Exploring what can happen when people think for themselves.
Funny how Google did not offer its services to the country when President Trump’s administration was in office. I wonder why? ( No, I don’t…)
Maybe they’ve taken a page from the liberal playbook and are buying votes (to stall or drop the government’s antitrust actions). Time will tell.
Could it be that Gov. Newsom’s COVID-19 decisions have been based on politics rather than facts, and he simply doesn’t want this revealed while so many are pushing for his recall?
California ignores public records request, keeps coronavirus data hidden
If a Republican had said this about a member of Biden’s administration, they’d be deemed a racist and cancelled in a heartbeat. But a Democrat supporter? No big deal…
You’re a tool, Tim – and a dull one at that. Take your racist, misogynistic views and go back to Delta House. It’s where you belong.
Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass), one of AOC’s “squad”, has implicated as racist the longstanding tradition of the Senate filibuster by claiming that it is a Jim Crow remnant. She is either intentionally lying to garner support for its dissolution or she is woefully ignorant of the filibuster’s origins. Either way makes her unsuitable as a member of the United States House of Representatives.
Pressley is quoted in a recent news article (via a Twitter post) of the following:
Only the filibuster’s origins have nothing to do with “Jim Crow” laws. In fact, the rule change that allowed for the filibuster originated in 1806, and it’s first use was in 1837 – long before the post-civil war era that led to the development of Jim Crow laws. But, to be fair, former President Obama made the same claim recently. However, this endorsement of her idea does not excuse Rep. Pressley from investigating the origins of the filibuster before making such outlandish claims.
Making false claims of racism is the equivalent of crying “Wolf!”, and at some point the people will tire of these invented claims. But how many traditions and rights will be trampled in the mean time by such incorrect assertions?
As president Biden rushes to to un-do the work of President Trump, I take issue with one action in particular: rejoining the Paris climate accord. You don’t have to be a climate science denier to be against the Paris accord as originally agreed; you just have to be awake.
Note that I have no problem with America working towards a greener, cleaner and self-sustained energy infrastructure. Nor do I deny that this is something we – along with the rest of the world – must do to preserve our way of life. But it must be done fairly, uniformly and simultaneously to prevent unintended consequences.
My primary concern with the Paris climate accord is that it is a voluntary commitment allowing different countries to have different goals for their global warming emissions reduction. The U.S. has committed to an aggressive goal; other countries have not (guess who…). The result could be that American products are priced out of the international (or even domestic) markets due to increased compliance costs associated with America’s bold emissions reduction goals. If this happens we’ll lose our manufacturing base; we’ll end up buying our products from other countries that might not have the same emission standards or Paris accord commitment, resulting in even more emissions than if we had continued production here without any additional reductions. It’s a double-whammy: lose our industry AND increase total global emissions. Not a good combination.
Instead we must insist on trading partners who agree to meet the same Paris accord commitment as we do or pay a tariff commensurate with the difference in manufacturing costs associated with emissions compliance. This will require productivity-based emissions goals – in other words, comparable products should have comparable emissions no matter where produced. Complicated – yes, but the alternative is to wipe out our own industrial base while increasing worldwide emissions.
Dump the Paris accord, President Biden, until it treats all polluters equally.
I don’t know about you, but I’m pretty sure I couldn’t get on a plane, train or bus without a mask BEFORE he signed this executive order:
President Biden signs mask mandate via executive order for planes, trains, buses
President Biden cancelled the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline in one of his first executive orders. This was a knee-jerk reaction by liberals to a Trump-supported project and a poor decision on the part of President Biden.
The Keystone XL pipeline project would have been a source for thousands of American jobs. In addition, it would have ensured that America – if we were slow in our move to clean energy – maintained a conventional source of energy from a trusted ally and partner. Finally, the refusal to honor a prior permit – regardless of by whom it was approved – places doubt on the security of any future permits; this will increase the perceived risk of investing in large American infrastructure projects that require federal-level approval.
A better option for our country would have been to let it go forward, but make it pointless by accelerating the new administration’s move to clean energy. In this way we’d have the jobs building the XL pipeline until the green energy infrastructure and jobs materialized, and a backup energy source from an ally in the mean time. While this would have been detrimental to Keystone pipeline investors (the value of the pipeline would plummet if green energy goals were met ahead of schedule), that’s a legitimate risk investors take – not the risk that different administrations would alternate between approval and cancellation of their project.
Smooth move, Mr. President. Thanks for caving to the “green” police. I hope the labor unions don’t eat you alive…
The city of Baltimore is suing more than a dozen oil companies for damages resulting from climate change, claiming that the companies knew their products caused global warming.
Baltimore Is Suing Big Oil Over Climate Change
I’ve got news for you, Baltimore – it’s not the manufacture of oil products that causes global warming; it’s the use of such products. Are you also going to argue that your citizens – you know, the ones with SUVs, traveling by plane, heating their pools, etc. – did not know that the use of these fuels caused global warming? Because I think the ones using the oil products are at least as culpable as those producing them.
Blaming the oil companies for global warming is like blaming McDonald’s for making you fat; it was your choice to use their products, and you must assume responsibility for your actions. But this is just about extorting money out of the oil companies, isn’t it? Deep pockets, you know.
…sure seems to work. But people get mad when you welch on the agreed payment:
Georgia voters enraged after Democrats promise of ‘$2,000 checks’ becomes $1,400
They promised to pay people with “government” money for their votes, then stiffed them on the full payment. Maybe this is how we finally get the Democrats to admit that there was voter “fraud”…
Now possible Republican National Guard members – or, god forbid, Trump voters – cannot be trusted to honor their commitment to the Constitution. All of them must be vetted before they are allowed to protect the capital or President Biden:
Trump supporters in National Guard might ‘do something’ to Biden, Dem congressman says
Maybe Democrats will use this as a basis to develop their own, trusted military force of people vetted as loyal to them (rather than the Constitution). Maybe they’ll give this new force a cool name like “Select Security”, or “SS” for short. How about a cool insignia, like a double lightning bolt? Sound familiar?
The ongoing efforts by Democrats (and the media) to associate all who disagree with the incoming administration as a danger to society is troubling. It’s baseless claims like these, and politicians like Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn) who promulgate them, that are the true threat to our democracy.