Masks Work: NC Extends Phase 3 As Cases Rise

By William Teach October 23, 2020 – 10:30 am

Remember how masks were supposed to solve this?

Gov. Roy Cooper extends Phase 3 of COVID-19 restrictions as metrics continue trending in wrong direction

Gov. Roy Cooper announced Wednesday that Phase 3 of his COVID-19 restrictions would remain in place for the next three weeks.

The state has been in Phase 3 since October 2. That allowed movie theatres, amusement parks, and outdoor venues to open at reduced capacity; it also allowed bars to open (with limited outdoor capacity) for the first time since March.

However, COVID-19 trends during the past week have been going in the wrong direction. Cases, hospitalizations, and positivity rates have all increased.

That increase in key metrics is not exclusive to North Carolina. In fact, many states are seeing a similar COVID-19 surge.

“Like states across the country, our numbers continue to be higher than we want. So our work to contain this virus remains critical,” Cooper said.

What could be causing this, something that isn’t unique to the United States: some countries, like Germany and the UK, are talking about rolling back reopening phases and even going back into lockdown

NCDHHS Secretary Dr. Mandy Cohen said the surge in cases is not linked to any particular age group, activity, industry or community. She said that fact suggests fatigue associated with proven prevention measures — such as wearing a mask, waiting more than six feet apart, and washing hands — could be to blame.

America’s top infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci echoed those sentiments recently by saying, “We’ve really got to double down on fundamental public health measures.”

Look, I’ll say again, wearing a mask is probably better than nothing, but, people wearing them makes many a little too careless. I was waiting in line to vote yesterday and this lady was standing about a foot behind me. I kinda looked at her, and when I moved up she moved with me. So I looked again. Still moved. Fortunately, a poll worker told her to just wait. Same at the grocery store, lady was way too close. But, let’s face it, a basic cloth covering does little. People who are sick should wear them, but, really, they should stay home.

Strangely, we aren’t hearing these problems in places like South Dakota, where the gov, Kristi Noem, has not slapped them with all these restrictions.

Read: Masks Work: NC Extends Phase 3 As Cases Rise »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, NC News | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

We Only Have 8 Years To Save The World From The Climate Crisis (scam) Or Something

By William Teach October 23, 2020 – 8:19 am

At least the UK Guardian is honest in their far left Progressive/Marxist/Modern Socialist leanings, unlike most Credentialed Media outlets

Humanity has eight years to get climate crisis under control – and Trump’s plan won’t fix it

In Donald Trump’s world – laid bare during Thursday night’s final presidential debate with his Democratic rival Joe Biden in Nashville – fossil fuels are “very clean”, the US has the best air and water despite his administration’s extensive regulatory rollbacks, and the country can fix climate change by planting trees.

But according to the harsh realities being laid out by climate scientists, Trump’s world does not exist.

Humanity has just eight years to figure out how to get climate change under control before the future starts to look drastically worse – multiple-degree temperature increases, global sea-level rise, and increasingly disastrous wildfires, hurricanes, floods and droughts. Doing so will mean that unless there is a technological miracle, humans will at some point have to stop burning oil, gas and coal.

“We’re told by all the leading scientists in the world we don’t have much time,” Biden said. “We’re going to pass the point of no return within the next eight to 10 years. Four more years of this man … will put us in a position where we’ll be in real trouble,” the former vice-president said.

Eight? What happened to 12? All the climate cultists were saying we had 12 years left in 2018, so, that would mean we have 10 years to avoid doom, right?

But perhaps the most interesting point was when the candidates were asked what they would do for people – often people of color – who are living next to polluting gasoline refineries and petrochemical plants.

Trump pressed Biden: “Would you close down the oil industry?”

And Biden, who might typically steer clear of such a politically controversial question, said he would.

“I would transition from the oil industry, yes,” Biden said.

The UK Guardian is cheering this, as are so many Warmists this morning. Joe had to backtrack after the debate

Speaking to reporters after the debate, Biden insisted the fossil fuel industry wouldn’t “be gone” until 2050.

“We’re not getting rid of fossil fuels. We’re getting rid of the subsidies for fossil fuels, but we’re not getting rid of fossil fuels for a long time,” Biden said.

But, getting rid of fossil fuels is exactly what his hardcore base wants, including natural gas, yet, most, including Joe and the UK Guardian, refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels. Joe sure wasn’t reticent about using fossil fuels while he was Vice President, nor was Obama.

Eight years, people. And, then when we pass that 8 years, they’ll proclaim we have another 12 years to Do Something, and none in the media will point out that the climate cultists were wrong the first time.

Read: We Only Have 8 Years To Save The World From The Climate Crisis (scam) Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Donald Trump, Global Warming, Joe Biden | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Career Politician Advocates $15 Minimum Wage And Bailing Them Out

By William Teach October 23, 2020 – 8:07 am

Joe Biden hasn’t worked an honest day since the early 70’s. He graduated from law school, did a couple years in the private sector, and then got elected a senator. That’s what he’s done, so, it’s no wonder he has no idea how business works. Donald Trump has had his ups and downs, successess and failures, but, he understands. It was an interesting debate, which I flipped back to here and there, between the football game and other stuff. This one I caught

‘That’s Not Helping’: Trump Goes After Biden For Saying That Raising The Minimum Wage Will Help Small Businesses

President Donald Trump called out former Vice President Joe Biden during Thursday night’s debate for saying that he will raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour to help small businesses.

After mentioning that many small businesses are struggling during the coronavirus pandemic, debate moderator Kristen Welker asked Biden if he thinks now is the right time to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, a policy that he supports.

“I do,” Biden responded. “Because I think one of the things we’re going to have to do is, we’re going to have to bail them out, too. We should be bailing them out now, those small businesses. You got 1 in 6 of them going under. They’re not going to be able to make it back.”

The former Vice President mentioned how small businesses were able to take a loan from the Paycheck Protection Program, a loan program that supported more than 51 million small business jobs during the pandemic.

“They need the help,” Biden said. “The businesses, as well as the schools, need the help. But these guys will not help them. It’s not giving them any of the money.”

The video of this is at the link, and it almost makes you wonder if Joe didn’t really know what he was answering. Is he saying that all these small businesses simply need help due to all the mostly Democrat Governor lockdowns, or is he saying that they will need help like the PPP because of a $15 minimum wage? Not sure why the schools need help, as their money is pretty much guaranteed, just like most in the government. And Trump was wanting to do things along with PPP to keep them from going under, which Democrats have blocked, including getting them open.

“He said we have to help our small businesses – by raising the minimum wage?” Trump asked Biden. “That’s not helping. I think it should be a state option.”

“Alabama is different than New York,” Trump continued. “New York is different from Vermont. Every state is different. It should be a state option.”

It would actually be better as a local option. The NYC area is quite different from the upstate lake regions. Heck, $15 an hour isn’t even really livable in NYC. And it would kill so many businesses. Lots of the beach area positions would be gone.

“How are you helping your small businesses when you are forcing wages?” the president said. “What’s going to happen and what’s been proven to happen, is when you do that, these small businesses fire many of their employees.”

“Not true, by the way,” Biden answered.

Yes true, by the way. Some will figure out a way to make it work, usually by doing things like raising prices, limiting hours, reducing staff, no overtime, using lower cost ingredients, some combination. Others? They move away, don’t expand, or just close up. Lots and lots have done this in places like Seattle and LA. The suburbs of those cities get the businesses, and lots of lower wage employees have no way to get to the new facility. Then they have to try and find a new job. Dems want this nationally so everyone will share the pain.

The minimum wage would not be raised “to a level that’s going to put all these businesses out of business,” Trump said. “It should be a state option.”

“Different places are all different,” the president added. “Some places, $15 is not so bad. In other places, other states, $15 would be ruining.”

States should allow cities to raise the wage if they choose. But, Joe wouldn’t understand this, because all he’s done for almost 50 years is work in government. If Biden wins and the Dems get the Senate, they’ll destroy the economy.

Read: Career Politician Advocates $15 Minimum Wage And Bailing Them Out »

Posted in Donald Trump, Economy, Joe Biden | 23 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Leftist Cities With Climate Pledges Aren’t Really Accomplishing Much

By William Teach October 22, 2020 – 3:37 pm

I know I’m surprised. Are you surprised? It’s easy to make a pledge, right? We make them all the time for New Year’s Day. I’m good at continuing to work out (excepting during lockdown, though I did do at least a 2 mile walk daily), but, playing more golf and losing weight? Not so much. But, then, that only affects me, and doesn’t really harm anyone else. Lots of these climate cult cities make lots of pledges. How are they doing?

Cities are pledging to confront climate change, but are their actions working?

Scientists and activists put the problem of global warming on the national agenda in the late 1980s. Since then, five different presidents have occupied the White House, leading to five disparate federal strategies for managing the emissions that cause climate change.

Whipsawed by Washington, activists and policymakers have instead turned inside the country, notably to cities. Since 1991, over 600 local governments in the United States have developed climate action plans that include greenhouse gas inventories and reduction targets, reflecting growing public concern about the consequences of a warmer planet. Recently, this local action has been accelerating. But despite numerous studies, we still don’t know if all this effort is working.

(Hint: it’s not)

Now, a team of scholars organized by the Brookings Institution has built and analyzed one of the most comprehensive statistical evaluations of just what’s happening in a cross section of diverse cities on emissions reductions. Unlike earlier studies—which tend to focus only on the places that have made climate pledges—we looked at all of the nation’s 100 largest cities to get a dose of realism about how much of the country is really engaged in confronting climate change.

From that perspective, what cities are doing is—at best—a start. As of 2017, only 45 of the 100 largest cities had any serious climate pledge at all, and many of those pledges are more aspirational than realistic. About two-thirds of cities with climate pledges are currently lagging in their targeted emissions cuts, while 13 others don’t appear to have available emissions tracking in place.

Hey, this is not some climate skeptic group looking at this: the Brookings Institute is definitely far left. They go on to attempt to paint some sort of rosy picture, and yammer about having to have nation and international dictates forcing citizens to comply, but, let’s face it, most of what these leftist climate cult cities with a majority leftist climate cultists as citizens are doing is just climavirtue signaling. It’s easy to make that pledge, right? Not so easy when instituting it levels their economies, and the government’s themselves, and especially the elected politicians, rarely take actions in their own lives. Go too far and you end up with the Yellow Vest protests in Paris.

Read: Bummer: Leftist Cities With Climate Pledges Aren’t Really Accomplishing Much »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 22, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is a big 1%er backyard which should be confiscated and have wind turbines installed, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post asking if we can get Pope Francis back.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

California’s Governor, Ruling Elites Come Up With Crazy Restrictions For Thanksgiving And Christmas

By William Teach October 22, 2020 – 10:30 am

Hey, this is what you crazy Modern Socialist moonbats voted for, so, don’t complain. And don’t leave the state, bringing your crazy with you, trying to spread it after escaping it. Live under the crazy you created

California Just Declared War On Thanksgiving With Kafka-Level Regulations

Gov. Gavin Newsom just gave Californians more regulations for an early Christmas present — and anyone hoping to celebrate the holidays with family better hope there’s a gift receipt.

Just in time for the Thanksgiving and Christmas festivities, when most families gather with loved ones, California’s Democrat governor has issued a new set of regulations that bans gatherings of more than three households. Additionally, no indoor gatherings are permitted, so don’t plan on eating around the dining room table unless you lug it out into your backyard.

Newsom’s ban on gatherings of more than three households means that a family with more than two grown children can only have two visit at the same time. According to the Pew Research Center, almost two-thirds of mothers in their young forties in 1976 had three or more children. If those mothers are grandmothers now and their children are grown, that means up to two-thirds of families would be banned from bringing all their children under one roof for the holidays.

Sounds fun, eh?

Not only is California limiting the number of households that can come for Thanksgiving, the state also requires hosts to write down the names of all attendees for contact tracing. For families who want to celebrate the holidays with both sets of in-laws, “participating in multiple gatherings with different households or groups is strongly discouraged.”

Remember when Liberals used to be about government staying out of their bedroom, meaning their personal affairs? What happens if The Government comes and you don’t have a List? Will they arrest you? What if there was no COVID, but, government still wants you list?

That has to be the end of the crazy, right?

In addition to limiting how much of your family can gather, California is mandating that all gatherings happen outside. That means families can’t congregate in the kitchen to cook together, serve food in the kitchen, or sit around the dining room table. Family members can leave your backyard and enter your house to use the restroom, but only if the restroom is “frequently sanitized.”

Have fun with that in warm Southern California and in the cold north and mountains. And, people must maintain 6 feet separation at all times.

Speaking of Thanksgiving turkey, Newsom’s regulations require that “as much as possible, any food or beverages at outdoor gatherings must be in single-serve disposable containers.” And no serving your own plate — if food can’t be served in single portions, then someone wearing a face covering must be there to dole out servings.

Attendees should also put their face masks back on as soon as they finish eating. And make sure to keep your gathering short, even if it’s been months since you’ve seen your extended family. “Gatherings should be two hours or less,” Newsom’s rules stipulate.

Is this about safety or just Progressives (nice Fascists) just controlling your life they way they want to? If you get used to it, you’ll comply more, right? And no singing Christmas carols, as it is “highly discouraged”. Who enforces all this? These are not suggestions. These are mandates.

Stay in your own state, California Democrats. This is yours, and you should have to live with it.

Read: California’s Governor, Ruling Elites Come Up With Crazy Restrictions For Thanksgiving And Christmas »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Bat Soup Virus, Democrats | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Excitable Cultist Bill McKibben: 9 Justices Isn’t Sacred, But A Livable Climate Is

By William Teach October 22, 2020 – 8:49 am

This doesn’t sound too much like a cult, does it?

There’s Nothing Sacred about Nine Justices; a Livable Planet, on the Other Hand . . .

The Republican-controlled Senate, by any measure, is acting dishonorably as it moves to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett for the high court: having previously declared that Presidents in their last year in office should not be able to nominate a new Justice, it reversed this “McConnell rule” when it served them to do so. The Trump years have been so ugly that this hypocrisy doesn’t stand out as sharply as it should, but it is an ignoble thing to have done and, in Barrett’s case, to have gone along with.

Still, it’s not the most remarkable thing about the moment. For me, anyway, that came when Senator John Kennedy, of Louisiana, asked Barrett if she had an opinion on climate change. “I’ve read things about climate change,” she said. “I would not say I have firm views on it.” It’s hard to imagine that an intelligent and highly educated person, such as Barrett, would not have reached a conclusion on the key questions facing the future of life on earth: Is global warming dangerous, and is it caused by humans? Neither of these positions is controversial among the scientific community, nor, for that matter, in the Catholic community where Barrett makes her spiritual home. Pope Francis’s lengthiest and most important encyclical, “Laudato Si,” takes on the climate crisis with a philosophical and sociological depth that few others have even attempted. The Pope’s newest encyclical, “Fratelli Tutti,” released this month, covers much the same ground, and he has helpfully produced a ted talk that makes the point in much sharper terms. “We must act now,” he said, which is what every scientist studying the crisis has said, too.

Still whining about that, eh? Bill makes an interesting admission

It is clear, first, that regulation is going to be essential to bring greenhouse gases under control, and, second, that it’s going to have to happen fast. The world’s climate scientists have stated plainly that the next decade represents the critical time frame: without fundamental transformation by 2030, the chances of meeting the Paris accord’s climate targets are nil. Given Barrett’s performance at her hearings, it seems doubtful that she’ll let America play its role—if you’re not even clear that climate change is real, how much latitude will you give government agencies to attack it? As with so many things about climate change, the problem is ultimately mathematical. Joe Biden, should he be elected, acting not out of anger but out of sorrow at Republican gamesmanship, could make sure that the will of the people, not just the will of Charles Koch, is represented on the bench. The composition of the Supreme Court has varied over time from five Justices to ten; eleven seems like the right number for 2021. Or maybe thirteen.

It is clear, first, that the Cult of Climastrology is really all about empowering more Big Government control over everything, and, second, that the CoC really wants to control your life and take your money, and they cannot do that unless they can pack the court to make sure their un-Constitutional power grabs can be ruled A-OK by the Supreme Court. Of course, to make this happen, they would have to pass a new law to do this, not an easy thing, as having 9 Justices has been the law since 1869. The last time Dems tried this, during the FDR period, and he was a heck of a lot more popular than Joe, people damn near revolted. Seriously, if you need to pack the court to get your agenda through, it might be rather shady, is it not?

Read: Excitable Cultist Bill McKibben: 9 Justices Isn’t Sacred, But A Livable Climate Is »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Constitution, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Should Avoid Hunter Biden, Talk About Economy And Keeping Citizens Safe

By William Teach October 22, 2020 – 8:36 am

In case you missed it, these are the subjects for the next and final debate, rather than the original foreign policy focus

  • Coronavirus
  • National Security
  • Race
  • Leadership
  • American Families
  • Climate Change

Karl Rove says

With less than two weeks left before the 2020 presidential election, former White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove said it would be more “effective” for the Trump campaign to focus on the economy as opposed to the Hunter Biden “scandal.”

Rove made the statement on “America’s Newsroom” on Wednesday shortly after Trump 2020 Campaign National Press Secretary Hogan Gidley appeared on the program and explained the campaign strategy to focus on Hunter Biden and his international business dealings to attack Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

“The president isn’t talking about Hunter Biden. What he is talking about is Joe Biden and what these emails now reveal is that Joe Biden is flatout corrupt,” Gidley said referencing the Hunter Biden emails reportedly revealing his foreign business dealings, including contacts in Ukraine and China.

“This was one of the big problems with Hillary Clinton back in 2016,” Gidley continued. “The American people knew about Clinton cash.”

Admittedly, that worked, did it not?

In response, Rove pointed to a Washington Post op-ed written by former White House chief speechwriter Marc Thiessen in which Thiessen argued that President Trump “needs to stop talking about Hunter Biden” and “start winning over reluctant voters.”

“He argues the focus ought to be on the economy and the big contrast between the policy prescriptions of President Trump and those of Joe Biden and frankly I’m in agreement with him,” Rove, a Fox News contributor, said.

On one hand, yeah. People need to know about the good news in the economy, and that Joe’s plans would be bad for the economy, jobs, and their wallets. How do they effect American families? Think about this: for all the Democrat caterwauling about Trump’s tax plan not helping the middle and lower classes, those making less than $400,000, Biden’s plan keeps the taxes exactly the same for those making under $400k, so, they must have been good, right? Trump could ask Joe why he wasted so much money on projects that were not shovel ready, on companies that went out of business, on unnecessary weatherization projects, and more, while Obama had Joe in charge of the 2009 Stimulus. He could ask Joe what exactly he knows about business, considering he’s been an elected official most of his life.

But, of course, this campaign has mostly been about personality rather than policies.

Lee Carter: Biden vs. Trump – at presidential debate both men must say these 4 words to voters

Thursday night is the last chance President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden have to make their case on the debate stage. And while the microphones can now be muted, there’s one message they must still get across: with me, you will be safe.

Here’s why those four words are so important and mean so much.

No matter where you sit on the political spectrum, you likely feel the same emotion right now: fear. And more than anything, we need to be reassured.

We need to know that it’s all going to be OK. That we can wake up after the election is decided, breathing a long-needed sigh of relief.

And so, for both Trump and Biden, the message must be the same. But what it means coming for each of them will be totally different. Let’s start with the president and then move on to the Democratic presidential nominee.

Carter goes through a list for both candidates. For Trump, it’s about telling people you’ll have freedom, jobs, money, Right to be armed, protecting freedom of speech, protection from overbearing government. For Joe, it’s all about Government being mommy and daddy.

And they’re both right. Trump should actually use tonight’s debate to discuss topics. He should focus on who’s policies keep people safe and prosperous better, that Joe wants government control of your life, that his climate change plans and everything else will increase people’s taxes and cost of living. That Trump has been working to spread peace in the Middle East in a way no one else did, that Biden emboldened the Iranian terrorist government. That Joe and the Dems stood back while their Antifa folks burned down black owned businesses and created mayhem which distracted from police reform, and how so many Dems want to simply defund the police. Compare and contrast. Will he? We’ll see.

Read: Trump Should Avoid Hunter Biden, Talk About Economy And Keeping Citizens Safe »

Posted in Donald Trump, Joe Biden | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Crisis (scam): Cold Lizards Falling Out Of Trees In Florida Is Your Fault

By William Teach October 21, 2020 – 3:00 pm

My little spies tell me you had an evil cowburger the other day, with fatty french fries and a sugary drink with an evil plastic straw. Hence, lizards are falling from trees

What cold lizards in Miami can tell us about climate change resilience

It was raining iguanas on a sunny morning.

Biologist James Stroud’s phone started buzzing early on Jan. 22. A friend who was bicycling to work past the white sands and palm tree edges of Key Biscayne, an island town south of Miami, sent Stroud a picture of a 2-foot long lizard splayed out on its back. With its feet in the air, the iguana took up most of the sidewalk.

The previous night was south Florida’s coldest in 10 years, at just under 40 degrees Fahrenheit. While most people reached for an extra blanket or a pair of socks, Stroud—a postdoctoral research associate in Arts & Sciences at Washington University in St. Louis—frantically texted a collaborator:

“Today’s the day to drop everything, go catch some lizards.”

When temperatures go below a critical limit, sleeping lizards lose their grip and fall out of trees. From previous research, Stroud and his colleagues had learned that different types of lizards in Miami can tolerate different low temperatures, ranging from about 46 to 52 degrees Fahrenheit, before they are stunned by cold. This  provided a unique opportunity to understand how they are affected by .

They couldn’t possibly be blaming cold on greenhouse gases which make the world warmer, could they? The researchers found that many of the lizards, some with Central and South American roots, have adapted to the cold, but

Regardless of the underlying mechanism, the new study provides a critically important piece of information for understanding the impacts of climate change.

Scientists expect that air temperatures will gradually become warmer under climate change, but also that temperatures will become more chaotic.

Events that spike temperature to extremes—both exceptionally hot and exceptionally cold episodes—will increase in frequency and magnitude. As such, it is important to understand both the effects of gradual, long-term increases in air temperatures as well as the consequences of abrupt, short-term extreme events.

Well, hopefully they do not turn into alligator lizards in the air.

Read: Climate Crisis (scam): Cold Lizards Falling Out Of Trees In Florida Is Your Fault »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 21, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…is grass that is dying due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on Pelosi not being able to stop pandering.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 9 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove