Warren Says She’s Willing To Ban Construction of New Homes in America

 

If your new home isn’t carbon neutral, an Elizabeth Warren presidency might not let you build it. And if that means no new homes get built in the United States, the Massachusetts senator and Democrat presidential nominee says she’s fine with that.

In the fog of being overloaded with news, it is easy to miss just how radical the Democrat nominees are. We should be concerned that the two communists are either leading or close to it in some polls. What in the world are people thinking? It is now acceptable to destroy our economy on the altar of Progressive Climate Change nonsense? No drill baby drill for her. She would have us live in tents as in San Fran? It’s interesting that none of this was brought forth in the recent debate. But of course.

All of this comes after she made her millions flipping houses.

Fauxcahontas Warren flipped houses, was a GOPer, became a multimillionaire first

In her 2006 book All Your Worth, co-authored with her daughter, Amelia, Warren lists as a top myth the idea that “you can make big money buying houses and flipping them quickly.” She has made a career out of telling people how to behave in financially responsible ways, and out of creating laws that will make it illegal for them to do otherwise.

Elizabeth Warren

WesternJournal report: During her appearance on Morning Joe, Warren was asked what she’d do to “change the tide of U.S. policy on the issue of climate change” and acted as if she’d been thrown the softball of all softballs.

“That means we’ve got to be willing to do things, for example, like regulation. By 2028, no new buildings, no new houses, without a zero carbon footprint.”

And she’s coming for your car and electricity bill, too.

“By 2030, trucks — light-duty trucks and cars, zero carbon footprint. By 2035, all production of electricity, zero carbon footprint,” Warren said.

Oh, and there was also talk of some vague idea of social justice — because schemes like this always need to be undergirded with some such vague idea-

“We also need to make environmental justice really at the heart of our climate plan,” Warren said.

Mr. Mika showed no inquisitiveness about her plans.

 

 

 

Other than that all is A-OK in the swamp.

For the best in news

 

 

 

Fat people contribute to Global Warming

 

I KID YOU NOT

by Mustang
 

Obese people contribute to global warming as they emit more carbon dioxide than those of a normal weight, according to research.” This from the Daily Mail

“The study, published in the journal ‘Obesity,’ also points out that by consuming more, they increase their impact on the planet.”
 
“Obesity is estimated to be responsible for 700 megatons of carbon dioxide, or about 1.6 per cent of all man-made emissions.”
  • Obesity Society calculated environmental impact of increased food intake
  • Overweight people are responsible for 20 per cent more greenhouse gas emissions compared with a lean person 
  • Transporting obese people also causes an excess of carbon dioxide emissions
“Researchers compared a larger body mass index with one considered normal and calculated the extra emission of greenhouse gasses.  They found an obese person produces an extra 81kg of carbon dioxide a year.  They are also responsible for an extra 593kg from increased food and drink consumption and an extra 476kg from car and air travel each year.”
 
“Author Faidon Magkos, of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, said, “In addition to beneficial effects on morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs, managing obesity can favorably affect the environment.”
 
“The authors said it was important not to stigmatize people because of their weight, and noted exercise also contributes to carbon emissions.”
 
This is NOT a joke, so to repeat the title, I kid you not.  
 
If we pretend that these statistics are bona fide scientific findings, does anyone have any ideas how to solve the problem? 
I mean, suppose an obese person doesn’t want to cut back on carbs or join Planet Fitness?  What solutions would socialists most likely come up with?  Come on, help us out. 

Leave us your suggestions (or likely outcomes of heavily socialist programs) for solving the problem.  Regale us with your best ideas, or better yet, send an email to Faidon Magkos at fma@nexs.ku.dk.  He could probably use the support.

Pope Endorses U.N. Pro-Abortion “Sustainable Development” Agenda

 

The Pope’s big deal at the Amazon meeting held recently was the discussion regarding married priests which took the headline. As with all of these meetings, it’s always good to look further. We are just learning about the fine print.

The low background hum you hear are the globalists and now the Pope advancing the over population of the planet theme. By golly, they will find a way to bring earth back to the glory days of Adam and Eve. After all, who should want to bring a child into this terrible earth we are living on. Killing Mother Earth.. is it 10 or 12 years we have left? I get so confused. Well that was quick, Catholics went past birth control being a sin to abortion all in one Pope’s reign.

If we thought this notion of just too many of us started recently, I will swing by Africa and what Obama’s thoughts were back in 2013.

But back to the tale:

“The Pontifical Academy of Sciences, members of a United Nations network directed by a pro-abortion globalist [Jeffrey Sachs], and governors of the Pan-Amazonian region have signed a common declaration committing themselves to implementing the UN sustainable development goals (SDGs) in the Amazon. 

“The Oct. 28 declaration, addressed to Pope Francis and signed at the pontifical academy’s Vatican headquarters one day after the close of the Amazon Synod, consists in 14 pledges to ‘build together effective solutions for sustainable development of Amazonia.’”

The three-week gathering, or synod, discussed spreading the faith in the Amazon, a greater role for women, environmental protection, climate change, deforestation, indigenous people and their right to keep their land and traditions.

While the sustainable development goals include “universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programmes,” their focus is providing for abortion.

The SDGs indeed are all about abortion. They propose that we make the planet a safer place through population control, i.e. abortion, but this is done under the guise of caring for the poor. The globalist ploy is to say that ‘we shouldn’t bring people into the world to suffer but should first take care of the poor that are among us.’

According to U.N. globalists, the big “sin” against the planet is the birthing of children since they will grow up to “pollute” the environment, so they see abortion as a sacrifice to this terrestrial deity, in a similar way children have been sacrificed to the Pachamama idol. The “Mother Earth” Pachamama idol that was venerated at the Vatican during the Amazon Synod merely symbolized this globalist cause of “atoning” to the planet. To think that Rome has joined the infamous U.N. in bowing to its planetary idol!

But it doesn’t end there. Pope Francis has handed the Church’s evangelical mission over to the United Nations, telling them, ‘you are now the pastors of the flock,’ and he tells the flock, ‘the U.N. representatives are now your pastors. When they speak, it is your duty to obey.’ Consider his discourse from a September 10 press conference on route to Rome from Madagascar.

“When we acknowledge international organizations and we recognize their capacity to give judgment, on a global scale — for example the international tribunal in The Hague, or the United Nations — If we consider ourselves humanity, when they make statements, our duty is to obey … We must obey international institutions. That is why the United Nations were created.”

Keep reading

Let’s take a look at what and the why of Africans as well and why no doubt their population needs to be controlled. T.V.’s and cars and air conditioning will just boil over the planet.

Back in 2013

Obama: ‘The planet will “boil over” if Africans raise their standard of living’

President Barack Obama said at a town hall event in Johannesburg, South Africa, on Saturday gives us this doom and gloom.

“Ultimately, if you think about all the youth that everybody has mentioned here in Africa, if everybody is raising living standards to the point where everybody has got a car and everybody has got air conditioning, and everybody has got a big house, well, the planet will boil over — unless we find new ways of producing energy.” –

 

 

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

For the best in conservative news tap the button.

 

 

 

 

Supreme court rules Baltimore climate change lawsuit against energy companies can proceed

 

The Robert’s Supreme court deals another blow. This time to the energy industry. The Supremes will allow a State court to proceed with an energy law suit at the same time the case resides in the fourth circuit federal appeals court for a ruling on jurisdiction.  The court did not disclose a vote count or reasons for rejecting the request for a stay. Just to show how bizarre this is:

Former Mayor Catherine Pugh decided to move ahead with the case, (2018) despite decisions against similar lawsuits in California and New York only days before Baltimore’s filing. In California, District Judge William Alsup determined in May 2018 that cases brought by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland against energy companies belonged in the federal judiciary, and strongly questioned key parts of the case, including the allegation that energy companies had created a “public nuisance” against an entire community. Rebuking the plaintiffs, he stated, “If we didn’t have fossil fuels, would have lost [World War II] and every other war. Planes wouldn’t fly. Trains wouldn’t run. And we’d be back in the Stone Age.”

Read more

But not the first of this:

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Virginia law that bans mining at the nation’s largest known uranium deposit.

Bloomberg

Sure, why not stop our Uranium production after Hillary was kind enough to give 20 percent of our deposits to the Russians.

The Supreme Court allowed the city of Baltimore to proceed with its climate change lawsuit against two dozen fossil fuel companies Tuesday, after the corporate defendants asked the justices to put the dispute on hold.

The oil and natural gas companies — among them BP, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, and Royal Dutch Shell — are fighting to move Baltimore’s lawsuit out of a Maryland state court into a federal court. They wanted the justices to stop state court proceedings while they fight to remove the dispute to a federal forum.

The lawsuit alleges that the fossil fuel companies have engaged in a “coordinated, multi-front effort” to conceal the harm of greenhouse gas emissions that attend the use of their products. The plaintiffs claim the energy industry has been investigating atmospheric carbon accumulation since at least 1958, and has long been aware of its environmental consequences.

After Baltimore lawyers filed their complaint in state court, the corporate defendants tried to move the case to federal court. U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander rejected that request. The companies are now fighting that decision in the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has yet to produce a decision.

The defendants went to the Supreme Court because state proceedings are slated to continue while the 4th Circuit considers their bid to move the dispute into the federal system.

Read more

A portion of an earlier B-ville post:

Baltimore suit of 26 energy companies for injuries sustained in climate change, heatwaves, continues

In the process, of course, we do untold damage to important industries that we need or want for our country’s wheels to go round. In this case in Baltimore against energy companies.

Another example of this type of action is suing various drug manufacturers for billions of dollars regarding Opioids.  Continuing this course will either bankrupt the companies, or damage them to the extent of limiting the research funds available for new discoveries.

The opioid manufacturers included in the lawsuit are Purdue Pharma, Cephalon, Inc. and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, while the opioid distributors are McKesson Corp., Cardinal Health, Inc. and AmerisourceBergen Drug Corp. More than 1,800 lawsuits have been filed against opioid manufacturers, distributors and pharmacies.

Read more

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

For the best in conservative news push the button. So much better than Drudge.

 

The Wind Farm, the Hamptons, the Super Rich, and ‘not in my back yard’

 

“My home is not a detail” so goes the argument against a wind farm landing cable site to be strewn throughout their particular clump of sand on tony Long Island. The battle between the very super rich and the super rich – Not in my back yard!!

So will it be Wainscott? Or twelve mies away away in Hither Hills in Montauk for a substation and run twelve miles of cable? Or no wind farm?

The transmission line would go through an area where homeowners include the billionaire Ronald Lauder and Marci Klein, daughter of Calvin Klein.

 

EAST HAMPTON, N.Y. — This affluent enclave on the East End of Long Island is steeped in eco-conscious pride, with strict water quality and land preservation rules and an abundance of electric cars on the roads.

Wainscott is home to many affluent homeowners, some of whom oppose having the transmission cable landing site in their neighborhood.

So at first, many happily embraced a plan for an offshore wind farm that would help lead the way as New York State sets some of the most ambitious green energy goals in the country.

But then came word that the project’s transmission cable was going to land in Wainscott, one of the most exclusive slices of the already exclusive Hamptons, where homeowners include the likes of the cosmetics billionaire Ronald Lauder and Marci Klein, a former longtime producer of “Saturday Night Live” and the daughter of Calvin Klein.

Soon a push to protect the planet was out and the imperative to protect a golden plot of sand was in. Homeowners organized and hired an army of lawyers, lobbyists, public relations experts and engineers to argue their case.

…still, he added, “their zeal for wind power need not be exclusive with picking the best available landing site.

Some view the landing site as a detail in the big picture of addressing climate control. But it is not a detail where the landing site is. My home is not a detail.” Wainscott is home to many affluent homeowners, some of whom oppose having the transmission cable landing site in their neighborhood.

Now the developer of the wind farm may turn to an alternate landing site, bringing the cable ashore in Hither Hills in Montauk, a popular state park, and then burying it for nearly 12 miles before connecting it to a substation.

In Montauk, resentment is building among some residents over the idea that they may be forced to accept the cable landing because of a campaign mounted by the deep-pocketed in Wainscott. (P.S. Montauk is building a war chest to block it as well.)

From  New York Times

“The Hamptons Love Green Energy. But That Wind Farm …”

Other than that all is well with the super super rich and the super rich.

For the best in conservative news and much better than Drudge click below

Trump to ban CA from setting emission rules

This will insure that California nor other states will be able to set standards for car makers that impact all cars made throughout the U.S.

California wants 15.4% of vehicle sales by 2025 to be EVs or other zero emission vehicles and 10 other states have adopted those requirements.

A refresher what Obama had in mind:

The Obama-era rules called for a fleetwide fuel efficiency average of 46.7 miles per gallon by 2025, with average annual increases of about 5%, compared with 37 mpg by 2026 under the Trump administration’s preferred option to freeze requirements.

“One national standard will provide much-needed regulatory certainty to automakers, dealers, and consumers,”

Here we go:

The Trump administration will announce it is rescinding California’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles on Wednesday, according to people familiar with the matter, a move sure to set off a legal battle with the most populous state.

The Environmental Protection Agency intends to announce it will revoke the so-called waiver underpinning California’s power to set vehicle greenhouse gas standards separately from the Trump administration’s broader rule to ease federal vehicle-efficiency standards, which is expected in the weeks ahead, the people said. More at

Bloomberg

Other sources Reuters

Welcome readers from Whatfinger news!

For the best in conservative news click  WHATFINGER NEWS!/

MSNBC : It’s a ‘Privilege’ to Not Eat Meat to Save the Planet

 

MSNBC promotes a guest who states meat intake needs to be reduced by 90 percent. Their guest and climate change activist Jonathan Safran Foer on Monday said it’s a “privilege” to not eat meat in order to save the planet.

Foer harkens back to the wonderful days of rationing during WW II. My parents told me it was just swell. Forget that China and India continue spew along. No doubt this is what our kiddies are being taught in our educational institutions. Grubs and plants are to be our mainstay in our diet.

Anyway, climate change is simply about control over every aspect of our life.

Foer said:

“There’s a good model for this in World War II, the home front efforts that regular Americans made regardless of their political leanings or their socioeconomic backgrounds, driving at 35 miles per hour,”

“We had a 94 percent income tax, highest rate income tax. We had rations on foods and a really wonderful fireside chat that I could never imagine our president giving, but FDR gave at the time.”

MSNBC asked Foer whether he was talking about “individual choices” or “government-level, institutional-level changes to how we eat” when he was talking about sacrifices to the way we eat.

Foer said he was talking about both and then said he took issue with Velshi’s use of the word “sacrifice.”

And of course, when all else fails, and what is starting to be pushed:

Newsweek: Time to re-think the taboo on cannibalism?

No doubt the better red meat……then there is always fresh “roadkill”!

Other than that, all is well in the swamp.

For the best in conservative news click below

Democrats 2020 – Ban all things! Blast us back to the 18th century

 

Listening to bits and pieces of the weekend talk shows about the marathon CNN Extravaganza on climate change. Wow. How is it possible that America isn’t howling with laughter? You do know the intent of their policies is to blast us back a couple of centuries in a time capsule and let the today’s Visigoths keep breeching our walls? Totally disrupt our economies? Destroy our economies and create massive unemployment? Here are just a few of the highlights.

The Visigoths were one of two main branches of the East Germanic tribe known as “Goths” (the other tribe is the Ostrogoths). The Goths were among the Germanic peoples who disturbed the late Roman Empire during the Migration Period, following a Visigothic force led by Alaric I’s sacking of Rome in 410.

How is it even possible that any of these candidates are in any real contention for 2020?

Have we really lost our way entirely and there is not one bit of sense left in our population?

Short, sweet and to the point.

Other than that all is well in the swamp.

Welcome readers from Whatfinger News! Thanks for the link.

For the best in conservative news click below.

NASA map shows Africa has more fires burning than Brazil

 

The dust up with France’s Macron and the President of Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro regarding the fires burning in the Amazon left out one small detail. Africa is on fire as well. NASA maps show that there are more fires in the African region than in the Amazon.

The on again off again acceptance of money to fight the Amazon fire lost sight that we have fires everywhere. The G-7 Summit raised $20 Million to assist in putting out the fires in Brazil.

No doubt more proof that humans are just too destructive to the “lungs” of earth.

Another detail never mentioned is that long before planes and humans, fires raged across the planet. It was nature’s way of regeneration. Old growth was removed and new growth lead to food sources for animals and birds.

But after all now, humans are much wiser. An earlier post:

CA Fires of Hell? Thank Obama and the Environmentalists

“Hotter, drier, longer forest fires we are witnessing today have nothing to do with dangerous manmade climate change. They have a lot to do with idiotic forest mismanagement policies and practices. Diseases are devastating the Forest.

It’s the worst of both worlds, small fires are not allowed to burn allowing forests to rejuvenate with new growth and browse necessary to sustain animal life. Appropriate logging has been stopped or severely curtailed thus limiting barriers to these hellish fires as well and help keeping forests healthy.

In a 2016 Townhall column, Paul Driessen explains:

Eco-purists want no cutting, no thinning – no using fire retardants in “sensitive” areas because the chemicals might get into streams that will be boiled away by conflagrations. They prevent homeowners from clearing brush around their homes, because it might provide cover or habitat for endangered species and other critters that will get incinerated or lose their forage, prey and habitats in the next blaze. They rarely alter their policies during drought years.

The resulting fires are not the “forest-rejuvenating” blazes of environmentalist lore. They are cauldron-hot conflagrations that exterminate wildlife habitats, roast bald eagle and spotted owl fledglings alive in their nests, boil away trout and trout streams, leave surviving animals to starve, and incinerate every living organism in already thin soils … that then get washed away during future downpours and snow melts. Areas incinerated by such fires don’t recover their arboreal biodiversity for decades.

But I digressed. Of course I don’t think that the fires burning in the Amazon are a good thing. I just suggest keeping a perspective. Fires have raged across the earth long before humans came on the scene:

Over a period of two days last week, Angola had approximately three times more fires than Brazil , according to data that Bloomberg news agency obtained from Weather Source. On Sunday, 6,902 fires were recorded in Angola and 3,395 in the neighboring Democratic Republic of the Congo , compared to 2,127 fires in Brazil. In the last 48 hours, Zambia ranked fourth in the list of countries with the most fires and Bolivia, a neighbor of Brazil, ranked sixth.

Fires in Africa and South America

It remains to be determined whether these are grassland or forest fires, the magnitude of these and whether they have been caused . Experts say that the fires in the rainforest of Central Africa are often seasonal and are linked to traditional farming methods . African farmers set fire to forests in the dry season to “clean” the land in order to plant crops. Deforestation, soil erosion and loss of biodiversity are some of the consequences of using this agricultural technique known as ” logging and burning ” and is usually carried out by these dates, one month before the start of the season of rains

According to NASA, in June last year more than 67,000 fires were registered in a period of one week..

Read more ABC International

Welcome readers from Whatfinger news and Doug Ross @ Journal Thanks for the links.

Welcome readers I f All You See… » Pirate’s Cove

Other than that all is well in the swamp. For the best in conservative news its

Whatfingernews

Baltimore suit of 26 energy companies for injuries sustained in climate change, heatwaves, continues

 

Setting aside as to whether this legal matter should be in State versus Federal Court, the end result is to go after the big pockets of big companies for big bucks.

In the process, of course, we do untold damage to important industries that we need or want for our country’s wheels to go round. In this case in Baltimore against energy companies.

Another example of this type of action is suing various drug manufacturers for billions of dollars regarding Opioids.  Continuing this course will either bankrupt the companies, or damage them to the extent of limiting the research funds available for new discoveries.

The opioid manufacturers included in the lawsuit are Purdue Pharma, Cephalon, Inc. and Janssen Pharmaceuticals, while the opioid distributors are McKesson Corp., Cardinal Health, Inc. and AmerisourceBergen Drug Corp. More than 1,800 lawsuits have been filed against opioid manufacturers, distributors and pharmacies.

Read more

On June 10, Judge Ellen L. Hollander of the United States District Court of Maryland ruled that the City of Baltimore’s case against 26 energy companies should be returned to the state court. Although this rules in favor of the plaintiff’s motion to remand the case to state court, this isn’t a clear-cut advantage for the plaintiffs.

Judge Hollander stayed her order for 30 days, giving the defendants nearly a month to appeal her decision. The defendants had argued that the case belonged in federal court because the claims made in the lawsuit were of global impact:

The 26 oil and gas companies targeted by the lawsuit are all but certain to appeal, which will prolong Baltimore’s case further, demonstrating how climate litigation does not provide an efficient or effective means to address climate change’s damages and causes.

The case, which the City of Baltimore originally filed in July 2018, sought to hold 26 fossil fuel companies liable for injuries the city had sustained from climate change, including severe storms, which had allegedly increased the average sea level, in addition to heatwaves that were associated with public health impacts. Sher Edling, a prominent law firm in climate litigation, is representing the City of Baltimore.

Former Mayor Catherine Pugh decided to move ahead with the case, despite decisions against similar lawsuits in California and New York only days before Baltimore’s filing. In California, District Judge William Alsup determined in May 2018 that cases brought by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland against energy companies belonged in the federal judiciary, and strongly questioned key parts of the case, including the allegation that energy companies had created a “public nuisance” against an entire community. Rebuking the plaintiffs, he stated, “If we didn’t have fossil fuels, would have lost [World War II] and every other war. Planes wouldn’t fly. Trains wouldn’t run. And we’d be back in the Stone Age.”

Read more

Juries are more than happy to dole out big bucks. Get a Progressive Judge and the result is about the same as well.

BONUS TIME:  Just in: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Virginia law that bans mining at the nation’s largest known uranium deposit.

Bloomberg

Sure, why not stop our Uranium production after Hillary was kind enough to give 20 percent of our deposits to the Russians.

Other than that, all is well in the swamp.

 

 

WhatFingerNews  A great site for all the news.

%d bloggers like this: