from an actual rural area, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Doug Ross @ Journal, with a post on the 5 D’s of D.C.
Read: If All You See… »
Let’s blame guns and raaaaacism, because this is really about using data for something else
Young Black men and teens made up more than a third of firearm homicide victims in the USA in 2019, one of several disparities revealed in a review of gun mortality data released Tuesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The analysis, titled “A Public Health Crisis in the Making,” found that although Black men and boys ages 15 to 34 make up just 2% of the nation’s population, they were among 37% of gun homicides that year.
That’s 20 times higher than white males of the same age group.
Of all reported firearm homicides in 2019, more than half of victims were Black men, according to the study spearheaded by the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. Sixty-three percent of male victims were Black.
This is nothing new. We’ve known for decades that 50% of the homicides are committed by 13% of the population. That 50% of people shot are black, and 95% of the shootings of blacks are committed by other blacks.
Black women and girls are also at higher risk. Black females had the highest risk of being killed by a firearm than females of any other race or ethnicity, and they were four times more likely to be victims than white females.
“Gun violence has for the longest time been a public health crisis in the Black community,” said epidemiologist Ed Clark of Florida A&M University’s Institute of Public Health.
So, let’s blame guns. That makes sense. Perhaps they should study exactly why blacks are much more likely to shoot people, especially other blacks. The gun doesn’t simply put itself in their hands and make them pull the trigger.
The gun violence expert said a “holistic approach” is needed to reduce gun fatalities and injuries.
“That should include really viewing gun violence as a public health issue. The business of public health is population wellness – looking at how we can decrease the disease burden or the threat of injury to the population at large,” he said. “And gun violence is definitely a problem that should be looked at through that lens.”
Perhaps we should be looking at the conditions for black who predominately live in cities run by Democrats. When you see that 8 were shot in Chicago Wednesday, one fatally, you start looking up the victims and realize that the majority are black, and, when they catch the perps (which is rare, because no one will snitch), they usually turn out to be black. So, why such a disparity? Why do blacks turn to guns for violence so much more?
“Despite the limitations, gun death data are the most reliable type of gun violence data currently available – but gun deaths are only the tip of the iceberg of gun violence. Many more people are shot and survive their injuries, are shot at but not hit, or witness gun violence,” the analysis reads. “Many experience gun violence in other ways, by living in impacted communities, losing loved ones to gun violence, or being threatened with a gun.”
Still blaming the gun. This type of study really doesn’t care at all about why blacks are so prone to picking up a gun and shooting each other, it’s to be used to gun grab. From law abiding people. Which leaves the criminals with their illegally possessed firearms still with those firearms. And still shooting each other. Because Democrats are racists. Why do you think they want so many abortion providers in black areas in Democratic Party run cities?
Read: Somehow, Young Blacks Shooting Each Other Is A “Racial Disparity” »
Trackback URL
The climate cult craziness just continues. Sadly, so many people have been indoctrinated that they actually believe that heat trapping greenhouse gases can make snow, ice, and cold weather
Texas scientists: Power outages show why Texas must prepare for climate change
The two writers are climate cultists Katherine Hayhoe, who also pretends to use her Christian religion to push her climate cult beliefs, and loves blocking everyone who dares ask her a question, even though she has stated she wants a robust debate (did you realize she also teaches Political Science? Go figure), along with Ginny Catania, a professor with the Jackson School of Geosciences at the University of Texas at Austin. While Hayhoe could charitably be called a “climate scientist”, with a Masters in atmospheric science (also, in Philosophy), Catania has a PHD in Geophysics, so, not a direct climate science degree. And we were told we should only listen to people with degrees in climate science, right? They managed to get a whole bunch of Comrades at their schools to sign on. Have anyone of them given up their own use of fossil fuels?
Last week, ice, snow and record-breaking cold left millions across Texas without electricity, heat or water, and with homes damaged or destroyed. Roughly 4 million homes and up to 15 million people had no power for several days, and 13 million homes had no water or poor water quality.
Like our fellow Texans, we were also victims of this preventable disaster; as always, however, this extreme weather-related disaster disproportionately impacted our most vulnerable populations. The compounding failures of interconnected life-sustaining resources created a dangerous crisis for millions, particularly those living in poverty and acutely suffering the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
A massive winter storm was preventable? Really? We’re supposed to take this stuff seriously.
Some may say that no one could have foreseen such severe weather. Although Texas experiences extreme cold events, it is indeed unusual to have a winter storm advisory for the whole state at once. However, given the well-known and very large fluctuations of winter temperatures in this part of the country and the scale of this storm, it is surprising that there was no clear preparation ahead of time. Meteorologists predicted the storm’s arrival for more than a week in advance, yet Texans still faced empty grocery stores, shuttered pharmacies and hospitals without power, water or adequate water pressure needed for critical operations and procedures. (snip through the tedious explanation of how you eating a burger causes the Arctic to warm and cause winter weather)
Human decisions can exacerbate these risks: Urbanization can increase runoff from rainfall, and development in low-lying areas and coastal regions makes us more vulnerable to floods. Preparing for future disasters requires a systematic analysis of future — not just historical — risks. Texas must prepare for these risks. Such planning is critical for the state to remain financially resilient in the face of climate change. (snip)
Unlike the power outage crisis, climate change will be difficult or near impossible to reverse in the near-term. The state’s leaders need to accept climate science and begin using research to build a more resilient Texas. Texas has always experienced heat and cold, drought and flood. But today, climate change is loading the dice against us. For decades, climate researchers have projected — and are now observing — that extreme climate events (of many kinds) will become more frequent or more intense as our planet continues to warm.
It’s long past time to start asking these climate cultists to prove their assertions and prognostication, along with whether they’ve changed their own lives to match their beliefs.
Read: Texas Needs To Prepare For Power Outages From Heat Snow And Heat Cold Or Something »
Well, not just sports. But, their safety and security in locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms, along with taking away scholarships and so much more. And blowing up the 1st Amendment on religious freedom. Because Democrats priorities do not include getting America back on it’s feet from the pandemic
House To Vote On Equality Act: Here’s What The Law Would Do
The House of Representatives is set to vote this week on the Equality Act, a bill that would ban discrimination against people based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It would also substantially expand the areas to which those discrimination protections apply.
It’s a bill that President Biden said on the campaign trail would be one of his top legislative priorities for the first 100 days of his presidency.
When House Democrats introduced the bill last week, Biden reiterated his support in a statement: “I urge Congress to swiftly pass this historic legislation,” he wrote. “Every person should be treated with dignity and respect, and this bill represents a critical step toward ensuring that America lives up to our foundational values of equality and freedom for all.”
But it’s also controversial — while the Equality Act has broad support among Democrats, many Republicans oppose it, fearing that it would infringe upon religious objections. (snip)
The Civil Rights Act covered discrimination in certain areas, like employment and housing. The Equality Act would expand that to cover federally funded programs, as well as “public accommodations” — a broad category including retail stores and stadiums, for example.
(“Public accommodations” is also a category that the bill broadens, to include online retailers and transportation providers, for example. Because of that, many types of discrimination the Civil Rights Act currently prohibits — like racial or religious discrimination — would now also be explicitly covered at those types of establishments.)
One upshot of all of this, then, is that the Equality Act would affect businesses like flower shops and bakeries that have been at the center of discrimination court cases in recent years — for example, a baker who doesn’t want to provide a cake for a same-sex wedding.
Importantly, the bill also explicitly says that it trumps the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (commonly known by its acronym RFRA). The law, passed in 1993, set a higher bar for the government to defend laws if people argued those laws infringed upon religious freedom.
Well, you’ll have almost every single Republican in the House voting against it, and you won’t get 60 Senators to vote for ending debate. The only way to attempt to pass it in the Senate is by nuking the filibuster, and Dems might not get 50 votes for passage even with the nuking. And would expressly violate the 1st Amendment, leading to an immediate constitutional challenge going right to the Supreme Court. The NPR article barely touches upon the other big question
The Equality Act Makes Women Unequal
All people are created equal, but Congress is considering a bill that would make some people more equal than others.
H.R. 5, styled the Equality Act, would redefine “sex†under federal civil-rights laws to include “sexual orientation†and “gender identity,†overriding basic biology along with millennia of tradition.
This isn’t only a question of semantics. Nor is it merely an attempt to prohibit employment discrimination against sexual minorities. A 2020 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court already does that.
The Equality Act would go much further by making it illegal to distinguish “identity†from biology and thereby prioritize transgender people over women. By erasing sex as a distinct legal category, the measure threatens to open up female-only spaces and opportunities designed to increase representation for girls to biological men, which can endanger the safety of women and girls.
The Equality Act would threaten the existence of women’s prisons, public-school girls’ locker rooms, and women’s and girls’ sports teams. It would limit freedom of speech, freedom of association, accurate data collection, and scientific inquiry. It would threaten the rights of physicians who doubt the wisdom of performing life-changing, reproduction-limiting procedures, and parents who seek to protect their minor children from such treatment.
This isn’t hyperbole. Similar state laws have already resulted in such harm. In California, Catholic hospitals have faced lawsuits for declining to perform life-altering “gender affirmation†surgery in September 2016. In Connecticut, two biologically male athletes won a combined 15 girls state championship races, allegedly taking opportunities for further competition and scholarships from female runners in June 2019. Alaska’s Equal Rights Commission opened an investigation into a women’s shelter after it turned away a biological male in September 2019. H.R. 5 would impose the most extreme form of these laws on the whole country.
Hey, female Democrats and female Republican Trump haters, this is what you voted for. Are you good with Democrats taking away so much from women? Are you good with women losing college scholarships and more to biological males with mental issues who believe they’re female? Do you want them in your female only places? Instead of voting for the $1,400 checks (didn’t Biden promise $2,000 specifically?) and important recovery measures, they want to destroy women.
Arkansas is the latest state to be working on a law to protect women from trans males in K-12. Many other states will soon go the same route, having to pass laws that, in years past, would have been unnecessary because Americans had common sense and understood the difference between male and female. It’s insane that we even have to have a discussion on this.
Read: House To Vote On The “Destroying Women’s Sports” And Limiting Religious Freedom Act »
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.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.