53percenter's Blog

Global warming alarmists is that they can’t stand debate. Anyone who disagrees with their theory that humans cause global warming/climate change is called a denier and told to shut up. Not one of us who question the theory that humans, fossil fuels and CO2 cause warming (or climate change, if you will) have ever said that the climate is constant and has never changed, so calling us “deniers” is a bald-faced lie.

Tuesday, that brilliant climate scientist John Kerry was at it again. He penned an op-ed in the Washington Post saying that President Trump should disband his “Climate denial Panel”

Many have become immune or anesthetized to the daily assault on truth that is the Trump presidency, an alternative reality where North Korea has denuclearized and Russia might not have attacked our elections in 2016. It would be laughable were it not dangerous. Presidents are supposed to hold consensus together, not invent fictions to fray it. 

But the administration’s most dangerous collision with facts has been its effort to paralyze U.S. efforts to join the nations of the world in confronting climate change. The White House plans to convene “experts” to “determine” whether climate change is a national security threat. We know what the outcome will be: President Trump’s council of doubters and deniers will convene to undo a 26-year-old factual consensus that climate change is a national-security threat multiplier. 

How dare Trump bring in scientists who disagree with the indoctrination? 

People writing in the Washington Post have been spewing forth this climate change alarmism for a very long time. In 1922, they essentially predicted the same garbage as they have predicted for the last approximately forty years.  Snopes.com dug up the 1922 article:

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared

The predictions were 100% wrong in 1922 as the ice came back, and so far, they have been wrong now.  But somehow, being wrong so consistently allows them to say the science is settled. The only reason they get away without being questioned about their bad previous predictions is because almost all journalists just repeat what they are told with no questions.

It is too bad that journalists won’t question John Kerry and other fear mongers, but here are a few easy ones for them:

• How come the ice is still in the Arctic after 150 years of exponential growth in fossil fuel use, since we were told it would be gone by now?
• What caused the ice to melt after the ice age, since humans and fossil fuels couldn’t have caused it?
• We have been warned that because humans and fossil fuels cause warming, we would have snowless winters. Why were the predictions so wrong and why should we believe the doom and gloom about the future since previous predictions have been 100% wrong?
• Scientific studies have shown that droughts were much longer in the past prior to when humans and fossil fuels could have caused them, so why do climate change alarmists continually lie that we cause longer and more severe droughts?  Isn’t that a daily assault on the truth?

There are thousands of questions, and it is sad that no one asks the alarmists. It is obvious that the climate has always and always will change naturally, and it is arrogant to believe politicians and bureaucrats can control temperatures, sea levels and storm activity forever. They just want the money to control her lives.

It is no wonder that twenty-nine-year-old Ocasio-Cortez believes this garbage since she has been indoctrinated with it her entire life.  She actually tells young people that maybe they shouldn’t have children because she believes the nonsense she has been told.

Since she believes what journalists and others have taught her, she and others have come up with what can best be described as an abjectly ignorant Green New Deal that would absolutely destroy our economy. Russia would certainly be happy to have politicians destroy America. They would love to have people like Kerry, Hillary, Pelosi, Schumer and AOC in charge instead of Trump. 

Image credit: Pixabay

Global warming alarmists is that they can’t stand debate. Anyone who disagrees with their theory that humans cause global warming/climate change is called a denier and told to shut up. Not one of us who question the theory that humans, fossil fuels and CO2 cause warming (or climate change, if you will) have ever said that the climate is constant and has never changed, so calling us “deniers” is a bald-faced lie.

Tuesday, that brilliant climate scientist John Kerry was at it again. He penned an op-ed in the Washington Post saying that President Trump should disband his “Climate denial Panel”

Many have become immune or anesthetized to the daily assault on truth that is the Trump presidency, an alternative reality where North Korea has denuclearized and Russia might not have attacked our elections in 2016. It would be laughable were it not dangerous. Presidents are supposed to hold consensus together, not invent fictions to fray it. 

But the administration’s most dangerous collision with facts has been its effort to paralyze U.S. efforts to join the nations of the world in confronting climate change. The White House plans to convene “experts” to “determine” whether climate change is a national security threat. We know what the outcome will be: President Trump’s council of doubters and deniers will convene to undo a 26-year-old factual consensus that climate change is a national-security threat multiplier. 

How dare Trump bring in scientists who disagree with the indoctrination? 

People writing in the Washington Post have been spewing forth this climate change alarmism for a very long time. In 1922, they essentially predicted the same garbage as they have predicted for the last approximately forty years.  Snopes.com dug up the 1922 article:

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared

The predictions were 100% wrong in 1922 as the ice came back, and so far, they have been wrong now.  But somehow, being wrong so consistently allows them to say the science is settled. The only reason they get away without being questioned about their bad previous predictions is because almost all journalists just repeat what they are told with no questions.

It is too bad that journalists won’t question John Kerry and other fear mongers, but here are a few easy ones for them:

• How come the ice is still in the Arctic after 150 years of exponential growth in fossil fuel use, since we were told it would be gone by now?
• What caused the ice to melt after the ice age, since humans and fossil fuels couldn’t have caused it?
• We have been warned that because humans and fossil fuels cause warming, we would have snowless winters. Why were the predictions so wrong and why should we believe the doom and gloom about the future since previous predictions have been 100% wrong?
• Scientific studies have shown that droughts were much longer in the past prior to when humans and fossil fuels could have caused them, so why do climate change alarmists continually lie that we cause longer and more severe droughts?  Isn’t that a daily assault on the truth?

There are thousands of questions, and it is sad that no one asks the alarmists. It is obvious that the climate has always and always will change naturally, and it is arrogant to believe politicians and bureaucrats can control temperatures, sea levels and storm activity forever. They just want the money to control her lives.

It is no wonder that twenty-nine-year-old Ocasio-Cortez believes this garbage since she has been indoctrinated with it her entire life.  She actually tells young people that maybe they shouldn’t have children because she believes the nonsense she has been told.

Since she believes what journalists and others have taught her, she and others have come up with what can best be described as an abjectly ignorant Green New Deal that would absolutely destroy our economy. Russia would certainly be happy to have politicians destroy America. They would love to have people like Kerry, Hillary, Pelosi, Schumer and AOC in charge instead of Trump. 

Image credit: Pixabay

A certain illegal immigrant is about to find out that actions have consequences and that they are not going to be what she expected after assaulting a man wearing a red MAGA hat in a Massachusetts Mexican restaurant.

The incident went down last week in Falmouth when a man was peacefully enjoying his meal while wearing the hat but was then set upon by a woman named Rosiane Santos who was triggered by what the Democrats and the media have worked 24/7 to brainwash their followers is the new KKK hood.

23-year-old Bryton Turner not only had to deal with having his hat roughly ripped off his head but also, the 41-year-old assailant then tried to shove his face into his plate. According to reports, Santos was also overheard threatening to poison his food.

Via Boston CBS affiliate WBZ, “Man Attacked For Wearing MAGA Hat At Falmouth Restaurant”:

A Falmouth woman has been charged with disorderly conduct after confronting a customer who was wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat at a Mexican restaurant.

Police say Rosiane Santos walked by Bryton Turner as he was eating dinner at Casa Vallarta and knocked the hat off his head. She then allegedly confronted him verbally.

He recorded some of the confrontation on his cell phone. “I’m just trying to sit here and eat a nice meal,” Turner says in the video as Santos grabbed his President Trump-inspired hat.

Police arrived and had difficulty removing Santos.

“It’s just a hat at the end of the day,” Turner told WBZ. “I don’t really understand why people can’t just express themselves anymore, everybody has to get mad.”

Before he recorded the video, Santos allegedly tried to shove Turner’s face in his food.

The bartender, who is of Mexican descent, said Turner was minding his own business. “The lady didn’t agree with his hat and I just kept telling her it’s alright, he’s not doing anything to me why is it even a problem,” bartender Geo Macario said.

Santos was drunk but she was also in the country illegally but probably not for much longer thanks to the dedicated law and order professionals of ICE.

A drunk woman caught on camera confronting a MAGA hat wearing patron at a Mexican restaurant is being deported by ICE.https://t.co/qRJXRGX66T

— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) February 27, 2019

Via The Washington Examiner, “Illegal immigrant faces deportation after arrest for assault of man wearing ‘MAGA’ hat in Mexican restaurant”:

Falmouth Police told the Washington Examiner that Santos was intoxicated when officers arrived on the scene, refused to leave the restaurant, and assaulted Turner in the presence of officers. She “remained uncooperative during the booking process” and was charged with disorderly conduct as well as assault and battery.

ICE said officers detained Santos near Falmouth on Tuesday and that it is preparing to deport her. “Santos is currently facing local charges for assault and other offenses. She is presently in ICE custody and has been entered into removal proceedings before the federal immigration courts,” ICE spokesman John Mohan told WBZ.

Hasta La Vista Baby!

Is rabidly far-left Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D.-Washington) trying to become the Ilhan Omar of the health care industry?

Sure looks like it, given her new Medicare-for-All proposal set to go to the House for a vote. It’s so left-wing even the left-leaning Axios says it makes Bernie Sanders look like a piker. Here’s how bad it is:

Even Sen. Bernie Sanders can get outflanked in the race to define Medicare for All as Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) is set to introduce a bill today that would go even further than Sanders’ sweeping proposal.

Why it matters: Even as moderates and more conventional liberals are freaking out over the politics of such a dramatic upheaval, the left is still moving left, laying down ever-more-ambitious markers as they gain more and more influence over their party.

• Many of the broad strokes are the same: Both bills would eliminate most private insurance and most existing federal health programs, moving everyone in the country into a new single-payer system. Neither would allow co-pays or deductibles.
• Jayapal’s version, though, would cover some things Sanders’ bill wouldn’t — most significantly, long-term care like nursing homes. It also calls for a 2-year phase-in period, compared to Sanders’ 4 years.

What we don’t know: The cost.

 Axios also notes that the bill seeks to keep costs under control through a “global budget,” meaning a cap on how much money hospitals and nursing care facilities can get, which is a fancy way of saying: rationing. They call that “interesting.” The rest of us call it “Venezuela.”

The HuffPo praises it as: ”The Most Ambitious ‘Medicare For All’ Bill Yet.”

And it has even more horrible details: 

The program would be non-voluntary, which means you get care as the government determines, whether you like it or not. You’d not only lose your current insurance, you’d lose any right to buy insurance even if you wanted to pay extra on top of your well-raised taxes. Rest assured the dolings will be politicized.

The only private element would be for non-Medicare-covered services, such as optional plastic surgery. The boob jobs get saved. The rest of your health care? Not so much.

Abortion would be fully covered and paid for through those higher taxes, like it or not. One wonders if infanticide fees for babies who survive abortions will be billable hours now, too.

Much of nightmare would be “paid for” not just through soaring taxes, and don’t expect the projects for this to avoid cost overruns, but also by cutting doctors’ salaries, which is a great way to motivate them and the future doctors who are going to be needed. The insurance would be nationalized, but the hospitals and doctors would stay private, forcing the latter to remain on double-entry bookkeeping while the state would have no limits on who it could keep sending over for care. In Venezuela, this was the exact recipe for the country’s famous shortages and you can bet they’d show up here, too.

Here’s another one: It will be available, free of charge to “all residents,” according to the HuffPo piece, which obviously would include all illegal immigrants. With Democrats already dangling out free health care to illegals in California, leftist states suing to block any fence at our southern border as their “illegal immigration stimulus plan,” and congressional Democrats vowing to block any effort to put up a border barrier, too (Jayapal is one of the loudest voices on this by the way), you can bet that’s a dinner triangle for free health care, not just to all of Central America, but other prominent suppliers of America’s illegals: Somalia, the Philippines, Vietnam, South Korea, China, India, Brazil and Nigeria . Who wouldn’t?

Meanwhile, the transition period from the health care you have, to the Medicare you aren’t going to like? A mere two years. It would be a rather amazing jolt, and too bad for you if there any ‘glitches’ and you needed some service.

The HuffPo notes that the bill will have fewer sponsors as even Democrats blanch, but among those who are signing on are all those newly-minted Democrats from places such as southern California. Those representatives wouldn’t be around were it not for ballot-harvesting and who knows how many illegal votes – because the state after all isn’t saying. Which rather shows the coercive factor here – given that most of these places’ voters aren’t that left-wing.

The bottom line, though, is that the bill is even more extreme than what Bernie Sanders is proposing, and that says a lot about the state of the Democrats. They all want to stand out and they wall are now trying to out-Bernie Bernie and go open with what their real agenda is. Obamacare looks so mild compared to these lunacies. To propose something more socialist than the big socialist wants for you speaks to how crazily Chavista left the Democrats are now becoming. All that is holding them back now is President Trump and the Republican-led Senate, as Axios notes.

As Sen. Lindsey Graham once said in another context: “Boy, y’all want power. You want this seat? I hope you never get it.” 

Is rabidly far-left Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D.-Washington) trying to become the Ilhan Omar of the health care industry?

Sure looks like it, given her new Medicare-for-All proposal set to go to the House for a vote. It’s so left-wing even the left-leaning Axios says it makes Bernie Sanders look like a piker. Here’s how bad it is:

Even Sen. Bernie Sanders can get outflanked in the race to define Medicare for All as Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) is set to introduce a bill today that would go even further than Sanders’ sweeping proposal.

Why it matters: Even as moderates and more conventional liberals are freaking out over the politics of such a dramatic upheaval, the left is still moving left, laying down ever-more-ambitious markers as they gain more and more influence over their party.

• Many of the broad strokes are the same: Both bills would eliminate most private insurance and most existing federal health programs, moving everyone in the country into a new single-payer system. Neither would allow co-pays or deductibles.
• Jayapal’s version, though, would cover some things Sanders’ bill wouldn’t — most significantly, long-term care like nursing homes. It also calls for a 2-year phase-in period, compared to Sanders’ 4 years.

What we don’t know: The cost.

 Axios also notes that the bill seeks to keep costs under control through a “global budget,” meaning a cap on how much money hospitals and nursing care facilities can get, which is a fancy way of saying: rationing. They call that “interesting.” The rest of us call it “Venezuela.”

The HuffPo praises it as: ”The Most Ambitious ‘Medicare For All’ Bill Yet.”

And it has even more horrible details: 

The program would be non-voluntary, which means you get care as the government determines, whether you like it or not. You’d not only lose your current insurance, you’d lose any right to buy insurance even if you wanted to pay extra on top of your well-raised taxes. Rest assured the dolings will be politicized.

The only private element would be for non-Medicare-covered services, such as optional plastic surgery. The boob jobs get saved. The rest of your health care? Not so much.

Abortion would be fully covered and paid for through those higher taxes, like it or not. One wonders if infanticide fees for babies who survive abortions will be billable hours now, too.

Much of nightmare would be “paid for” not just through soaring taxes, and don’t expect the projects for this to avoid cost overruns, but also by cutting doctors’ salaries, which is a great way to motivate them and the future doctors who are going to be needed. The insurance would be nationalized, but the hospitals and doctors would stay private, forcing the latter to remain on double-entry bookkeeping while the state would have no limits on who it could keep sending over for care. In Venezuela, this was the exact recipe for the country’s famous shortages and you can bet they’d show up here, too.

Here’s another one: It will be available, free of charge to “all residents,” according to the HuffPo piece, which obviously would include all illegal immigrants. With Democrats already dangling out free health care to illegals in California, leftist states suing to block any fence at our southern border as their “illegal immigration stimulus plan,” and congressional Democrats vowing to block any effort to put up a border barrier, too (Jayapal is one of the loudest voices on this by the way), you can bet that’s a dinner triangle for free health care, not just to all of Central America, but other prominent suppliers of America’s illegals: Somalia, the Philippines, Vietnam, South Korea, China, India, Brazil and Nigeria . Who wouldn’t?

Meanwhile, the transition period from the health care you have, to the Medicare you aren’t going to like? A mere two years. It would be a rather amazing jolt, and too bad for you if there any ‘glitches’ and you needed some service.

The HuffPo notes that the bill will have fewer sponsors as even Democrats blanch, but among those who are signing on are all those newly-minted Democrats from places such as southern California. Those representatives wouldn’t be around were it not for ballot-harvesting and who knows how many illegal votes – because the state after all isn’t saying. Which rather shows the coercive factor here – given that most of these places’ voters aren’t that left-wing.

The bottom line, though, is that the bill is even more extreme than what Bernie Sanders is proposing, and that says a lot about the state of the Democrats. They all want to stand out and they wall are now trying to out-Bernie Bernie and go open with what their real agenda is. Obamacare looks so mild compared to these lunacies. To propose something more socialist than the big socialist wants for you speaks to how crazily Chavista left the Democrats are now becoming. All that is holding them back now is President Trump and the Republican-led Senate, as Axios notes.

As Sen. Lindsey Graham once said in another context: “Boy, y’all want power. You want this seat? I hope you never get it.” 

The day after Senate Democrats blocked a bill designed to protect babies born alive from botched abortion, Republican Senator Tim Scott (SC) took to the Senate floor to address his Democrat counterparts about the intrinsic value of every child’s life.

“We are a nation that must continue to value life, and for some reason, somehow, this body missed that opportunity to reinforce that value system before the American public, to say each child born, no matter your state, no matter your challenges: you have an intrinsic value,” said Scott.

The senator opened his remarks by explaining that he missed the vote on Republican Sen. Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act by four minutes due to a flight delay, which he found “quite frustrating.”

“But what’s frustrating even more than that,” Scott said, “is that, in a nation of good conscious, that we would be debating, having a conversation about, a child who was born — sitting there: alive — separated from her mother. And that there would be a question of whether or not that child should be able to continue to live.”

Scott noted that the issues of late-term abortions and infanticide were recently raised in New York and Virginia. Governor Andrew Cuomo (D-NY) recently signed a bill to allow abortion up to the moment of birth for virtually any reason. In Virginia, Governor Ralph Northam (D) endorsed infanticide during a radio interview, again under the guise of feminism.

“This is an issue that has raised by comments coming out of New York, and more recently comments coming out of Virginia, when the governor, who happens to be, from my understand, a pediatric surgeon, suggested that it is okay to allow that child to die,” Scott said.

“I cannot imagine, whether you pro-life like I am, or you are pro-choice like others, that this would even be an issue of debate or discussion within the two sides. There is no side on this topic. There cannot be a side about life separated from the mother, whether or not that life should continue to live. This is common sense. This is human decency. This is not an issue of being pro-life, or pro-choice, this is being pro-child, which we all should be,” he continued.

Scott said there is no gray area when he speaks to Americans across the country from both sides of the aisle, from all demographics, regarding the value of children.

“There was no disagreement on the issue of infanticide,” he said of the folks attending a Black History Month event in South Carolina. “There was no disagreement, whatsoever. .. The one thing in common was the value of life.”

“There is nothing to debate regarding the sanctity of born children,” Scott said, adding, “We’re all come to the same conclusion, and that is that a child born deserves to live. This is a place of universal agreement.”

“Each child born, no matter your state, no matter your challenges: you have an intrinsic value,” concluded the senator.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would amend the criminal code to “prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion.”

“If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws,” the legislation states.

“Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn, or for any person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care,” it states.

WATCH: