March 4, 2019

"With progressives pushing Democrats to embrace the Green New Deal — and Republicans ridiculing the idea as socialism — Mr. Schumer is effectively trying to turn a weakness into a strength."

"He is planning daily floor speeches attacking Republicans for inaction and a proposal for a special Senate committee focused on the issue, which he intends to announce this week. And while there is virtually no chance of passing climate change legislation in a Republican-controlled Senate with President Trump in office, Mr. Schumer said he wanted legislation to run on next year — and bring to a vote in early 2021, should his party win the White House and the Senate. 'This is the first time Democrats have decided to go on offense on climate change,' Mr. Schumer said in an interview.... But the rise of climate change as a rallying cry has come with huge downsides for Democrats. The ambitions of its youthful advocates have clashed with the caution of Democratic veterans...  'Climate change, to our frustration, was never an issue that rung a bell with voters, particularly in the throes of coming out of an economic crisis,' said David Axelrod, the former chief political strategist to Mr. Obama. 'But now we’re a decade down the road, and the road is surrounded by floods and fires in a way that is becoming more and more visible.'... The Green New Deal immediately won the embrace of multiple Democratic presidential candidates, including Senators Kamala Harris of California, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Cory Booker of New Jersey, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont... 'Do our Democratic colleagues really support this fantasy novel masquerading as public policy?' Mr. McConnell asked last week on the Senate floor... 'Do they really want to completely upend Americans’ lives to enact some grand socialist vision?'"

From "Pressed by Climate Activists, Senate Democrats Plan to ‘Go on Offense’" (NYT).

The Times article quotes Trump's CPAC speech sarcastically encouraging Democrats to run on the Green New Deal: "I think it’s really something that they should promote."

If it's really so bad to run on the Green New Deal, why are Trump and McConnell taunting them about it now? I think it is a bad signature issue, but this early taunting makes me wonder whether perhaps it's good. The reason I think it's bad is that it's all about how awful everything is and how much sacrifice is going to be extracted from everyone.

I think people are drawn to the sunnier vision, and Democrats have worked so hard at painting Trump as dark, ugly, and cruel. The panic and horror about climate change and the demand for immediate and dramatic sacrifice seems to undo all that work and to take on pessimism as the Democratic brand.

I realize the Democrats who are pushing the Green New Deal must think they can put it in a sunny light. It's "Green" and it's "New" and it's a "Deal." But in the old New Deal, good things were offered to people — hope and economic benefits. The Green New Deal asks you to give up hope and to give up economic benefits. What is the psychological draw? Fear? I know there's a way to get to optimism if you can really believe in wonderful technological advances, but where are they?

365 comments:

1 – 200 of 365   Newer›   Newest»
M Jordan said...

They should re-brand it the “Green New Bullshit.” Catchier, imho.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

More pro-democratic / Anti-Republican "news".

Howie Car: Smirking media bias against GOP couldn’t be clearer



Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Climate Change is code for "Punitive taxation and punitive restrictions coming you're way, baby."

M Jordan said...

Or maybe the “Green Nuke Deal.”

chickelit said...

The only thing Dems have to fear is jeers.

Martin said...

In this age where ideology is more powerful than facts and logic, the GND may be a plus.

Until it is implemented and the consequences become apparent--and maybe not even then, as there is always someone or something else to blame.

The Soviets blamed the nonexistent kulaks for 15 years and it worked for them. (There were people previously called kulaks, but hardly any people as the word was redefined and corrupted by the Bolshevik//Communist propagandists)

hawkeyedjb said...

Reduced living standards, centralized control, loss of freedom... those are goals, not by-products in the struggle against Climate Change.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Democrats use "Hope" to cover for the "rape"

hawkeyedjb said...

We have to wreck our economy to find out what was in it.

Lucid-Ideas said...

AOC is the best thing to ever happen to Republicans.

Her and her socialist and anarchist buddies nationwide are going to sink that party.

She's proof that you don't have to be blonde to be a ditz.

She's making enemies even among the environmentalists.

All they had to do was not be crazy and they're failing massively.

They are officially on the moon.

I'm erect.

Screencap this.

hawkeyedjb said...

If you like your standard of living, you can keep your standard of living. If you like your job, you can keep your job.

Jersey Fled said...

Worder to the wise:

When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.

M Jordan said...

I LOLed when I heard that child tell Diane Feinstein, “We’ve only got twelve years to turn this around.”

Turn this around. It’s so funny to me that I must use this emoji: ��

(And I hate emojis.)

Nonapod said...

I think it is a bad signature issue, but this early taunting makes me wonder whether perhaps it's good

It's bad. The early taunting is because it's clearly bad and unpopular. As it is it wouldn't have a lot of support from the moderate swing voters in districts that matter. That's the reality. Whether or not it's adjusted to be less absurd sounding, whenever people hear the term "Green New Deal" they'll always think of the absurdities of the original AOC ideas (an end to air travel in 10 years ect). It's a loser issue.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

I'd like leftists to fix the rest of the world first. Go help the 3rd world with the environment. Thanks.

M Jordan said...

Crap! My emoji got translated out. Just imagine the tilted laughing so hard it’s squirting tears face. That one.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Teachers scaring kids into thinking "we've only got 12 years to turn this around" - unconscionable.

Meade said...

"The only thing Dems have to fear is jeers."

I am certain that my fellow Americans expect that on my induction into the Presidency I will address them with a candor and a decision which the present situation of our people impel. This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great Nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to [jeer is jeer] itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory. I am convinced that you will again give that support to leadership in these critical days.

Seeing Red said...

How is this GND going to stop China and India from polluting?

Known Unknown said...

"If it's really so bad to run on the Green New Deal, why are Trump and McConnell taunting them about it now?"

I think it's just a natural non-politically calculated response. I mean, how else do you talk about a plan that eliminates farting cows in a decade?

Known Unknown said...

"How is this GND going to stop China and India from polluting?"

It will level the playing field so affluent Americans (relatively speaking) live more like those in India and/or China.

Meade said...

My fear is that, more and more, young Americans, miseducated in American History, grow up deluded into believing that it was FDR's socialist New Deal that brought the country out of the Great Depression.

Known Unknown said...

"My fear is that, more and more, young Americans, miseducated in American History, grow up deluded into believing that it was FDR's socialist New Deal that brought the country out of the Great Depression."

Most people already think that.

Wince said...

And while there is virtually no chance of passing climate change legislation in a Republican-controlled Senate with President Trump in office, Mr. Schumer said he wanted legislation to run on next year — and bring to a vote in early 2021, should his party win the White House and the Senate...

The Times article quotes Trump's CPAC speech sarcastically encouraging Democrats to run on the Green New Deal...


Trump was taunting Democrats. Why the focus only on the Senate?

Evidently the NYT writer needs to be reminded the Democrats just took the House.

A case of "lemme at 'em, lemme at 'em" by the Democrats? Trump and McConnell should push them.

It also give Trump the opportunity to point out the House is too preoccupied with "investigations" to pass their signature initiative.

Dave Begley said...

Seeing Red:

Carbon dioxide is not pollution. One can never concede a false premise to the Left.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

@Meade - indeed. It's worse than that. Young people think "socialism" = "social".
They have no clue that socialism is communism's ugly cousin.

Francisco D said...

The underlying premise of the college indoctrinated and their "teachers" is that they are best prepared to make decisions for the country. In order for people to give up their freedoms, you have to convince them that there is a crisis.

The climate change hoax is an attempt by the Watermelons (Green on the outside and Red on the inside) to take more control over our lives.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Socialism = free stuff, including a free Ipad, free health care, free groceries, free "education" (government sponsored and approved) free housing, and the death to evil evil capitalism.

You must be pure evil to be against that.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

The Green Leap Forward is impossible to not laugh at, to not make fun of. It's cartoon-like in its grasp of underpants gnome economics, and yet it proposes to scale that up to absurd proportions. It has the simplicity of Medicare for ALL without the immediate dread of the loss of private insurance, so Dems can embrace its fluffy goals while claiming the details will be worked out easily. They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner. It will remain just around the corner for the foreseeable future and beyond.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

Hickenlooper on the Green New Deal.
“Said he hasn't read all the details, but "I'm going to guess that 99% of what's in the Green New Deal I will be happy to embrace."

https://www.axios.com/john-hickenlooper-2020-presidential-election-factsheet-1551626771-620fd5d9-74c8-495e-b868-f433b07ae58c.html

Seeing Red said...

Where was I talking about carbon dioxide?

We don’t have rivers of plastic. We don’t have to walk around with face masks. We don’t have the air pollution they do.

Lucid-Ideas said...

Meade said, "My fear is that, more and more, young Americans, miseducated in American History, grow up deluded into believing that it was FDR's socialist New Deal that brought the country out of the Great Depression."

So true. It wasn't. It was a war. We need another. A civil one that'll fix our "civility bullshit" problem. I'm also a pilot. I'm offering free helicopter rides for leftists. Free-of-charge and powered by CFUs (Cow-Fart-Units).

Seeing Red said...

Good ! A guy running for President who can’t fly around the country stumping!

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”

I don’t recall reading that this is what Althouse indicated. Maybe you could go find if and post it here.

tim maguire said...

Democrats have been about fear and anger and pessimism my entire life. Even "hope and change" was just hope we'd become less angry and white.

Achilles said...

I realize the Democrats who are pushing the Green New Deal must think they can put it in a sunny light. It's "Green" and it's "New" and it's a "Deal."

Democrats know that there is a huge group of ignorant people out there willing to vote for any stupid shit the Democrats pedal.

People who for example think we can effectively buffer wind power grids with batteries.

Seeing Red said...

He should order his Colorado’s senators and reps home. Wire up their capitol. Let them stay in state, closer to their constituents and only allowed to visit DC 2x a year.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

"new Green Deal" is the AOC litmus test. You better support it, or else.

If Trump cured cancer, the left would be pro-cancer.

Ken B said...

Why now? Because it's current now, because right now they can expose the insincerity of the bill — even its sponsor doesn’t want a vote.
If they don’t pin the tail on the donkey now it will slip from memory, like the thousands of other grandiose bullshit talking points of yesterday.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“It was a war. We need another. A civil one that'll fix our "civility bullshit" problem.”

And just how will a civil war accomplish that?

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”

I don’t recall reading that this is what Althouse indicated. Maybe you could go find if and post it here.

Just google it.

I would really love to see Inga debate climate change. Ritmo has 20 IQ points on her and looks like a retard.

gspencer said...

Schumer's running for re-election. True enough, it's what every pol does the moment he/she enters office. But Chuck's going above and beyond what someone who has a 6-year term would do. His next election is November 2022, and he sees that the future (AOC) is capable of crossing a bridge (to use a very clever Tom Wolfe expression).

Given what's obviously gone to her head since her May 2018 upset over Crowley, AOC no longer wants a measly congressional district. By 2022 she'll have met the age requirement (30) for Senator. And by 2028 she'll have met the age requirement (35) for President.

Is she counting her chicks before they've hatched? For certain. But Chuck's taking no chances.

Ken B said...

Meade (to name him) makes a great point about FDR. They already DO think that. Although in fact the New Deal was very strongly influenced by Mussolini's programs, the NRA in particular. FDR extended the depression, however great he was as a war president.

Heartless Aztec said...

All of this GND is moot. Were $22T in debt. We can't even afford the shit and services we have now. And it will never be paid off. There is no money for the GND. Our politicians all live in cloud cukoo land. We are beyond broke and fast on our way to imminent bankruptcy. Just give it a few years... Won't be long now.

chickelit said...

@Meade: And as the chants were misreported at the CPAC rally: "For More Jeers"

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

No Green Deal will work without India and China participating. We can cut USA carbon pollution (sic) to zero (hypothetically) and the global CO2 level would not drop at all. By sending China into economic contraction, Trump is doing more to reduce the world's carbon footprint than anyone else in history. Frackers have already allowed USA to be the only country to meet Paris Accord goals and we aren't even party to their scheme!

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tim maguire said...

One reason Trump and McConnell might be talking it up now is to force Schumer and Pelosi to deal with it instead of quietly burying it like they would if Republicans kept quiet about it.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

OT: Actual Collusion:

Days After Comey Firing, McCabe's Team Re-Engaged Fired Dossier Author

Temujin said...

"Climate Change Legislation."

What is that? Legislation to prevent the climate from changing? Or to change how the climate is 'acting up' now? And...according to who? How exactly is the climate supposed to act these days? Or...is it how we act? And they want to change how we live/act/work/play/think? Yeah...nothing totalitarian in that, I'm sure.

It's snowing in Boston. It's cold in Michigan/Wisconsin/Minnesota. It's raining on the west coast and...surprise, there are mudslides and flooding. In the summer, there will again be wildfires, but probably not as bad as last year because??....nature does its own fix and has again given the mountains of California a ton of snow, which will again replenish some of their water needs.

I have relatives in New York who seriously ask me what I'm going to do about living on the Gulf Coast of Florida, as they keep reading that we're going to be under water any time now. (I wonder if they're also worried about the Island of Manhattan or if climate change can be legislatively prevented from attacking New York.)

Every generation thinks they are the cats meow. But this is the first generation that looked at the world as if history started 19 years ago and that they and only they can stop nature via legislation from a Brooklyn bartender.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”-Mike

“I don’t recall reading that this is what Althouse indicated. Maybe you could go find if and post it here.”-me

“Just google it.”-Achilles

But WHERE did Althouse say what Mike accused her of saying. THAT was my question.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Once again, lefty reading comprehension raises its hoary head. Google it Troll!

Bruce Hayden said...

I question whether Schumer has any choice here. A number in his caucus are running for President, and have mostly signed onto AOC’s idiotic plan. And, yes, “Climate Change”, whatever that is currently defined as, apparently is popular with the more scientifically illiterate portion of the Dem constituency. I think that part of it may be that as many of them leave their Judeo/Christian traditions, they feel their lack of spirituality, and seem to be trying to fill it with Gaia worship. Which means that they desperately want there to be something evil about our stewardship of our environment. That they have to listen to scientific charlatans to find that supposed evil is, really, irrelevant to their faith. What is important is that they truly believe. I see little difference between AOC flying around this country, or other Senators accepting MT steaks from Tester, on the one hand, and Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker on the other. Of course they are massive hypocrites. But that is just fine.

Seeing Red said...

Just read the blog Inga.

The Last Dragon Slayer said...

Interview with the last dragon slayer
Excerpt…
Reporter Kim Weaver: You’ve been quoted as saying that if there are no dragons, mankind will invent one. What do you mean by that?
The Last Dragon Slayer: It’s quite simple, really. A dragon is a rallying point. It is a tangible opponent that one can point to and say “See? We have this big ole dragon. We need to all join together to defeat the dragon.”
RKW: Can’t people tell the difference between a real dragon and a fake one? I mean, a real dragon is big, breathes fire and snatches up fair maidens. A fake dragon dos not do any of that.
TLDS: First of all, not all dragons are the same. Some ravage the country-side with wind, other fire, still others, cataclysms. Second, life is chaotic and messy, so any cataclysm will do, in fact even the lack of a cataclysm portends dragon mischief.
RKW: The LACK of cataclysm? That does not make any sense.
TLDS: You need to think bigger. Think ambitiously. If you want to sway a mob into helping you charge up the hill, you don’t use logic, you use fear. And people are so easily made afraid. Just create a menace and tell them it must be stopped.
RKW: But a LACK of cataclysm…
TLDS. It works like this. If there are fires burning: Dragon breathing fire. If the wind blows: Dragon beating his wings. If the ground shakes: Dragon playing jump rope. Nothing at all happening: Dragon is biding his time ready to pounce in some dastardly way.
RWK: Jump rope?
TLDS. Yeah, that can’t happen. Their arms are too short.

rehajm said...

Experts estimate the cost of the program will be between $51 and $93 Trillion.

Perspective: US GDP for 2018 will be around $21 trillion.

The proponents of the program have had to invent a new theory of economics since no existing theory of economics can account for the cost of a program that is that high. This new theory of economics is actually an old theory called 'printing money'. Proponents of the old theory have demonstrated the program is not viable under the new theory, either.

Sebastian said...

"I know there's a way to get to optimism if you can really believe in wonderful technological advances, but where are they?"

Wait, don't we already have all the advances we need?

Just yesterday Althouse informed us that Trump was wrong, since the Google showed that storage issues for wind power had been solved.

Piling on, I know.

Rick said...

But in the old New Deal, good things were offered to people — hope and economic benefits.

You omitted the core value of the New Deal: demonization of anyone who disagreed with Democrats.

Fernandinande said...

"The country needs and, unless I mistake its temper, the country demands bold, persistent experimentation. It is common sense to take a method and try it: If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something."

For The Children.

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
Hickenlooper on the Green New Deal.
“Said he hasn't read all the details, but "I'm going to guess that 99% of what's in the Green New Deal I will be happy to embrace."


Proof that in order to win the democrat presidential primary you have to cater to ignorant idiots and generally stupid people.

It never reached 70 degrees in LA in February.

It has been well over 100 years. 0 press coverage.

Also note one page down on the web story showing a graph with the number of days below 70 degrees in LA.

The trend line is unmistakable.

There are mounds of data like this. Total earth ice levels are increasing. We have detailed historical data showing CO2 is a lagging indicator of global temperature.

The proponents of global warming have been caught multiple times manipulating data and committing research fraud.

Al Gore and Tom Steyer, in typical democrat tradition, have become billionaires while spreading poverty and trying to lower everyone else's standard of living.

This is going to be a wonderful debate.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

How exactly is the climate supposed to act these days?

That is an interesting question, because the DNC_Media complex keeps flogging the premise that this year is "the hottest on record," which they have tried applying to every year in the last decade. Funny none of the "mainstream media" sources have highlighted the fact FEB was the coldest month ever recorded in Los Angeles. In 132 years of recorded temperatures, this is the only February that never saw the temperature get above 70 degrees F. Here's an Althouse style "link" to the "local" story that won't go national:

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-cold-february-20190228-story.html

Quick question: Is this climate or weather?

rehajm said...

Climate change, to our frustration, was never an issue that rung a bell with voters, particularly in the throes of coming out of an economic crisis

One of the many reasons I can no longer support Democrats. They always see the challenge as a failure of messaging and communication. If only our message resonated with voters. Never is there a thought that the policy being pushed might suck.

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”-Mike

“I don’t recall reading that this is what Althouse indicated. Maybe you could go find if and post it here.”-me

“Just google it.”-Achilles

But WHERE did Althouse say what Mike accused her of saying. THAT was my question.


Apparently you can't get a room temperature IQ on google.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Achilles proving once again that grate minds run in the same gutter or something. LOL.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Once again, lefty reading comprehension raises its hoary head.”

The fact is that Althouse didn’t say what you accuse her of. So maybe it’s your reading comprehension that is the problem.

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”-Mike

Rick said...

Hickenlooper on the Green New Deal.
“Said he hasn't read all the details, but "I'm going to guess that 99% of what's in the Green New Deal I will be happy to embrace."


That didn't take long. I guess "moderate" didn't poll well so he decided to move to the far left.

gilbar said...

Igna...Allie Oop said...
But WHERE did Althouse say what Mike accused her of saying. THAT was my question.


Here. I'm not making a link, so maybe you won't know what to do with this:
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/03/darling-darling-is-wind-blowing-today.html

stevew said...

A majority of Americans do not accept the Climate Change argument. The purported scientific proof is nothing more than opinion (euphemistically called 'consensus'). Schumer and the Democrats can propose all the green legislation they want, Republicans will vote against it, and the electoral politics will likely be advantageous for the latter group.

Do your worst Chuck...

buwaya said...

Its not fear, exactly.
Honest fear doesn't work like this, but it does exist in marginal people as usual. It does not apply to the mass.

This is the left-wing/haut bourgeois flip side of Jonathan Haidt's theory of moral foundations. That is, the basis of eco-hysteria is a religio-moral one. Contra Haidt, the only difference in weighting sanctity/degradation, or disgust, is the nature of the factors that cause it. In other words it is left-religion, different symbolic values, different objects held to be sacred.

And then there is the purely tribal conflict part. "They hate it? Good!"

OldManRick said...

Damn, I'm getting tired of the "global warming crisis". Spend some time on the skeptic sites - they cite studies and data not "experts" (who's livelihood, by the way, is dependent on AGW funding). For example, at Watts Up with That we have a report that solar irradiance is at the lowest level since 1978 - https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/03/01/amid-the-dimmest-sun-since-1978-a-month-without-sunspots/. In the 70's, experts were predicting another ice age.

Now maybe a drop of 1 watt in Total Solar Irradiance (TSI)of 1362 doesn't seem like a lot to you - it's only .07% - but with out the sun, the planet would be in the low teens in Kelvin. 77 degrees Fahrenheit is about 300 degrees Kelvin. That .07% is drop of .3 degrees Fahrenheit. Along with lower TSI is lower solar winds; lower solar winds means more gamma rays hit the atmosphere; more gamma ray means more high clouds; more high clouds means less of the TSI reaches the surface. This is a provable sequence, not a non-falsifiable claim like global warming's claim colder is a sign of global warming - hotter is a sign of global warming.

There is a strong historical correlation between sunspot activity and global temperatures. But claiming that doesn't pay the alarmist experts bills.

gilbar said...

Igna is Right though, Professor Althouse didn't say it was 'just around the corner'
She said it was Here, NOW; and that Obviously, it's wrong to say to say otherwise

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

It was the most widely-quoted and responded-to statement by Althouse on that thread, but some trolls can't find it, and in fact will NOT find it, even with GPS coordinates. You see, it is the distraction and diversion that she seeks, not engagement, not knowledge, not common ground. The troll only wants to derail the discussion, not advance it.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Democratics abuse power. It's what they do. It's who they are.

New Green Deal is a means to and end.

Kevin said...

“Said he hasn't read all the details, but "I'm going to guess that 99% of what's in the Green New Deal I will be happy to embrace."

He has to embrace it so he can find out what's in it.

buwaya said...

Experimentation is a wonderful thing. The part that breaks down in science and business and public policy and war alike are in "If it fails, admit it frankly".

That is very very hard, because of things like sunk cost fallacies, protection of rice bowls and mixed motives. The supposed openly stated purpose is never the only purpose, or often enough the driving force behind the policy.

stevew said...

"The climate change hoax is an attempt by the Watermelons (Green on the outside and Red on the inside) to take more control over our lives."

Watermelons - hadn't seen or heard that before. I like it.

Kevin said...

The technology exists to deal with CO2 emissions.

It's called nuclear power.

That the dems can't even speak those words tells you the GND isn't about CO2 emissions.

Achilles said...

How is that high speed train project going in California?

Oh it is doing exactly what we said it would?

But the idiots of California keep voting for democrats. You have to be really stupid to vote for democrats.

Willfully stupid.

buwaya said...

The watermelon idea was Ayn Rands original take on the whole thing, amost 50 years ago. One of her most perceptive and prophetic ideas, because it was based on her best skill, her understanding of her enemies.

Yancey Ward said...

Ms. Althouse asked:

"If it's really so bad to run on the Green New Deal, why are Trump and McConnell taunting them about it now?"

The answer is pretty simple- if Trump claimed apple pie is tasty and good for you, the Democrats would run around calling him a liar and a fraud. Indeed, Schumer shows you why Trump and McConnell are doing it now- the Democrats simply can't help themselves but jump when Trump pokes them.

Kevin said...

Trump and McConnell are right to push this on Schumer.

The last thing they need is some undefined, nothing but sunshine, giveaway by the Dems to motivate the idiots in their base. If they wait until the election, the candidates can mumble their way through it and the press can cover for them.

No, they need a thorough discussion of the plan and they need people on record as having supported it when the truth becomes widely known.

It will take months, if not years, until the average person on the street realizes how destructive progressivism has become.

Why, it's taken this long for them to realize "choose your own gender" was going to ruin women's sports.

phantommut said...

That the dems can't even speak those words tells you the GND isn't about CO2 emissions.

The only good thing about the GND is that it may finally brings nuclear back into the mix of energy options. It works beautifully in France and Sweden who, when OPEC flexed in the '70s, realized that if they didn't want their economies held hostage they were going to have to learn to live without relying on oil or coal.

Seeing Red said...

The climate change hoax is an attempt by the Watermelons (Green on the outside and Red on the inside) to take more control over our lives."

Watermelons - hadn't seen or heard that before. I like it.


That’s where the commies ended up after the Wall fell.

Seeing Red said...

The proponents of global warming have been caught multiple times manipulating data and committing research fraud.


The Ozzie’s again. In the past few weeks.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“It was the most widely-quoted and responded-to statement by Althouse on that thread, but some trolls can't find it, and in fact will NOT find it, even with GPS coordinates.”

1. Blogger Ann Althouse said...
If you really don't know what I think is obvious, do you also not know how to Google?

Here. I'm not making a link, so maybe you won't know what to do with this: https://www.windpowerengineering.com/business-news-projects/uncategorized/an-overview-of-6-energy-storage-methods/

3/3/19, 6:19 AM

2. Blogger Ann Althouse said...
If you want to talk about whether the storage methods are good, fine, but it doesn't change what's wrong with Trump's remark (if taken seriously), which is that there isn't even an idea of storage, just direct power from the wind to the thing you are trying to operate, like the way a windmill turns a grindstone.

3/3/19, 7:22 AM

3. Blogger Ann Althouse said...
I'm not hopeful about wind power, but those who oppose it by pretending it only works when the wind blows are completely dishonest. But I'm willing to give Trump credit, because I don't think he actually believes what is false. I think he's doing humor.

3/3/19, 7:23 AM

4. Blogger Ann Althouse said...
Dishonest or ignorant. Don't know which is worse.

3/3/19, 7:24 AM

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6329595&postID=8447907879505368369

Now WHERE did she say what you accuse her of?

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”-Mike

narciso said...

Skydragon high priests dont amuse:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/the_most_important_scientific_breakthrough_you_probably_never_heard_of.html

Seeing Red said...

Why, it's taken this long for them to realize "choose your own gender" was going to ruin women's sports.

That’s because their daughters can’t win. That stuff has a tendency to focus one’s mind.

bagoh20 said...

"... the road is surrounded by floods and fires in a way that is becoming more and more visible.'..."

That is a flat out lie that I'm sure many many believe, especially those too young to know when they are being lied to. If they did know, they would be overwhelmed by how much lying is going on and how much is aimed right at them.

bagoh20 said...

We are still deep in debt from the old New Deal, and it may still be the thing that ruins us financially, and culturally.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

but does it spark Jeers?

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

3

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Anyone trying to sell the voters on the Green Leap Forward should have to list all the cities and island nations that have been subsumed by the rising oceans, just so we know where we are on this long journey to avoid disaster. Then a list of all the IPCC predictions that have been borne out by events. All of them.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“3”

Nope. Your comment was a mischaracterization of her comment.

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”-Mike”

“3. Blogger Ann Althouse said...
I'm not hopeful about wind power, but those who oppose it by pretending it only works when the wind blows are completely dishonest. But I'm willing to give Trump credit, because I don't think he actually believes what is false. I think he's doing humor.”

3/3/19, 7:23 AM

Tommy Duncan said...

Fortunately the Democrats have not asked themselves the question "does anyone actually believe the 12 years to climate Armageddon crap?"

After all the failed predictions in the past, few voters will get worked up over global warming until Manhattan and Miami are under water.

The election is 20 months away. That's a long time to be crying "wolf". Or "global warming". Or "collusion". Or "obstruction". I encourage Schumer on his strategy.

Seeing Red said...

Can’t square the GLF with open borders. Part of this is based on staying put in your box. Except for those anointed/elected. They get to fly, drive, and eat meat around the world.

It’s a good thing I grew up during The Cold War and can recognize the same old BS.

Curious George said...

"...and Republicans ridiculing the idea as socialism..."

No, the are ridiculing it because it is retarded. And unattainable.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Show your work Troll.

MountainMan said...

Global warming/climate change is the biggest con job of all time. Anyone who embraces the GND is a total idiot who is not only economically illiterate but at some point failed to take a middle school science class (as I did in 1964) that includes learning about the production and use of fossil fuels. Not only do they provide most of the reliable energy needed for a modern economy, but most of its products too.

I will ask the same question I always ask of people I meet who are climate change lunatics: What are you willing to give up to support your save-the-planet fantasy? You clothes? Your car? Your house? Everyday drugs, like Tylenol, Advil and, aspirin?

I will be glad to come by the house of anyone who believes in this fantasy and assuage your enviro-guilt by helping to discard all the offending items made from fossil fuels. By the tie I get through, however, you will be left standing naked on a vacant lot.

bagoh20 said...

"I'm not hopeful about wind power, but those who oppose it by pretending it only works when the wind blows are completely dishonest."

Did she really say that? WTF does that even mean? Storage is not the same as working, infact it's the opposite. The system is not just not producing, but is actually losing power during storage and in the process of storing.

John Ray said...

To Inga: Give it up lady, you were not in that session, but it really happened. It is not a non-event just because you were not there.

Old Man Rick at 10:something. You took the words out of my mouth, more need not be said.

Bob Boyd said...

The gods of the weather are dark gods and the priests of the new religion are summoning them, offering them sacrifice, hoping to share their power. These gods won't be placated with the surrender of a few creature comforts. They'll want blood, a lot of blood.

John henry said...

Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”

I don’t recall reading that this is what Althouse indicated. Maybe you could go find if and post it here.


Pedantically speaking you may be correct. She did not indicate that it is just around the corner. She thinks it is here now. There was a 350 comment thread yesterday. In which you participated.

Surely you have not forgotten already?

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/03/darling-darling-is-wind-blowing-today.html

John Henry

bagoh20 said...

Look, some of these people are just stupid, but many are at least smart enough to understand the price tag is unsustainable, and they also know the failures of socialism, so why are they pushing it anyway? The smart ones know it will not work, and could even be horrible, so why aren't they saying so? They value something else more than...everything!

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Give it up lady, you were not in that session, but it really happened. It is not a non-event just because you were not there.”

What are you talking about? I posted Althouse’s comments from that thread. She was mischaracterized and as happens all too often, people then run with it. Are you saying there are Althouse comments on that thread that are no longer there? I was there and I did not see Althouse deleting any of her comments.

Seeing Red said...

Now WHERE did she say what you accuse her of?

Scroll down her blog, The post is my main page.

buwaya said...

The very intelligent see the whole thing as a backdoor to complete bureaucratic rule, as it automatically justifies any economic intervention. It is also excellent for corporatism.

Achilles said...

bagoh20 said...
"I'm not hopeful about wind power, but those who oppose it by pretending it only works when the wind blows are completely dishonest."

Did she really say that? WTF does that even mean? Storage is not the same as working, infact it's the opposite. The system is not just not producing, but is actually losing power during storage and in the process of storing.

It was a funny peek inside Ann's bubble.

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
“Give it up lady, you were not in that session, but it really happened. It is not a non-event just because you were not there.”

What are you talking about? I posted Althouse’s comments from that thread. She was mischaracterized and as happens all too often, people then run with it. Are you saying there are Althouse comments on that thread that are no longer there? I was there and I did not see Althouse deleting any of her comments.


As Inga points out, she was in that thread, and she is that stupid.

Big Mike said...

How is that high speed train project going in California?

@Achilles, I confidently assert that the California high speed rail project never was intended to succeed. Otherwise they would have started in the challenging parts of the route, namely at the ends (LA and San Francisco) and where the terrain is difficult. The template was established in the 19th century, from the B&O starting in Baltimore to the.Great Northern. I am not (quite) ready to assert that it’s sole purpose was graft and corruption, but an actual rail connection could not ever have been a goal.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

She thinks it is here now. There was a 350 comment thread yesterday. In which you participated.”

Indeed I did and I just got done quoting all of 4 of Althouse’s comments and provided a link to the thread at 10:56 AM. You too are mischaracterizing her comments. Did she say what Mike Accused her of? Did she say “city wide battery storage” was here “now” as you accuse her of?

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”-Mike

Daniel Jackson said...

"If it's really so bad to run on the Green New Deal, why are Trump and McConnell taunting them about it now? I think it is a bad signature issue, but this early taunting makes me wonder whether perhaps it's good."

The issue is, for want of a better expression, bandwidth. It is the beginning of March and the usual rule of thumb for the House is that they have until May 31 of their first year of the two year session to accomplish something--ANYTHING. Summer is coming and the reelection season for all of the House is only 90 days off. Not a lot of time left to rack up some points to compete for reelection.

WHAT exactly has this House accomplished?

AH, YES! Another gem effort to shut down civilization. Yessirree BOB. Perilous Pelosi has overseen a government shutdown, a stuttering imbecile from Somalia utter weekly blood libels, a lot of women dressed in white, and the legislation genius of a Bronx Bimbo that has taken center stage of the Democratic controlled House.

You bet it is a fine idea! Run with Madame Speaker. Definitely the MOST important piece of business of all those fine elected saviors on the Public Tit pushing to end air transportation and cow flatulence.

Oh yes; another Russia collusion investigation is needed to say NOTHING of getting those articles of impeachment delivered to the Senate. Don't forget to pass legislation to end hateful speech on all federally funded institutions of higher learning.

Remember, y'all have ninety more days.

FullMoon said...

As mentioned yesterday by another commenter:
One of the biggest names in Wind/Solar comes out for nuclear and explains why

Why Renewables Can’t Save the Planet

The Drill SGT said...

Seeing Red said...
How is this GND going to stop China and India from polluting?


To get serious about a GND, we're gonna need to bomb a bunch or Coal plants in China and India, and mine the Persian Gulf

If it leads to nuclear war and nuclear winter, so much the better.

and the population impact is just an added bennie :)

/sarc

mockturtle said...

Interesting that the co-founder of Greenpeace rips the GND and calls AOC a "pompous little twit". Article from FOX news

Anonymous said...

Mike: No Green Deal will work without India and China participating. We can cut USA carbon pollution (sic) to zero (hypothetically) and the global CO2 level would not drop at all.

Most Green Guards have probably never given this a moment's thought. After all, taking realistic concrete action to solve a problem is not really the point of the exercise. But I have the greatest confidence that, if cornered on the point, they can whip up a the prog diversionary stew from the classic ingredients always on hand in the prog cant pantry. (Racism! Colonialism! Privilege! blah blah blah...)

I suspect that for the fuzzy prog mind, climate-breaking is like racism - only white people can do it.

effinayright said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
“She thinks it is here now. There was a 350 comment thread yesterday. In which you participated.”

Indeed I did and I just got done quoting all of 4 of Althouse’s comments and provided a link to the thread at 10:56 AM. You too are mischaracterizing her comments. Did she say what Mike Accused her of? Did she say “city wide battery storage” was here “now” as you accuse her of?

“They have already convinced Althouse that battery technology and city-scale storage is just around the corner.”-Mike
************************

Inga, you fatuous ass. You are deliberately ignoring the difference between a quote and a paraphrase. Althouse clearly implied that city-scale storage was being done right now, as did you when you claimed that electric power stations were doing so, by citing someone else:

“Many people pair their solar and wind energy with traditional power to create a hybrid system that will reduce their bills. In these cases, the energy created is stored by the utility company."

https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/living-off-the-grid1.htm

Other commenters challenged that statement, pointing out to you that "load shedding" isn't storage, it's the getting rid of power that cannot be stored. Thus there ARE no city-scale storage facilities. I asked you to provide us with evidence of one: where is it, what is its capacity...

You didn't.

Because they don't exist.

Even Bill Gates agrees that they are a chimera:

https://stopthesethings.com/2019/02/18/bill-gates-slams-unreliable-wind-solar-lets-quit-jerking-around-with-renewables-batteries/


Arguing in Bad Faith is your stock-in-trade here. Pathetic.


mockturtle said...

Here in AZ there exist Yuuuuge solar plants. But they would be pretty useless in western WA. My RV uses solar for electrical power.

cubanbob said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
Hickenlooper on the Green New Deal.
“Said he hasn't read all the details, but "I'm going to guess that 99% of what's in the Green New Deal I will be happy to embrace."

Great news indeed! Now we have a Democrat candidate who admits that having a turd in the milk tank is acceptable as long it is below a certain size.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Althouse clearly implied that city-scale storage was being done right now, as did you when you claimed that electric power stations were doing so, by citing someone else...”-wholelottabs

“Many people pair their solar and wind energy with traditional power to create a hybrid system that will reduce their bills.”- from my link

Wrong again. Where in either statements or quotes is the term “city wide” used? Paraphrasing is one thing. Mischaracterization is another, closer to a lie.

“Thus there ARE no city-scale storage facilities. I asked you to provide us with evidence of one: where is it, what is its capacity...”-wholelotta

Again who claimed there was “CITY WIDE SCALE. STORAGE” ?

Seeing Red said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Arguing in Bad Faith is your stock-in-trade here. Pathetic.”

Mischaracterization or lying about other commenters’ comments are in bad faith.

traditionalguy said...

The new reality we want to pretend we can’t see is the American One Party that has been at war with he American people for 30 years. And Trump has refused its be bribed and is fighting the criminal politicians.

Seeing Red said...

Lolol GLF the one time the vile progs believe in American exceptionalism. Unless China and India play along.

Big Mike said...

@Althouse, Democrats are desperate to push the global warming, oops I mean climate change, oops I mean climate chaos bullcrap right this very minute because if the theory of Habibullo Abdussamatov and Valentina Zarkhova (and now Martin Mlynczak of NASA’s Langley Research Center) is true — and anecdotal evidence suggests that it is — then we are entering a lengthy period of extreme cold temperatures akin to the “Little Ice Age” of the eighteenth century. We are going to want carbon dioxide and cow farts in our atmosphere. Warm weather is uncomfortable, but people can die of hypothermia.

effinayright said...

Inga, unless there were city-wide storage or larger, there is NO EFFECTIVE storage for city-wide needs.

QED.

That's precisely Bill Gates' point vis a vis the effect of cyclones hitting Tokyo. The city's energy needs over a three-day recovery would require gigantic batteries. They do not exist. And, of course, those huge towers might be taken down in typhoon-scale winds.

If you want to argue that you and Althouse were really arguing that teeny, weeny storage facilities could handle the energy needs of entire cities, you go right ahead.

We all note for the record that you are attempting to divert from your orginal statements.

So...what exactly did YOU mean when you cited as authority this statement:

“Many people pair their solar and wind energy with traditional power to create a hybrid system that will reduce their bills. In these cases, the energy created is stored by the utility company."

C'mon, give it a go!

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“If you want to argue that you and Althouse were really arguing that teeny, weeny storage facilities could handle the energy needs of entire cities, you go right ahead.”

Precisely what has NOT been argued by either Althouse or myself or the links she or I provided. Go and find WHERE she or I said any such thing.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

LOL

Earnest Prole said...

It polls at about 20 percent when you drill down on the actual proposals, but sure, go to town on that Green New Deal. What could possibly go wrong?

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“We all note for the record that you are attempting to divert from your orginal statements.”

Copy and post here the “original statement” you assert that I’m “attempting to divert from”, or are you once again engaging in mischaracterization?

Drago said...

Wholelotta to Inga: "So...what exactly did YOU mean when you cited as authority this statement:"

Inga routinely links to articles that she asserts or implies support her claims and, amusingly, even a cursory review of said articles quickly exposes how 180 degrees out of whack she is.

She only reads the headlines!

Now, combine that proclivity of hers with a technical topic on which she possesses zero knowledge or experience and hilarity always ensues!!

BJM said...

The so-called green storage options translates to batteries. This is what happens when a country mandates electrical vehicles (they were granted the license).

@Inga, when Patrick Moore, the co-founder of Greenpeace, calls out AOC's NGD as bullshit you might want to consider the global ramifications on billions of people, not pie charts, cooked data and a neophyte's political talking points.

Gird your loins, this is a Twitchy page, but you can go directly to Moore's Twitter account.

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
“If you want to argue that you and Althouse were really arguing that teeny, weeny storage facilities could handle the energy needs of entire cities, you go right ahead.”

Precisely what has NOT been argued by either Althouse or myself or the links she or I provided. Go and find WHERE she or I said any such thing.

Again: "Google it."

I also find it interesting that Inga is here saying she was never stupid enough to believe the crap the GNDers are pedaling and that their claims are trash.

But she supports the GND.

You can't make this stuff up. Satire is completely unnecessary.

This is going to be an awesome debate.

Drago said...

What is amusing is even after all this discussion, Inga will remain in precisely the same knowledge/insight "place" as when she came in.

Which makes sense really, when all that matters is what increases the power of the Left/LLR's over everyone else.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“But here's something I need you to do...DON'T NAME ANOTHER COMMENTER WHEN YOU'RE DISAGREEING WITH HIM... It looks like a pointless, childish game. If you seriously want to argue on the substance, quote the person and disagree with the material posted. Don't make it about the person.

Ann Althouse

FullMoon said...

Ya know, the commenteriat here are middle aged and older.
Many voters, especially Democrats, are as young as eighteen.

The younger voters have been hearing about the perils of climate change for much of their lives.

As AA mentioned being frighteded as a child by the sounds of jet planes because of being taught of potential nuclear destruction, perhaps young people really are afraid of dying.

Not to mention saving all the cute animals being annihilated by evil fossil fuels.

Drago said...

Last evening Inga was proclaiming she and HoaxPPT had bern schooling everyone on this issue!

LOL

No clearer example of Dunning-Kruger is possible.

daskol said...

GND is one letter away from GOD.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Last evening Inga was proclaiming she and HoaxPPT had bern schooling everyone on this issue!

LOL

No clearer example of Dunning-Kruger is possible.”

But here's something I need you to do...DON'T NAME ANOTHER COMMENTER WHEN YOU'RE DISAGREEING WITH HIM... It looks like a pointless, childish game. If you seriously want to argue on the substance, quote the person and disagree with the material posted. Don't make it about the person.”

Ann Althouse

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

OAC is awesome.

Henry said...

Is Pelosi on board?

Then it's nothing.

cubanbob said...

Does Inga or Althouse know something that no one else knows how to do? I might be wrong but I have yet to hear of anyone explaining how it is possible to generate the electrical needs of the nation during both day and night, summer and winter, cloudy days and rainy days and hazy days and days and nights with little winds entirely with renewable energy sources nevermind on how to store excess production for use later on a national scale. If either of them can explain how it can be done without violating the laws of nature then they truly will be by leaps and bounds the wealthiest people ever to have lived. And the most brilliant. Newton, Einstein will be simpletons in comparison and Gates and Bezos mere paupers. We have less than twelve years to git er done according the New Green Deal Democrat Brain Trust so ladies we have no time to waste so get to it! And thanks in advance!

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga...Allie Oop said...

“Does Inga or Althouse know something that no one else knows how to do?

I might be wrong but I have yet to hear of anyone explaining how it is possible to generate the electrical needs of the nation during both day and night, summer and winter, cloudy days and rainy days and hazy days and days and nights with little winds entirely with renewable energy sources nevermind on how to store excess production for use later on a national scale.”

And just WHAT is it that makes you think we claim to know how to do as you suggest?

“If either of them can explain how it can be done without violating the laws of nature then they truly will be by leaps and bounds the wealthiest people ever to have lived. And the most brilliant. Newton, Einstein will be simpletons in comparison and Gates and Bezos mere paupers. We have less than twelve years to git er done according the New Green Deal Democrat Brain Trust so ladies we have no time to waste so get to it! And thanks in advance!”

Who made any such claims that you speak of?

So many strawmen

FullMoon said...

What about all the headlines about expensive nuclear and cheap solar and wind? They are largely an illusion resulting from the fact that 70 to 80 percent of the costs of building nuclear plants are up-front, whereas the costs given for solar and wind don’t include the high cost of transmission lines, new dams, or other forms of battery.

It’s reasonable to ask whether nuclear power is safe, and what happens with its waste.

It turns out that scientists have studied the health and safety of different energy sources since the 1960s. Every major study, including a recent one by the British medical journal Lancet, finds the same thing: nuclear is the safest way to make reliable electricity.

Because nuclear plants produce heat without fire, they emit no air pollution in the form of smoke.

Even during the worst accidents, nuclear plants release small amounts of radioactive particulate matter from the tiny quantities of uranium atoms split apart to make heat.

Over an 80-year lifespan, fewer than 200 people will die from the radiation from the worst nuclear accident, Chernobyl, and zero will die from the small amounts of radiant particulate matter that escaped from Fukushima.

Why Renewables Can’t Save the Planet

Drago said...

I cant wait to see what The Magic Batteries/Golden Hoax Dossier Crew comes up with next!

Drago said...

Inga The Forgetful: "And just WHAT is it that makes you think we claim to know how to do as you suggest?"

Every major democrat presidential candidate supports the magical pixie-dust unicorn New Green Deal....which is utterly completely thoroughly dependent on non-existent Magical Batteries that they assert would be here in time to revamp our entire society in just 12 delightful years.

LOL

Seeing Red said...

It seems The science isn’t there to solve the issue in the next 12 years, so enjoy your last 12 years.

Of course I’ve been hearing for almost 50 years I should have been dead decades ago by famine...pollution...flooding...gmo...fill in the blank.

Ok Paul Erlich!

I also grew up with the threat of nuclear annialation but in my teens I had a serious discussion with my parents and had a family member due of cancer so I decided if I had a choice Nuke was the way to go. It was fast. Dying by cancer slowly eating away at you, not my choice.

I never really gave it a thought again until I was forced to by 9/11 and I certainly didn’t let it affect me living my life until then and I’m still pissed about the TSA.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“I cant wait to see what The Magic Batteries/Golden Hoax Dossier Crew comes up with next!”

But here's something I need you to do...DON'T NAME ANOTHER COMMENTER WHEN YOU'RE DISAGREEING WITH HIM... It looks like a pointless, childish game. If you seriously want to argue on the substance, quote the person and disagree with the material posted. Don't make it about the person.

Ann Althouse

Drago said...

The good news for Hickenlooper fans is Hickenlooper is "only" 99% on board with the Magical Puxie-Dust Unicorn-Magic Batteries GND!

So, thats like, super good, right?

Drago said...

“I cant wait to see what The Magic Batteries/Golden Hoax Dossier Crew comes up with next!”

traditionalguy said...

The systematic extermination of Americans by a great famine should be named the Malthusian Deal. The only thing green about it would be the fertilizer from 300 million dead bodies.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

Inga The Forgetful: "And just WHAT is it that makes you think we claim to know how to do as you suggest?

LOL”

“But here's something I need you to do...DON'T NAME ANOTHER COMMENTER WHEN YOU'RE DISAGREEING WITH HIM... It looks like a pointless, childish game. If you seriously want to argue on the substance, quote the person and disagree with the material posted. Don't make it about the person.

Ann Althouse 3/4/2019

Oso Negro said...

@ Inga - Althouse said this in her original post, not in the comments - "Obviously, it's wrong to say that energy from a wind turbine flows into your house only while the wind is blowing, and you'd lose your mind if you believed that Trump doesn't realize that".

So if the wind is NOT blowing, then WHERE is that energy normally generated by the wind turbine coming from? A storage system, aka "battery" is implied.

If we parse her sentence there is NO OTHER SOURCE OF ENERGY mentioned. Just the wind turbine. Clearly Althouse believes that energy from the wind turbine is saved up somehow. If she wasn't thinking about batteries, what do you suppose she had in mind?

buwaya said...

" I confidently assert that the California high speed rail project never was intended to succeed. "

Exactly so. The thing was milked to the limit for "consulting" this and that and legal services and other such things.

But this was an semi-innocent, normal, everyday bit of corruption. Leeching off of government contracts in the grand old tradition dating back to the Sumerians, probably.

The green business is quite different, as it is not about just one piece of spending, or skimming government contracts, but control. The thing is intended to put permanent hooks into all economic activity, on a basis that is unquestionable and unfalsifiable. This will be used to exert leverage to any degree necessary for any purpose. The "climate change" justification by its nature can be construed to justify anything.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

“If we parse her sentence there is NO OTHER SOURCE OF ENERGY mentioned. Just the wind turbine. Clearly Althouse believes that energy from the wind turbine is saved up somehow. If she wasn't thinking about batteries, what do you suppose she had in mind?”

Don’t know. Ask her. But she did not say a word about “city wide storage, now”.

Basil Duke said...

Achilles, a favorite tactic of these Marxist hucksters is to "travel back in time," so to speak, and arbitrarily lower recorded temperatures from 100+ years ago. Let's say, New York's Central Park had a typical temperature of 73.5 degrees in May in 1910. In 2018, that figure is 73.4. What to do if you're a leftwing liar who wants to cripple our economy by screaming "climate change"!!!!! It's simple: change the 1910 figure to 71.3. Viola!!! Temps have increased by more than two degrees since 1910!!!! Shut down the factories! Kill all the cows!!! Ban all the things!!! Starve, America, you racist bastards!!!

Drago said...

The Hoax Golden Dossier might have had greater staying power had it been powered by the Magic Batteries.

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...

Who made any such claims that you speak of?

3. Blogger Ann Althouse said...
I'm not hopeful about wind power, but those who oppose it by pretending it only works when the wind blows are completely dishonest. But I'm willing to give Trump credit, because I don't think he actually believes what is false. I think he's doing humor.

She actually posted this as support for her stupidity.

I know I know.

It is just funny to see her actually reference this post and actually make these arguments. CAGW needs people this stupid to believe in it.

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Original Mike said...

Inga is clinging to the phrase "city-scale storage" like Rose Dawson clinging to her raft.

Achilles said...

Inga...Allie Oop said...
“If we parse her sentence there is NO OTHER SOURCE OF ENERGY mentioned. Just the wind turbine. Clearly Althouse believes that energy from the wind turbine is saved up somehow. If she wasn't thinking about batteries, what do you suppose she had in mind?”

Don’t know. Ask her. But she did not say a word about “city wide storage, now”.

Ann snarkily said "Google it" and uncritically linked to an article that did.

Roeche/Voltaire stupidly asserted that MIT had just come out with a new breakthrough that would fix the problem in the same thread.

I know it is your habit to uncritically link to articles that completely refute your point.

I am not posting this because I think it would change your mind. At this point it is just for mockery.

You people are evil and you have evil intent. Being stupid is no excuse. You must be defeated before you and your fellow travelers starve millions more people to death.

Mockery is one of the best tools.

Drago said...

Wind power magically still works when the wind doesnt blow.

Solar power magically still works when the sun isnt shining.

LOL

Trust me, you dont want to be the first one to stop clapping when Comrade Democrat President is done speaking.....

Laslo Spatula said...

Inga,

Here are the Althouse quotes (including the initial one you didn’t include in your 10:56 comment). After each follows the thought process necessary to validate the points. Please note that I am not insulting you: I am putting this in good faith, and then am withdrawing from this conversation, because I don’t believe Althouse’s responses were in good faith, and am tired of the thing.

Althouse’s original comment:

“Obviously, it's wrong to say that energy from a wind turbine flows into your house only while the wind is blowing, and you'd lose your mind if you believed “

When the turbine is not turning there is no energy it is producing. So this statement is incorrect from the start. Period.

To make it have any possible sense — having energy from wind power when there is no wind to turn the turbines — means that we must be talking about receiving SOME alternate version of the wind power’s previously-produced energy, whether battery or alternate source.

When this was pointed out, Althouse responded with:

If you really don't know what I think is obvious, do you also not know how to Google? Here. I'm not making a link, so maybe you won't know what to do with this (link) 

The link led to a wind-power site that does not provide any current sources of such storage at a scale that would handle people’s houses — neighborhoods, towns, cities— only what may work in the future. Currently, these situations are responded to with non-renewable energy sources (example: California), or there are planned shortages / brown-outs (Australia).

Althouse responded with:

If you want to talk about whether the storage methods are good, fine, but it doesn't change what's wrong with Trump's remark (if taken seriously), which is that there isn't even an idea of storage, just direct power from the wind to the thing you are trying to operate, like the way a windmill turns a grindstone.

Remember: Althouse’s original statement was:

“Obviously, it's wrong to say that energy from a wind turbine flows into your house only while the wind is blowing, and you'd lose your mind if you believed “

(to be continued)

Laslo Spatula said...

(continued)

And here is where the circle is attempted to be squared.

Althouse doesn’t mention storage in her original statement; this comes later with the link. When it Is pointed out that the link does NOT support that any of this is happening now at a minimum of community scale, she now says the thing that was wrong with Trump’s remark “is that there isn't even an idea of storage, just direct power from the wind to the thing you are trying to operate, like the way a windmill turns a grindstone”

The storage IS NOT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE, but Trump is now wrong for not mentioning the idea of storage.

The thing is, with no storage capacity available, Trump’s statement is closer to the truth than Althouse’s ‘obvious’ take — Trump’s ‘direct power from the wind to the thing you are trying to operate’ (She is not quoting Trump, just re-stating his words in the manner she believes them to be meant — incidentally, how many are responding to Althouse’s words).

So:

• When the wind is blowing, power goes to “the thing you are trying to operate”.

• When the wind ISN’T blowing, there is no power being supplied to “the thing you are trying to operate”. Because the turbines are not turning.

• There are no batteries etc available at the necessary scale to store previous ‘wind power’ so that it can later be supplied “the thing you are trying to operate”.

• Any power that IS supplied to “the thing you are trying to operate” is coming from alternate non-renewable sources — like California buying coal and gas-produced energy from out-of-state when the wind power is not available on their own grid.

The only way out of this is to argue that Althouse was talking about a solitary house specifically designed to be off-the-grid (much like what is represented in the link that Inga supplied yesterday). But nowhere does she indicate this constraint: she states “that energy from a wind turbine flows into YOUR house” — to which most would interpret ‘YOUR’ as meaning pretty much anybody in a house capable of reading her blog on an electric device.

Perhaps there is another understanding that connects Althouse’s dots; however, I do not believe it to be “obvious’, nor do I believe one is being “ignorant or dishonest” for not seeing it, especially since she never revisited the subject to clarify her statements.

I am Laslo.

Freder Frederson said...

The Green New Deal asks you to give up hope and to give up economic benefits.

From your perspective maybe. But you also apparently think that if we continue with our current energy policy, everything will be just fine and dandy or that we cannot continue to have economic growth without fossil fuels. (And I know you have never not said that you didn't not believe in Global Warming, but your dismissal of any, even minimal, measures to combat it and the dismissive tone you display towards people who believe the science, belies your feelings).

You seem to think that no one actually believes that things will get very bad indeed (and you only need to look to Miami Beach as a canary in the coal mine), but we are just pushing global warming to inconvenience you, or socialism or something.

Browndog said...

Q: What did progressives use before candles?

A: electricity

Jim at said...

Notice how a certain person derails the entire thread over whether or not Althouse said or didn't actually say something in a prior thread ...

...while studiously avoiding the subject of forcing the totalitarian left to put up or shut up about the GND.

FullMoon said...

And I know you have never not said that you didn't not believe in Global Warming, but your dismissal of any, even minimal, measures to combat it and the dismissive tone you display towards people who believe the science, belies your feelings)

Here is the answer, from a leader in the renewable energy movement

L code:

Why Renewables Can’t Save the Planet

Caligula said...

For many, selecting "Green New Deal" is like selecting an over-the-counter remedy from a drugstore shelf.

Most select such remedies without considering what is actually in them. Thus, an OTC sleeping aid and an OTC sinus-relief product may both contain the same quantity of the identical anti-histamine; they are pharmacologically equivalent. Yet they are different products (and probably sell for very different products) because they target different maladies. Shoppers for such products pay little if any attention to the actual ingredients, but only to the package text that promises relief for some specific problem.

And so, too, with Green New Deal: unfortunately, few will look beyond the label to see what's actually inside; all that really matters is the label.

Freder Frederson said...

Let's say, New York's Central Park had a typical temperature of 73.5 degrees in May in 1910. In 2018, that figure is 73.4. What to do if you're a leftwing liar who wants to cripple our economy by screaming "climate change"!!!!! It's simple: change the 1910 figure to 71.3. Viola!!! Temps have increased by more than two degrees since 1910!!!! Shut down the factories! Kill all the cows!!! Ban all the things!!! Starve, America, you racist bastards!!!

Where are you getting your numbers? Say we (i.e., those of us who believe the planet is warming) are faking all the temperature data, how did we manage to get 95% of the glaciers in the world to retreat? (and the higher latitude you go to the more alarming the retreat). Have we altered the photographic record? And how can Ann look out of her office (assuming she had a lake view) and not admit that Lake Mendota freezes has seen the length of ice coverage drop from an average of 120 days in 1852/53 to around 85 days now (and it has accelerated considerably since 1980).

Inga...Allie Oop said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Freder Frederson said...

Here is the answer, from a leader in the renewable energy movement

For those of you who dismiss degrees in anything but STEM fields, you sure like to throw your biases away when you can find a MS in Cultural Anthropology who agrees with you.

And for the record, as much as I am not particularly enamored am skeptical of the touted benefits of nuclear power (it has never lived up to the promises made about it over the last 74 years), I do think as a transitional technology, it should be part of the mix.

Drago said...

Field Marshall Freder: "You seem to think that no one actually believes that things will get very bad indeed (and you only need to look to Miami Beach as a canary in the coal mine"

LOL

Miami Beach flooding occurs because it sits 3 foot above sea level and has ALWAYS flooded during King Tides (sun and moon aligned on same side of the Earth creating significantly higher tides).

Further, there has been an INCREASE in people moving to Miami Beach since 2000 which creates greater building density and fewer heavy rain runoff opportunity in this city which gets about 50+ inches of rain each year plus additional seasonal storms and surge.

I would think that having been exposed as an hilarious lying hack regarding the Bundy trial, where you got EVERY finding wrong, you would be more careful.

But, nope!!

LOL

FullMoon said...

As for supposedly working to “save” the environment, the GND offers no practical real-world solutions. Where this may be most glaringly evident is in the GND’s rejection of nuclear energy. The resolution proposes that “100 percent of the power demand in the United States” would be met “through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources.” But these energy sources “would not include creating new nuclear plants” and, in fact, “the plan is to transition off of nuclear and all fossil fuels as soon as possible.”

Yet, as Time magazine “Hero of the Environment” Michael Shellenberger argues, the only truly “green energy” is nuclear power. “When it comes to generating power for billions of people, it turns out that producing solar and wind collectors, and spreading them over large areas, has vastly worse impacts on humans and wildlife alike,” he says. “I think it’s natural that those of us who became active on climate change gravitated toward renewables. They seemed like a way to harmonize human society with the natural world. Collectively, we have been suffering from an appeal-to-nature fallacy no different from the one that leads us to buy products at the supermarket labeled ‘all natural.’ But it’s high time that those of us who appointed ourselves Earth’s guardians should take a second look at the science, and start questioning the impacts of our actions.”

https://patriotpost.us/articles/61524-socialist-green-new-deal-rejects-nuclear-energy

iowan2 said...

Straining the same ole gnat are we?

I have defended are host,(though she is most capable herself) several times. Thinking that some take her words out of context in an effort to make her seem unaware. This time some of the same is happening. Both sides could dial back a bit. Althouse stepped in it, when she claimed systems being powered by windmills, didn't require wind to watch TV. While it is easy to build a small system that uses batteries to provide chemical created electricity, to power low amperage loads for a short duration of no/low wind, that is not scale-ble to any practical level. President Trumps mocking satire was not referring to a single home choosing to utilize wind energy, that's a choice that a few people have made, they would not be wailing about lack of wind because they wanted to watch TV. It's only funny if its a city dweller that has been a beneficiary of the GREAT LEAP FORWARD.
Scale-ability is the fly in the ointment of the GREAT LEAP FORWARD.
Scale-ability is why yesterdays thread went over 300 comments.
Scale-ability is why THE GREAT LEAP FORWARD is nothing but a marketing scam, devoid of science.
Altouse's comment taken as a whole, failed at attempting to define the Presidents meaning of his CPAC speech. (because of scale-ability)

Drago said...

Freder: "And for the record, as much as I am not particularly enamored am skeptical of the touted benefits of nuclear power (it has never lived up to the promises made about it over the last 74 years),.."

Then you are anti-science and anti-data.

n.n said...

FDR's socialist New Deal that brought the country out of the Great Depression

It did not. It was a public smoothing function, which enabled avoidance of addressing underlying causes, thereby expanding their scope and magnitude ("great") until there was no politically viable resolution.

bagoh20 said...

All the energy available to the planet is at it's root nuclear, so skip the middle man. Go nuclear or go home!

gahrie said...

how did we manage to get 95% of the glaciers in the world to retreat?

When did those glaciers start retreating? Whenever someone brings up a glacier that is retreating, it turns out that the retreat began long before the industrial revolution.

n.n said...

Cleaned, redistributed, renewable greenbacks.

The Gray New Deal a la Green Energy... rather green drivers, gray conversion, production, storage technology. The semantic play in progress.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

the [glaciers] retreat began long before the industrial revolution

Also, it's an evolutionary, not progressive process, forced by mechanical and thermodynamic processes. And while the material is conserved, its form is not, or rather it is in a constant, albeit irregular, unpredictable, transformative state.

gahrie said...

The best form of renewable energy is hydro. It is the most reliable, can be generated at night and when the wind isn't blowing, and has supplemental benefits. Yet the Left refuses to build more dams, and in fact demands that current dams be torn down.

The best form of non-fossil fuel energy is nuclear, and the Left refuses to support nuclear energy.

I'll consider believing the Left when the Left starts acting like they believe their nonsense.

gahrie said...

Civilization did not cause global warming. Global warming caused civilization.

Man wandered around for 290,000 years as hunter-gatherers until the Earth began to warm.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

My neighbor's son lives in DC with his family and he is a lobbyist for the nuclear industry.

Hates Trump - huge lefty.
Just sayin'

Freder Frederson said...

the [glaciers] retreat began long before the industrial revolution

This statement is simply not true. If I am mistaken, please provide a source for this assertion.

Freder Frederson said...

The best form of non-fossil fuel energy is nuclear, and the Left refuses to support nuclear energy.

And it amuses me to no end that the right's favorite energy source is a technology that would not exist, and would not even be remotely viable, without one of the most massive investments of government resources in the history of mankind.

I think you are so enamored of nuclear energy simply because you believe the hippies hate it.

eLocke said...

@Achilles

I know I'm being pedantic, which I don't usually do on the internet, but you've made this error several times, and I suspect you might actually care.

Peddles not pedals.

Drago said...

Freder: "This statement is simply not true. If I am mistaken, please provide a source for this assertion."

Actually, that statement is completely true.

Drago said...

Freder: "And it amuses me to no end that the right's favorite energy source is a technology that would not exist, and would not even be remotely viable, without one of the most massive investments of
7government resources in the history of mankind."

Strange. I was always under the impression the Manhatten Project was about developing an atomic weapon.

And to think that all those brilliant scientists who conceived of such a weapon and its other applications prior to the creation of The Manhatten Project would have just given up on all their research if that effort had not been undertaken.

LOL

Such "brilliant" alternative history analysis by our resident Field Marshall.

Basil Duke said...

Freder, you forgot to mention that we're down to about eight or nine polar bears coz of global warming. We know this because some leftwing tool took a picture sometime of a polar bear standing on a wee ice berg. Also, the wildfires in California were caused by climate change, as was that killer twister down 'Bama way this weekend. I have a nettlesome corn on my left instep that I think formed because Orange Man Bad/climate change. And I could have kept my doctor if I liked him. And the world was going to starve to death by 1975 if we didn't act immediately!!! We need to shut down ALL factories RIGHT NOW, set fire to our cars, demobilize ALL coal mines and nuclear power plants, garrote every damned steak on the hoof in North America, retrofit every building in the country with sod walls and slit trench shitters, turn in our guns and flashlights, commit to an exclusive diet of twigs and dust bunnies, and then die with a smile on our emaciated lips after the cholera ravages us. It's for the planet, damn it! Just do it!!! I'm waiting on your lead. The goddess empress Alexandria "The Boss" Occasional Kotex sez "Thanks in advance! You're totes adorbs!!!!"

Francisco D said...

Danny Kahneman and Amos Tversky are cognitive psychologists whose work has been used in mathematics and economics. Their practical theories reflect real world thinking and actions such as Anchoring and Adjustment

It is a cognitive strategy used in bargaining. For example, you make an offer on a car that is far lower than the MSRP. The dealer either tells you to go home or he considers it. You have created an anchor for the negotiations.

The GND and other environmental nonsense are examples of setting an anchor. The goal is not to actually enact the proposed legislation. It is to move people in that direction. However, AOC and the Dems made such a ridiculous proposal that they need to go home.

A lot of threads on environmental issues get caught up in arguing absolutes when they are only dealing with the anchors.

Ann Althouse said...

“”“Obviously, it's wrong to say that energy from a wind turbine flows into your house only while the wind is blowing, and you'd lose your mind if you believed “ When the turbine is not turning there is no energy it is producing. So this statement is incorrect from the start. Period.”

You changed the words. I said “from.”

I have milk from a cow in a bottle in my refrigerator.

Ann Althouse said...

It flows when I pour it.

iowan2 said...

And it amuses me to no end that the right's favorite energy source is a technology that would not exist, and would not even be remotely viable, without one of the most massive investments of government resources in the history of mankind.

I'm to believe not a single physicist thought about splitting the atom? FDR got all the eggheads together and told them to create an entire branch of science from thin air? And they stumbled onto nuclear weapons?

brylun said...

To Ann Althouse and her statement about pouring milk from a bottle (taken from one of the almost 400 comments from yesterday): "For those that are numerate, here's an exercise. Estimate what would an off-grid house cost that consumed energy at the same rate as standard houses today (in other words matches the electric demand curve) using only windmills and batteries?

Or here's a variant, what percentage of the population could afford to build a house like that above? (Hint: Is it 1%, 0.1%, or 0.0001% ?)

If you think that's too restrictive throw in in solar power. Estimate what would an off-grid house cost that consumed energy at the same rate as a standard houses today (in other words match the electric demand curve) using only windmills, solar panels, and batteries?"

I expect Ms. Althouse won't be able to respond to any plea for mathematic/scientific/engineering analysis. What rhhardin says about women (to paraphrase): Women aren't interested in math, therefore they aren't good at math.

Ms. Althouse disappeared on yesterday's comment thread, only to be replaced (and supported) by none other than Inga.

John Ray said...

Inga: I stand corrected -- you were there, for that I apologize. However, that leads me to a brain teaser that needs no reply. In light of Lazlo's analysis, can anyone continue an argument on this matter?

FullMoon said...

Over an 80-year lifespan, fewer than 200 people will die from the radiation from the worst nuclear accident, Chernobyl, and zero will die from the small amounts of radiant particulate matter that escaped from Fukushima.

As a result, the climate scientist James Hanson and a colleague found that nuclear plants have actually saved nearly two million lives to date that would have been lost to air pollution.

Bilwick said...

Isn't ridiculing the Green New Deal for being socialism like ridiculing a tiger for having stripes? I mean, isn't that the nature of the beast?

Freder Frederson said...

Strange. I was always under the impression the Manhatten Project was about developing an atomic weapon.

I am not only talking about the Manhattan Project but also the post war investment by the government in peaceful nuclear energy through the National Labs and the fuel production facilities (which were built by the government and privately operated), subsidies for uranium mining, government insurance for catastrophic nuclear events, and the government agreeing to be responsible for the ultimate disposal of high, transuranic, and low level nuclear waste.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 365   Newer› Newest»