If All You See…

By William Teach October 17, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…are leaves falling due to carbon pollution driven climatic changes, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post fact checking the Harris-Biden tax plan.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 28 Comments | Trackback URL

Democratic Apoplexy Over ACB Could Lead To Changes They Don’t Want To Talk About

By William Teach October 17, 2020 – 10:30 am

If you’re a politician and you do not want to discuss your plans openly because your opponent might take advantage of it, it might not be a good thing you’re planning to do, right? The NY Times doesn’t seem all that interested in what the agenda, is, just that something is there and Republicans might pounce and ZOMG ACB!

Democrats’ Anger Over Barrett Could Have Big Consequences in the Senate

Sore LosersJudge Amy Coney Barrett is on a glide path to the Supreme Court, but she will leave behind a Senate badly torn by its third confirmation blowup in four years, with the potential for severe repercussions should Democrats take control next year.

The decision by Sen. Mitch McConnell and Republicans to push through Barrett’s nomination to the high court on the eve of the election, after blocking President Barack Obama’s pick under similar circumstances in 2016, enraged many Democrats, who saw it as a violation of Senate norms and customs. With some already contemplating consequential changes, they were coming under increased pressure from progressive activists demanding payback in the form of an end to the legislative filibuster and an expansion in the size of federal courts should Joe Biden triumph in the presidential race and Democrats take the Senate.

In the aftermath of the confirmation hearing, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader, said it would be premature to discuss what Democrats might do if they won the Senate majority. But he did not dismiss the idea that changes could be in store should the party prevail, only to hit roadblocks erected by a Republican minority in 2021.

Man, if only there was a huge news outlet which could badger Schumer to tell us, doing the job of a reporter, as protected by the 1st Amendment

Democrats have been hesitant to discuss their plans should they gain power, not wanting to provide Republicans — who are playing defense around the country — with an issue that could alienate voters. Biden has pointedly declined to give his opinion on adding seats to the courts, but during a Thursday night town-hall-style interview on NBC, he said he was “open” to the idea depending on how Republicans handled Barrett’s nomination.

Think about that: if those changes were good, they would have zero problem saying what they are, instead of worrying that they will alienate voters. That tells you all you need to know about their agenda, just like Handsy Joe refusing to really say whether he would be in favor of packing the courts.

Whether Democrats would move to gut the filibuster, expand the court or institute other changes would depend on multiple factors even should they win. Biden, a former longtime member of the Senate, would be cautious about upending an institution he reveres. In addition, how the Republicans respond to a Democratic takeover would be a major consideration. Plus, the margin of victory and the size of the party divide in the Senate would also factor into the debate.

Joe is in La La Land, and will do whatever Harris and the hardcores in his Party tell him to do.

Read: Democratic Apoplexy Over ACB Could Lead To Changes They Don’t Want To Talk About »

Posted in Democrats, Elections | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Slams Green New Disaster, Says AOC Has Some Great Mule Fritters

By William Teach October 17, 2020 – 7:58 am

He’s not wrong, you know

Trump says AOC has ‘a great line in bulls***’ as he slams Green New Deal

Donald Trump attacked Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for having a “great line of bulls***” but knowing nothing about the environment, as crowds at a rally in Macon, Georgia cheered.

The president took a swing at the New York congresswoman as he mocked her Green New Deal proposals to deal with the climate crisis.

Mr Trump made the dismissive comments to a campaign rally crowd on Friday, his third public event of the day following a speech to seniors and another rally in Florida.

“She doesn’t know anything about the environment, she doesn’t know, she has got a great line of bulls*** thats about it,” said Mr Trump to huge cheers.

Remember, her former chief of staff said it was all about economic, not the “environment”.

It was introduced in 2019 by Ms Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey.

Poor Ed Markey, he’s always left out of the discussion on the GND, but, he, if it’s not a great line of bullshit, then why have neither pushed hard to get it passed? In fact, again, you remember that Markey voted present when it was put up for a vote in the Senate, and AOC railed about the vote, wondering why the Senate was voting on her legislation, forgetting that Markey put it up in the Senate. Further, we’re fast approaching two years since it was introduce in that February, and not only has there been no votes in the House, it isn’t even being discussed in committee. Nor is AOC demanding that it get hearings and a vote.

Sounds like mule fritters to me. And now we’re just waiting for her shrieking response.

Read: Trump Slams Green New Disaster, Says AOC Has Some Great Mule Fritters »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Democrats, Global Warming | 43 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrat Riot Cities Sue Trump Admin For Attempting To Keep Law And Order

By William Teach October 17, 2020 – 7:03 am

Too bad this isn’t a bigger story, as voters might not be appreciative of Democratic Party cities suing over efforts to safeguard citizens and property, both federal and private. Even Democrat voters in the riot citizens might be rethinking their support for the riot enabling Democratic Party leaders

Portland, Oakland Sue Trump Administration for Efforts to Maintain Law and Order in U.S. Cities

The cities of Portland, Oregon, and Oakland, California, filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday claiming that the Trump administration’s effort to maintain law and order in U.S. cities and to protect federal property was unconstitutional. 

The lawsuit said that the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security unconstitutionally took over police duties in those cities, where, in the case of Portland, police have faced almost nightly violent riots that have resulted in property damage, injuries, and even deaths.

The genesis of the lawsuit comes from President Donald Trump signing an executive order in June to fulfill the federal government’s responsibility to protect the American people and federal property.

The local ABC affiliate in Portland reported on the lawsuit:

The cities sued the departments’ leaders, Attorney General William Barr and Acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf, in their official capacities as well and asked the judge to forbid the federal agencies of sending officers to the cities. The 48-page lawsuit was filed in federal court in California.

Among the allegations, the cities said the federal government’s policies to send in officers to protect federal property instead “reveal a distinct and meaningful policy shift to use federal law enforcement to unilaterally step in or replace local law enforcement departments that do not subscribe to the President’s view of domestic “law and order.””

Seriously, what does it say about Democratic Party leaders when they let a small number of people run riot, literally, through the streets, committing violence, assault, arson, looting, and more? When they are free to attack police officers, throw explosives, attack federal buildings, destroy private businesses, and harass private citizens with virtually no penalties, and the governments of those cities sue to stop the federal government from protecting citizens and property?

“Yet again, dangerous politicians and fringe special interest groups have ginned up a meritless lawsuit,” a spokesperson from DHS said. “They aim to harm President Trump and distract from his law and order agenda.”

“Department of Homeland Security have acted entirely lawfully,” the spokesperson said. “Instead of condemning the violence we are seeing across the country, these politicians focus on scoring cheap political points to the detriment of the American people.”

We all saw the rioting on TV and the Internet. That’s what the lawsuit is trying to protect: criminal behavior.

Read: Democrat Riot Cities Sue Trump Admin For Attempting To Keep Law And Order »

Posted in Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times: ACB Calling ‘Climate Change’ (scam) Controversial Is Controversial Or Something

By William Teach October 16, 2020 – 2:59 pm

See, people aren’t allowed to have opinions on political issues, and, climate cultists are kinda concerned that they will lose at the Supreme Court (because they’re arguments are not good and their facts are shoddy)

By Calling Climate Change ‘Controversial,’ Barrett Created Controversy

During two grueling days of questioning over her Supreme Court confirmation, Judge Amy Coney Barrett did her best to avoid controversy. But her efforts to play it safe on the subject of climate change have created perhaps the most tangible backlash of her hearings.

In her responses, the nominee to take the place of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an environmental stalwart, used language that alarmed some environmentalists and suggested rough going for initiatives to fight climate change, if as expected she wins confirmation and cements a 6-3 conservative majority on the court.

But with Senator Kamala Harris of California, the Democratic candidate for vice president, Judge Barrett, the daughter of an oil executive, went further. She described the settled science of climate change as still in dispute, compared to Ms. Harris’s other examples, including whether smoking causes cancer and the coronavirus is infectious.

“Do you believe that climate change is happening and threatening the air we breathe and the water that we drink?” Ms. Harris asked.

Judge Barrett responded, “You asked me uncontroversial questions, like Covid-19 being infectious or if smoking causes cancer” to solicit “an opinion from me on a very contentious matter of public debate,” climate change.

“I will not do that,” Judge Barrett concluded. “I will not express a view on a matter of public policy, especially one that is politically controversial.”

And that’s where it should be, in the legislative realm, not the justice system. But, Warmists know if they can get courts to rule in their favor they can jam through their agenda. If you make it all the to the end of this barely concealed opinion piece in the “news” section you see

To Carlos Curbelo, a former Republican member of Congress who supports action on climate change, the focus on Judge Barrett’s comments misses a broader point that the courts are not the proper venue for dealing with a problem as vast and complex as climate.

“Because Congress has been so dysfunctional for so many years, now we look to the courts,” Mr. Curbelo, “but we should be far more concerned with lawmakers and their understanding of the issue and willingness to act.”

But, see, climate cultists can’t. Even when the Democrats had full control of the Senate, House, and White House they didn’t push it through. So, they want the courts to rule. They can’t do that with ACB on the Supreme Court, and, also, she’s guilty of Wrongthink.

Read: NY Times: ACB Calling ‘Climate Change’ (scam) Controversial Is Controversial Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 16, 2020 – 1:00 pm

…are smaller than usual pumpkins due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is No Tricks Zone, with a post on a study showing East Antarctica was up to 6C higher during the Medieval Warm Period.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Want A Reason To Vote Trump? Just Look At The Courts

By William Teach October 16, 2020 – 10:30 am

There are the Never Trumpers, who will never acknowledge anything good that Trump has done, and then the “I just don’t like him’s”. Politics is often a system where you have a bad choice and a worse choice. Complain all you want about Trump personally, but, do you want Joe Biden (OK, really, Kamala Harris) and the Democrats picking the judges? Trump, along with Mitch McConnell (go figure), has filled an enormous amount of federal judicial positions, including 2 about to be 3 spots on the Supreme Court. He has turned the worse leftist court in the nation, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, a court that has been overturned by the Supreme Court more than any other because they rule on their Modern Socialist beliefs rather than Law and Constitutions, into almost a conservative court.

Supreme Court battle turns into 2020 proxy war

The fight over Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination is turning into a proxy war over the looming November election.

With Barrett’s nomination on a glide path, senators in both parties are instead using the chamber’s debate to make their case to voters in the final weeks of the Nov. 3 election, where both control of the White House and the Senate majority are up for grabs.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — while acknowledging that he believes Democrats have a “good chance” of winning the White House — predicted that the Supreme Court fight would influence voters when they cast their ballots.

“I think the public will go into the voting booth. And they’ll say, ‘Okay I’ve seen the kind of judges Democrats will nominate. I’ve seen the kind of judges Republicans will nominate,’ and that will be important to people,” Graham said.

Both sides are predicting the Supreme Court fight will pay political dividends in an already volatile election. Democrat believe the potential implications for health care give them a potent political force and Republicans are hoping for a redux of 2018, when several Democratic senators who opposed then-nominee Brett Kavanaugh lost.

Republicans are tying themselves closely to Barrett, believing the Supreme Court energizes their voters and could shore up support for GOP, or Republican-leaning, voters that might have grown exhausted by Trump.

There’s plenty more to this article, but, just consider: if you’re a squishy “zomg, Trump is a horrible person personally” Republican, is it worth it to hold your nose and vote Trump, or, if you like, against Biden, and keep putting good conservatives on the courts? I’ve said before, I held my nose in 2016 and ticked the box for Trump/Pence after doing the entire ballot first on election day, and it was more voting against Hillary than for Trump. Trump had to be better than Hillary, right, especially when Mike Pence, one of the good guys, was on the ticket, right? For all your Trump hatred, which is worse? His bloviating and stuff President Biden/Harris?

Read: Want A Reason To Vote Trump? Just Look At The Courts »

Posted in Donald Trump, GOP | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Cult Report Calls For Getting Rid Of Fossil Fueled Vehicles And Home Heating Oil

By William Teach October 16, 2020 – 7:17 am

The Cult of Climastrology tells us what restrictions and such they want to put on Other People: you just have to listen to what they say, yet, too many fall for the scam. This comes from the New Jersey Department Of Environmental Protection, which doesn’t seem to have given up its own use of fossil fueled vehicles

No gas-powered cars, no heating oil for homes. Climate report calls for major action

New Jersey has met a short-term goal of trimming carbon emissions but must make radical changes to transportation, electric generation, construction and industry if it is to achieve a much bigger reduction by the middle of the century, the Department of Environmental Protection said Thursday.

In a report on progress toward a legal requirement of cutting emissions by 80% from 2006 levels by 2050, the DEP called for “steep and permanent” reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions within the “next several years.”

Unless the state puts itself on a path to rapidly phase out fossil fuels and adopt renewables on a wide scale, its people will see the increasing effects of climate change including sea-level rise, increases in temperature and precipitation, chronic flooding, bigger storms and longer droughts, the “80×50” report said.

See, they have to attempt to scare people to get them to Comply with paying more taxes and fees, dealing with their cost of living skyrocketing, and giving up freedom, liberty, and choice.

Achieving transportation’s share of the shift would require a massive change in how new cars, SUVs and light-duty trucks are powered, the report said. It calculated that 88% of those vehicles would have to be driven by electricity or hydrogen by 2030, rising to 100% by 2035. For electric vehicles, that would mean expanding their number by 111,000 a year until 2035 from the current rate of only 8,000 a year, the report said.

Anyone ever been in NJ traffic? Good luck not running out while sitting in it (just like in California which is looking to do the same). Of course, you can bet it will be mandated that people take the bus or train to work rather than their own vehicle, plus, people won’t be able to really afford those pure electric vehicles, especially since power will be scarce and expensive.

And it said the experience of millions of people working from home rather than commuting to offices during the COVID-19 pandemic “provides an opportunity to realize significant short-term emissions reductions in the transportation sector.”

Looks like they want people pretty much staying home all the time.

Residential and commercial sectors account for the second-largest share of emissions, 26%, and the report said they must fall by 89% by 2050 to meet the overall target. That could be achieved in part by phasing out the use of heating oil and propane, which together account for about 10% of New Jersey residences. Legislation or directives from the Board of Public Utilities could be used to achieve a conversion of new building stock, starting at 22% by 2030, rising to 90% by 2050.

Say goodbye to your gas stove and heating, along with your propane grill, among others. Solar can provide adequate heat on a cold winter night, right? Right?

The New Jersey Business & Industry Association called the report a “first step” toward setting needed policy on reducing emissions, but said the absence of cost estimates limited its usefulness.

“It’s perfectly OK to do the analysis and say, ‘here’s where we think we need to go,’” said Ray Cantor, the BIA’s vice president of government affairs. “But DEP said there is really no analysis as to what this is going to cost, there is no analysis as to whether our energy system would actually be reliable as a result. It’s a starting point for the detailed conversations but it’s absolutely not how we should move forward.”

Cost? Pfft. There’s no need to worry about cost when you are Saving The World. When NJ gives this a whirl, and it is a when, not an if, the NJ Business and Industry Association will surely be among the first to bitch about their cost increases. NJ should try this. Like I’ve said, we need experimental groups to show us what happens.

Read: Climate Cult Report Calls For Getting Rid Of Fossil Fueled Vehicles And Home Heating Oil »

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

Conserving Conservatism By Electing Biden Is A Crusade Or Something

By William Teach October 16, 2020 – 7:00 am

Yeah, yeah, we all watched or read about the townhalls last night, where Trump ended up mostly debating Samantha Guthrie instead of answering audience questions and not getting softballs like Biden did previously, and Biden mostly got softballs and adoration again on another station. But, hey, let’s hear from James Carville at The Bulwark, which is supposed to be conservatives conserving conservatism

A Crusade for Something Noble
Americans are coming together to save our Republic, right now. And it means something.

In 1948, General Dwight D. Eisenhower released an expansive memoir that transcribed his personal account as Supreme Allied commander in Europe during World War II, the single most important American military official in the war. He chronicled the travail of the war in its bitter totality: men sunk beneath waves of bullets and unbroken battle; the immeasurable sorrow levied as hundreds-of-thousands perished for their country; the fateful decisions he took in which he accepted complete responsibility—most importantly the decision for the D-Day invasion. At the same time, Eisenhower also wrote of what was indomitable about Americans, how the country overcame and rang freedom’s bell for a world enveloped by the forces of darkness.

See, Americans who do not actually like America and want to change and/or destroy everything about the nation are coming together with unhinged Never-Trumpers, the latter which only focus on Trump’s personality rather all the conservative things he’s done (judges, anyone?), to stop the forces of darkness. Yet, not one can actually say what freedoms Trump has taken away

I know it’s difficult for so many of us to feel hope in this moment, which seems so incomprehensibly dark. We are a nation deeply wounded from a liberated virus. We’re struggling with systemic racism. And we’ve endured lashing mental abuse, time and again, from the president of the United States. But it is not a darker moment than what Ike saw when he looked across the English Channel on June 6, 1944 at the continent of Europe, dominated by the Nazis.

See, you’re supposed to remember to call Trump voters Nazis

So I see a light ahead. Just days away, a unified and electrified coalition of Americans, coming together like our country did in World War II, standing united to send a message that will be heard around the world to all those who look with expectant hope to the America that led the crusade more than half a century ago: That America has not succumbed to a demagogue and would-be autocrat. That we have overcome. And that Donald J. Trump is not who we are.

In just a short time, America will go from its darkest hour to its finest hour. (snip)

We find ourselves again at such a turning point. Donald Trump’s authoritarian presence behind the Resolute Desk is amongst the gravest threats America has ever faced from within. And Americans have risen to meet this threat.

Again, what freedoms has Trump taken away? Is he ruling with his pen and phone? How about passing massive legislation and implementing massive regulations that have huge government control impacts on the lives of citizens? Using Executive office agencies to spy on and/or harass private citizens and groups? Is he wanting everyone locked down, shutting down churches, and threatening Jews?

My participation on this site, which is operated by many of my former Republican rivals, is evidence of this unity in and of itself.

This article, posted right here, is evidence that this is a moment that carries extraordinary consequences much more profound than victory or defeat for a candidate.

Like the majority of people that read this news site, I am white and affluent and—you know what else?—I love my country. Collectively, what I know to be true among so many like us, is that we understand we have existed on an advantaged and privileged perch in our slice of America.

I had to include the white and rich privilege stuff for a hoot, but, look, there are some days I think that it would be great to give these Never Trumper Republican nuts like the Bulwark what they want, just to see them complain when they’re getting hit with tax and cost of living increases weekly, seeing Single Payer, what Dems call Medicare For All, passed, climate change scam legislation passed, implementing Net Neutrality, which will make the Internet a public utility with government controlling it, a Fairness Doctrine, which is really meant to kill off talk radio, which is dominated by Conservatives, along with outlets like Fox News, OANN, Newsmax TV, and so much more. Will these same Never Trumper Republicans be fine with the massive gun control passed? Will they be shocked if Dems attempt to go for an Australian solution? Raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, killing off jobs and businesses, making it harder for those left to work more than 30 hours a week? Make energy and fuel so expensive the average citizen can’t afford it? And so much more, the hit lost continues. And don’t forget, the Lefties will jettison Never Trumper’s and NT groups the minute Joe wins, because they will no longer be Useful Idiots.

And, don’t forget, these NT idiots are making it so that the Dems can keep and even expand the House, as well as win the Senate. How does that help them? OK, great, you hate Trump personally, ignore all the conservative things he’s done while covering their ears singing la la la la I can’t hear you, and want him gone, but, you’re helping Dems at all levels to win. How does that help? These morons should be the first ones to feel the pain, and, if Biden and the Dems win, I’ll be more than happy to let the ones I know in Real Life and on the Internet (including previously long term web-friends who no longer converse with me) “you got what you agitated for, which are you whining? Suck it up, buttercup.”

I have no time for these idiot NTs, who enable electing what they supposedly stand against.

Read: Conserving Conservatism By Electing Biden Is A Crusade Or Something »

Posted in Democrats, Donald Trump, Elections, Unhinged Tools | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Cultists Come Up With New Term, “Heat Storm”

By William Teach October 15, 2020 – 3:00 pm

It’s also apparently a “boiling poing” (view Climate Depot)

Boiling Point: Climate change is wreaking havoc on the power grid in ways you never knew

If you’re in the habit of reading the president’s tweets, you may have noticed a theme the last few weeks: California is a fiery wasteland. He said as much Tuesday, writing that the Golden State is “going to hell.”

What exactly is wrong with the nation’s most populous state? Why, rolling blackouts, forest fires and water rationing: (Trump tweet here)

Strangely, despite typically having hotter weather for longer during the year, you never hear about all the rolling blackouts and power grid issues from North Carolina down to Florida and east through Texas, eh?

As for blackouts? Well, if Trump wants to keep the lights on, he might consider doing something about climate change. (bold from story)

Or, California could go back to using reliable, efficient, lower cost energy sources. Oh, and deal with their power companies that keep having problems with down power lines and other maintenance failures.

The nonprofit research organization Climate Central analyzed federal data and released a report last month finding that hurricanes, wildfires, heat storms and other extreme weather events caused 67% more power outages in the United States during the decade ending in 2019 than they did during the previous decade. [Climate Depot note: Climate Central did not use the term “heat storm” in its report.] (snip)

“What happened during both of these heat storms was it didn’t cool down at night,” Nancy Sutley, chief sustainability officer for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, told me. “When it cools down at night — even when it’s really hot during the day — the equipment has a chance to cool down, and it will be OK. But the nighttime temperatures — when it was 111 downtown, it wasn’t 70 at night. It was 80 or 90 at night.”

Marc Morano goes on to note

The term “heat storm” also derives from the Star Wars movie series. The website Starwars.fandom.com defines the fictional term “heat storm” as a “natural occurrence” that raged across the fictional planet Ryloth in the Star Wars film series. “Heat storms consisted of furious cyclonic winds reaching speeds of up to 500 kilometers per hour and temperatures upwards of 300 degrees Celsius” and “If anyone was caught in one, they would be incinerated.” 

This sounds horrible for Californians! According to the Los Angeles Times, these (fictional) “heat storms” are now impacting California. The LA Times did not explain when people would be “incinerated” by these fictional Star Wars-inspired “heat storms.”

And, since the LA Times article and cultist Sammy Roth notes in his opinion screed disquised as news says it is primarily caused by the burning of fossil fuels, why are climate cultists refusing to give up their own usage?

Anthony Watts writes: “This renaming is just another way the left leaning media wants us to be afraid of normal weather patterns by making it into something that sounds scarier than “heat wave”.” Doomsday Cults always want things to sound apocolyptic.

Read: Climate Cultists Come Up With New Term, “Heat Storm” »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove