Court Blocks Pennsylvania’s Carbon Pricing Scheme

“Don’t let activists who believe that putting Pennsylvanians out of work will help ‘save the planet.’ It’s time to confront the wannabe planet savers here in this room and this state and tell them not only NO, but HELL NO.”

That’s what CFACT’s Marc Morano declared before the Pennsylvania House of Representatives when Governor Tom Wolf tried to push The Keystone State into “The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative” (aka RGGI) scheme without authorization by law.

A state court agreed and blocked Wolf’s power grab as an attempt to establish an “unlawful tax.” The court said plaintiffs “raised a substantial legal question” since taxing is a power that is supposed to be wielded by the Pennsylvania General Assembly rather than the Executive.

As reported by the AP, “The Power Pa Jobs Alliance, a coalition of industry and labor groups, said that power plant operators would have started paying what it called the ‘carbon tax’ on Friday had the court not issued its injunction. It contends the carbon policy will impose higher electricity costs on consumers. The group called Friday’s ruling a ‘significant win for working families.’”

Winning court decisions are important and cause for celebration. But we must remind ourselves that oftentimes they’re only isolated “battles” and don’t necessarily determine the larger outcome.

Take, for example, how the Biden Administration is brazenly moving forward on its climate agenda despite the fact the Supreme Court handed them a stinging defeat on regulating carbon dioxide emissions in West Virginia v. EPA.

No sooner did the court wallop them, than Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg rolled out plans to regulate CO2 emissions from motor vehicles and boost his power over the states in ways Congress never intended.

As CFACT senior policy analyst Bonner Cohen reported at CFACT.org:

“One week after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency could not regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants because the agency lacks congressional authorization to do so, the Biden Department of Transportation (DOT) proposed a rule targeting CO2 emissions from highway vehicles, for which DOT also has no legal authority.”

“In a rare moment of regulatory candor, the administration acknowledges in the docket supporting DOT’s proposed rule that DOT’s scheme will ultimately encourage Americans to switch from gasoline-powered cars to EVs.”

For those on the Left, court decisions are a useful tool if they propel their agenda forward — but if they suffer a setback then they proceed on as though it’s just business as usual. They need to lose again and again to force compliance.

Let’s hope the courts continue to teach Governor Wolf, Secretary Buttigieg and their armies of bureaucrats a sorely needed lesson in constitutional checks and balances.

RELATED VIDEO: COVID lockdowns morphing into climate lockdowns

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden’s Transportation Department targets CO2 emissions of cars on highways to push EVs

No excuse for Texas energy debacle

Electric vehicles a tool ripe for abuse

Government benefits more from fuel sales than oil companies!

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

It was never about the climate. It was always about destroying our way of life, our standing in the world and transferring our wealth to left-wing elites with nonsensical, failed ‘businesses’.

Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

By: Helen Raleigh, The Federalist, July 11, 2022:

Two recent studies have shown that electric vehicles have more quality issues than gas-powered ones and are not better for the environment.

Many people believe electric vehicles are higher quality than gas-powered vehicles and are emissions-free, which makes them much better for the environment. But two recent studies have shown that electric cars have more quality issues than gas-powered ones and are not better for the environment.

J.D. Power has produced the annual U.S. Initial Quality Study for 36 years, which measures the quality of new vehicles based on feedback from owners. The most recent study, which included Tesla in its industry calculation for the first time, found that battery-electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid vehicles have more quality issues than gas-powered ones.

According to J.D. Power, owners of electric or hybrid vehicles cite more problems than do owners of gas-powered vehicles. The latter vehicles average 175 problems per 100 vehicles (PP100), hybrids average 239 PP100, and battery-powered cars — excluding Tesla models — average 240 PP100. Tesla models average 226 PP100. Given the average cost of an electric car is roughly $60,000, about $20,000 more than the cost of a gas-powered car, it seems owners of EVs didn’t get the value they deserve.

Some blamed the supply-chain disruptions caused by pandemic-related lockdowns as the main reason for EVs’ quality issues. EV makers have sought alternative (sometimes less optimal) solutions to manufacture new vehicles. But the same supply-chain disruption affected makers of gas-powered vehicles. Yet the three highest-ranking brands, measured by overall initial quality, are all makers of gas-powered vehicles: Buick (139 PP100), Dodge (143 PP100), and Chevrolet (147 PP100).

Some pointed to the design as a main contributing factor to EVs’ quality issues. According to David Amodeo, global director of automotive at J.D. Power, automakers view EVs as “the vehicle that will transform us into the era of the smart cars,” so they have loaded up EVs with technologies such as touch screens, Bluetooth, and voice recognition. EV makers also prefer to use manufacturer-designed apps to “control certain functions of the car, from locking and unlocking the doors remotely to monitoring battery charge.” Increasing technical complexity also increases the likelihood of problems. Not surprisingly, EV owners reported more infotainment and connectivity issues in their vehicles than owners of gas-powered vehicles. Amodeo acknowledged that “there’s a lot of room for improvement” for EVs.

Electric Vehicles Are Worse for the Environment

Besides quality issues, a new study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that electric vehicles are worse for the environment than gas-powered ones. By quantifying the externalities (both greenhouse gases and local air pollution) generated by driving these vehicles, the government subsidies on the purchase of EVs, and taxes on electric and/or gasoline miles, researchers found that “electric vehicles generate a negative environmental benefit of about -0.5 cents per mile relative to comparable gasoline vehicles (-1.5 cents per mile for vehicles driven outside metropolitan areas).”

Keep reading.…..

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: FACT: All Electric Vehicles (EVs) Are Powered by Coal, Uranium, Natural Gas or Diesel-Powered Energy

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

FABRICATING REALITY: Climate Change, Atmospheric Transgenderism and Mental Masturbation

“I’ve called it ‘atmospheric transgenderism.’ If men can get pregnant, then CO2 is a pollutant, you see. If you’re fabricating reality, then anything goes.”, July 7, 2022 in Natural News

“I liken it to they compare the climate crisis to having cancer and the green energy transition, the Green New Deal is their version of chemotherapy. Yeah, you’re gonna be sick, you’re gonna be vomiting, you’re gonna be laid up, but just when you get to the other side of that, you’re gonna be cancer free or in this case, climate crisis-free. So in their minds, this is the necessary bitter medicine that we have to go through — that the Netherlands is going through. What Sri Lanka is going through. What Germany and England are going through, as they’re facing blackouts and energy shortages and economic devastation and inflation.” — Marc Morano, Climate Depot


Mental Masturbation: The act of engaging in useless yet intellectually stimulating conversation, usually as an excuse to avoid taking constructive action in your life.

We have spent a lot of energy, no pun intended, in defending energy, specifically that energy produced by fossil fuels. We have carried this torch to keep not only Americans but mankind in general able to reap the benefits of cheap and reliable energy.

If you Google the words ‘Atmospheric Transgenderism’ one of the links goes to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Policy on Gender Identity Protections statement which reads,

This Order establishes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Policy on Gender Identity Protections, which advances NOAA’s goal to provide a workplace that is free from discrimination and fully inclusive of all employees. These protections include all forms of gender identity and gender expression. NOAA strives to ensure equal opportunity and protection from all forms of harassment for all employees, contractors, fellows, interns, grantees, and applicants for employment. This Order is not intended to replace or impede any applicable discrimination complaint processes and does not alter the filing deadlines for invoking those processes.

NOAA is made up primarily of climate scientists yet they want to protect gender identity?

Gender identity is scientifically determined by ones genomes. One is either born XX (male) or XY (female). This is scientifically indisputable.

QUESTION: If NOAA’s scientists can’t follow the science on gender then are they also ignoring the science on the climate too?

Below is a video titled “IPCC Climate Change 2022 Impacts Report: Insights from NOAA Authors” that explains NOAA’s “scientific” position on climate change. This video features interviews with NOAA scientists Libby Jewett and Kirstin Holsman — contributors to the IPCC Climate Change 2022 Impacts Report. They served on an international team of authors who assessed scientific literature to prepare the new IPCC report’s chapter on North America.

According to the NOAA video byline, “Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns, mainly caused by human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels.

Their premise is fossil fuels create CO2, which is a pollutant and therefore impacts every aspect of life and that mankind, by changing its behaviors, can in fact control the climate.

That’s the definition of “atmospheric transgenderism.”

The Science of Anything Goes

NOAA is the perfect example of scientific mental masturbation.

NOAA’s mental masturbation RE: manmade global warming goes something like this: man uses fossil fuels ⇒ which emit the pollutant CO2 ⇒ therefore fossil fuels must be eliminated in order to save the planet.

We have written here, here, here, here and here that CO2 is not a pollutant but rather is essential to keeping the planet green and mankind healthy.

In the below December 15, 2011 video Professor Ian Clark, Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Ottawa and director, G.G. Hatch Isotope Laboratories, one of Canada’s leading analytical facilities, is testifying before a Canadian Senate hearing on climate change.

Professor Clark presents three important findings on what impacts the earth’s climate:

  1. Earths warming and cooling periods over millions of years has been due to activity on the sun.
  2. H2O (water vapor) is driving green house gas models, not CO2. It is H2O that keeps earth at a livable temperature for mankind.
  3. CO2 has little to do with global warming. CO2 actually helps keep the planet green.

Watch this entire video to understand how data and science are used to define green house gases and their effect over time on our climate.

Scientists Can’t Control the Climate or Change a Person’s Gender

No one can change their gender! What they can do is mutilate themselves psychologically, spiritually and physically. It’s the greatest and most destructive myth of our generation.

The same goes for the climate and weather. Mankind cannot control neither the weather nor the climate because:

  1. The climate changes.
  2. These changes in the climate follow natural cycles (e.g. Summer, Fall, Winter, Spring)
  3. These natural climate changes are immutable and cannot be changed in any way, shape or form.

Recently there have been four major developments impacting those who believe, like NOAA, that CO2 and fossil fuels are harmful.

  1. In a landmark ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a massive blow to the Climate Change Agenda by saying the CO2 cannot be regulated by the EPA. On July 1st, 2022 Zero Hedge’s Tyler Durden wrote, “In a majority opinion authored by chief justice John Roberts, the justices ruled that in the latest example of Democratic overreach, the Environmental Protection Agency was not specifically authorized by Congress to reduce carbon emissions when it was set up in 1970. The ruling leaves the Biden administration dependent on passing legislation if it wants to implement sweeping regulations to curb emissions. The opinion from the court’s conservative majority said that “a decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body”. The justices added they doubted Congress intended to delegate the question of “how much coal-based generation there should be over the coming decades, to any administrative agency”.
  2. On July 9th, 2022 the European Union voted to declare fossil fuel to be ‘green’ energy. “EU Parliament backs green label for nuclear and natural gas, defying climate Left,” reports the Washington Examiner. The decision will, “ease construction of infrastructure for those power sources over the objections of some environmentalists and members of the bloc…Suddenly, European nations are panicking to try to rebuild their energy infrastructure. But since they’ve officially blocked most funding for non-green energy projects, the only way to get funds to rebuild fossil fuel infrastructure is to declare fossil fuels to be ‘green.’”
  3. Natural gas prices soars by 700%. Bloomberg reported on June 29th, 2022, “[N]atural gas is the hottest commodity in the world right now. It’s a key driver of global inflation, posting price jumps that are extreme even by the standards of today’s turbulent markets — some 700% in Europe since the start of last year, pushing the continent to the brink of recession. It’s at the heart of a dawning era of confrontation between the great powers, one so intense that in capitals across the West, plans to fight climate change are getting relegated to the back-burner. In short, natural gas now rivals oil as the fuel that shapes geopolitics. And there isn’t enough of it to go around.”
  4. In an article titled “This Country Tried To Go Green, Now They Are In Total Collapse!” PRETCHI wrote, “Germany is now facing economic disaster following massive investments in green energy. The Wall Street Journal reported that in an effort to get ready for a potential recession, Germany stated on July 5 its intention to amend 1970s legislation to send taxpayer funding to energy companies. According to Reuters, the breakdown occurred shortly after Germany disclosed its intention to spend $220 billion to convert all of its energy needs to renewable sources, the fund for Germany’s energy plan was an industrial transformation between now and 2026, including climate protection, hydrogen technology and expansion of the electric vehicle charging network. “200 billion euros in funding for the transformation of the economy, society and the state,” German finance minister Christian Lindner said.

The atmospheric transgenderism of climate change and mind masturbation have run head first, no pun intended, into global economic and political realities.

The climate on climate change is changing rapidly.

People are looking at their pocketbooks and realizing that they’ve been duped by scientists and their governments on the climate, fossil fuels and CO2 things.

People are now seeing the myth of Atmospheric Transgenderism and they’re not happy.

As Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy, stupid.” Citizens in the U.S. and globally are now waking up to this climate Mental Masturbation exercise. They’re seeing it for what it really is about—control and nothing more!

They’re saying enough is enough. And so do we!

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Studies Show The Electric Vehicles Democrats Insist You Buy Are Worse For The Environment And Lower Quality

Canada’s Peoples Party: ‘Climate change alarmism is based on flawed models that have consistently failed at correctly predicting the future.’

Don’t Let Climate Change Alarmism Ruin Your Future

Two Videos on the Global Warming/Climate Change Hoaxes

VIDEO: Big Government Is Not the Answer to Climate Change

SUPPLY CHAIN CRISIS: 70,000 Self-Employed Truckers in California Forced Off The Road Under New Democrat State Law

The Democrats war on the hard working American ratcheted up another unimaginable notch. But this time, it not only outs the small businessman out of business, throw in massive shortages (food, supplies etc.), supply chain issues etc. It’s a catastrophe

Sadly, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a review on whether California Assembly Bill 5 (AB-5) violates the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 as it applies to self-employed truck drivers.

70,000 Self-Employed Truckers in California Face Shutdown Under New State Law

Industry says it’s ‘pouring gasoline’ on supply chain crisis

By Allan Stein, The Epoch Times, July 8, 2022:

Tens of thousands of independent California truck owner-operators could be out of business soon under a new statewide worker classification law designating them as employees.

On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a review on whether California Assembly Bill 5 (AB-5) violates the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 as it applies to self-employed truck drivers.

“Gasoline has been poured on the fire that is our ongoing supply chain crisis,” the California Trucking Association (CTA) wrote in a June 30 response to the high court’s decision regarding the association’s legal challenge to the bill.

“In addition to the direct impact on California’s 70,000 owner-operators—who have seven days to cease long-standing independent businesses—the impact of taking tens of thousands of truck drivers off the road will have devastating repercussions on an already fragile supply chain, increasing costs and worsening runaway inflation,” the association added.

“We are disappointed the court does not recognize the irrevocable damage eliminating independent truckers will have on interstate commerce and communities across the state.

“The legislature and [Gavin] Newsom administration must immediately take action to avoid worsening the supply chain crisis and inflation.”

The California State Assembly adopted AB-5 in September 2019, sparking CTA’s legal challenge and the Supreme Court’s latest decision.

The bill’s primary sponsor was Lorena Gonzalez (D), a union leader and former Assembly member.

Under AB-5, a self-employed commercial truck owner must satisfy a three-part test to be considered an independent contractor, with exceptions for construction trucking services.

The bill adds that existing law “creates a presumption that a worker who performs services for a hirer is an employee for purposes of claims for wages and benefits arising under wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission.”

Existing law defines employees for purposes that include “any individual who, under the usual common law rules applicable in determining the employer-employee relationship, has the status of an employee.”
Self-Employed Truckers Entitled to Benefits

The bill would entitle those self-employed truck drivers and owners to the same benefits and workers’ compensation as regular employees.

According to Globecom Freight Systems, a leading provider of transportation services, owner-operators make up 9 percent (350,000) of the commercial truckers on the road today. Their average salary is about $50,000.

A recent study by the American Trucking Association found that the nationwide shortage of 80,000 truck drivers could double by 2030. In light of the shortage, many trucking companies now offer lucrative sign-on bonuses and salaries to attract more drivers.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration recently launched an apprenticeship driver program for those aged 18–to–20 that would allow them to cross state lines to help further alleviate the shortage.

Tony Bradley, president and CEO of the Arizona Trucking Association, criticized AB-5 as a “horribly misguided piece of legislation” by California labor unions that will have a “drastic impact across all trucking.”

AUTHOR

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Economics: Natural Gas Soars 700%

“Best economy in history.” — White House

Natural Gas Soars 700%, Becoming Driving Force in the New Cold War

(Bloomberg) — One morning in early June, a fire broke out at an obscure facility in Texas that takes natural gas from US shale basins, chills it into a liquid and ships it overseas. It was extinguished in 40 minutes or so. No one was injured.

It sounds like a story for the local press, at most — except that more than three weeks later, financial and political shockwaves are still reverberating across Europe, Asia and beyond.

That’s because natural gas is the hottest commodity in the world right now. It’s a key driver of global inflation, posting price jumps that are extreme even by the standards of today’s turbulent markets — some 700% in Europe since the start of last year, pushing the continent to the brink of recession. It’s at the heart of a dawning era of confrontation between the great powers, one so intense that in capitals across the West, plans to fight climate change are getting relegated to the back-burner.

In short, natural gas now rivals oil as the fuel that shapes geopolitics. And there isn’t enough of it to go around.

It’s the war in Ukraine that catalyzed the gas crisis to a new level, by taking out a crucial chunk of supply. Russia is cutting back on pipeline deliveries to Europe — which says it wants to stop buying from Moscow anyway, if not quite yet. The scramble to fill that gap is turning into a worldwide stampede, as countries race to secure scarce cargoes of liquefied natural gas ahead of the northern-hemisphere winter.

The New Oil?

Germany says gas shortfalls could trigger a Lehman Brothers-like collapse, as Europe’s economic powerhouse faces the unprecedented prospect of businesses and consumers running out of power. The main Nord Stream pipeline that carries Russian gas to Germany is due to shut down on July 11 for ten days of maintenance, and there’s growing fear that Moscow may not reopen it. Group of Seven leaders are seeking ways to curb Russia’s gas earnings, which help finance the invasion of Ukraine — and backing new LNG investments. And poorer countries

that built energy systems around cheap gas are now struggling to afford it.

“This is the 1970s for natural gas,” says Kevin Book, managing director at ClearView Energy Partners LLC, a Washington-based research firm. “The world is now thinking about gas as it once thought about oil, and the essential role that gas plays in modern economies and the need for secure and diverse supply have become very visible.”

Natural gas used to be a sleepy commodity that changed hands in fragmented regional markets. Now, even though globalization appears to be in retreat across much of the world economy, the gas trade is headed in the opposite direction. It’s globalizing fast — but maybe not fast enough.

Keep reading……

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: EU Declares Fossil Fuel To Be ‘Green’ Energy As ‘Climate Change’ Narrative Self-Destructs

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EU Declares Fossil Fuel To Be ‘Green’ Energy As ‘Climate Change’ Narrative Self-Destructs

When reality meets propaganda, it’s brutal.

Trump was right. Right about “green energy’ farce, right about the climate accord, right about the Paris Agreement …. he was right about everything.

“EU Parliament backs green label for nuclear and natural gas, defying climate Left,” reports the Washington Examiner. The decision will, “ease construction of infrastructure for those power sources over the objections of some environmentalists and members of the bloc.”

This decision is the first sign that European leaders may be pulling back from the green energy suicide cult that now typifies socialist, progressive “libtard” governments that are more interested in virtue signaling than allowing their own domestic economies to function. The fraudulent, junk science narrative of “climate change” has caused western nations (including the USA) to dismantle much of their fossil fuel infrastructure over the last 20 years. With Russia’s energy exports suddenly cut off due to economic sanctions, Western Europe is finding itself mired in an unprecedented energy crisis with potentially catastrophic consequences.

Suddenly, European nations are panicking to try to rebuild their energy infrastructure. But since they’ve officially blocked most funding for non-green energy projects, the only way to get funds to rebuild fossil fuel infrastructure is to declare fossil fuels to be “green.”

And that’s exactly what the EU parliament just did with natural gas, delivering a devastating blow to the climate change narrative, which was always based on so much quackery and bunk that I’ve called it “atmospheric transgenderism.” If men can get pregnant, then CO2 is a pollutant, you see. If you’re fabricating reality, then anything goes.

It turns out that even “progressive” national leaders of European nations are being dragged back to reality, kicking and screaming, reluctantly admitting that fossil energy is the only thing that can power modern economies at the moment, at least until hot fusion or cold fusion are commercialized…… (more here)

EU parliament backs labelling gas and nuclear investments as green

By Kate Abnett, Reuters, July 6, 2022

Lawmakers back ‘green’ EU investment label for the fuels

Likely to become law unless super-majority of states veto

Gas, nuclear rules have split EU countries and lawmakers

Luxembourg, Austria to challenge law in court

BRUSSELS, July 6 (Reuters) – The European Parliament on Wednesday backed EU rules labelling investments in gas and nuclear power plants as climate-friendly, throwing out an attempt to block the law that has exposed deep rifts between countries over how to fight climate change.

The vote paves the way for the European Union proposal to pass into law, unless 20 of the bloc’s 27 member states decide to oppose the move, which is seen as very unlikely.

The new rules will add gas and nuclear power plants to the EU “taxonomy” rulebook from 2023, enabling investors to label and market investments in them as green.

Out of 639 lawmakers present, 328 opposed a motion that sought to block the EU gas and nuclear proposals.

The European Commission welcomed the result. It proposed the rules in February after more than a year of delay and intense lobbying from governments and industries.

“The Complementary Delegated Act is a pragmatic proposal to ensure that private investments in gas and nuclear, needed for our energy transition, meet strict criteria,” EU financial services chief Mairead McGuinness said.

The rules have split EU countries, lawmakers and investors. Brussels redrafted the rules multiple times, flip-flopping over whether to grant gas plants a green tag. Its final proposal fuelled fierce debate about how to hit climate goals amid a crisis over dwindling Russian gas supplies.

Gas is a fossil fuel that produces planet-warming emissions – but far less than coal, and some EU states see it as a temporary alternative to replace the dirtier fuel.

Nuclear energy is free from CO2 emissions but produces radioactive waste. Supporters such as France say nuclear is vital to meet emissions-cutting goals, while opponents cite concerns about waste disposal.

Read more

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Dutch Farms Seized To Make Way For Migrants

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre: ‘Our Economy is Stronger Now Than Ever Before!’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report us republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

UPDATE: Holland’s Eco-War Against Farmers

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face— forever.” ― George Orwell, 1984


Since Monday the Fourth of July, there has been an uprising of Dutch farmers. Though the farmers break laws, their protests should be considered peaceful and within the spirit of democracy.

Their case is justified. The Dutch Government says it wants to protect Nature and the farmers pollute heath with too much Nitrogen from their cattle. However, Nitrogen is beneficial for Nature and changes barren heath into beautiful green forest. Do you know that 78% of the air you breathe consists of Nitrogen?

Dutch farmers belong to Holland, just as cowboys belong to the USA. Holland was made a great nation by farmers, preachers and merchants.

As I wrote you before, the real reason that the Dutch Government wants to expel farmers from their farmlands is, that they need the land to build homes for mass immigration from Africa and the Middle East. Holland will become a city state, full of ugly modern architecture, meant for foreigners.

The in a July 7th, 2022 Free West Media article titled “No longer a conspiracy theory: Dutch farmers must make way for asylum seekers” reports:

Flevo member of parliament Niek Beenen (JA21) has shared a document on Twitter from the province of Flevoland in the Netherlands about the purchase of “nitrogen space” in the Noordoostpolder.

“The province of Flevoland has bought nitrogen space in the Noordoostpolder. With the nitrogen space that has been freed up, the province can help a number of PAS claimants in the Noordoostpolder. This opportunity has arisen because the government has bought an agricultural business in the Noordoostpolder. The government wants to set up a registration centre for asylum seekers at the location of the farm,” reads the document.

In this country, farming families who produce food are being exchanged for asylum seekers,” tweeted Beenen. [Emphasis added]

Read more

Dutch police and even part of the Military have responded aggressively to the farmers’ protests. There has even been an occasion in which a police officer shot at a 16 year old boy, who was unarmed and drove away from the protest without being a threat to anyone.

This happened in Heerenveen and there is video of the incident on Twitter.

Prime Minister Mark Rutte, a fake conservative, doesn’t seem to be impressed by the protests. He has offered that a friend of his mediate between the Government and the farmers. But Rutte has said that the plan to expel farmers will not be negotiable, so negotiations are meaningless. The mediator is also a driving force behind the climate hysteria in Holland.

I see a bleak future for Dutch farmers. But also for Dutch fishermen. They are also under attack by the Government. They have to diminish their fleet, so that wind turbines can be erected in the North Sea.

And what we also see happening, is that slowly but steadily a police state is developing in Holland. The Dutch Constitution is merely an obstacle that can be overcome by declaring “emergency” situations.

Yes, Holland is in deep trouble. Only immediate elections could offer a way out. But then again, would the people vote wisely? They are so misinformed by state run media and by media supporting the state.

©Matthys van Raalten. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Dutch Farms Seized To Make Way For Migrants

RELATED VIDEO: Italian farmers start rebellion of their own

Barrels of Oil Released by Biden From Reserve Were Sent to China

Dumping the country’s oil reserves was the only strategy to lower energy prices that Biden would accept. He continues blocking domestic drilling and taxes remain high. The practical impact of the reserve releases was negligible and, worse still, five million barrels of oil from the reserve were actually exported abroad.

More than 5 million barrels of oil that were part of a historic U.S. emergency reserves release to lower domestic fuel prices were exported to Europe and Asia last month, according to data and sources, even as U.S. gasoline and diesel prices hit record highs.

About 1 million barrels per day is being released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) through October. The flow is draining the SPR, which last month fell to the lowest since 1986.

Considering the scale of even the national use, 20 million a day, there was never going to be much of an impact here.

U.S. officials have said oil prices could be higher if the SPR had not been tapped.

Ah, the hypothetical.

Anyway the oil went all over.

The fourth-largest U.S. oil refiner, Phillips 66 PSX.N, shipped about 470,000 barrels of sour crude from the Big Hill SPR storage site in Texas to Trieste, Italy, according to U.S. Customs data. Trieste is home to a pipeline that sends oil to refineries in central Europe.

Atlantic Trading & Marketing (ATMI), an arm of French oil major TotalEnergies TTEF.PA, exported 2 cargoes of 560,000 barrels each, the data showed.

Cargoes of SPR crude were also headed to the Netherlands and to a Reliance RELI.NS refinery in India, an industry source said. A third cargo headed to China, another source said.

Yes, the story wouldn’t be complete without China. Much like the PPP disaster, the government efforts invariably only punish Americans and reward Communist China.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Stunning Amount Of Oil Released By Biden Found Its Way To China, Other Countries

Black Lives Matter Celebrates 4th with Race Riots and Vandalism

Boris Johnson’s successor is likely to be even worse than he is

UK: Boris Johnson resigns following unprecedented wave of resignations over his leadership

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

UN Journal Touts ‘The Benefits of World Hunger’ – ‘Hunger Has Great Positive Value’

The UN Chronicle, which bills itself as “The magazine of the United Nations, Since 1946” originally published this essay in 2008 

by Professor George Kent of the University of Hawaii:

“Hunger has great positive value to many people. Indeed, it is fundamental to the working of the world’s economy. Hungry people are the most productive people, especially where there is a need for manual labour. … How many of us would sell our services if it were not for the threat of hunger?” 

“More importantly, how many of us would sell our services so cheaply if it were not for the threat of hunger?” … 

“For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets. No wonder people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.”

[ … ]

Update: After outcry, the UN pulls the essay from its website on July 6, 2022, claiming it was satire! (UN essay archived here🙂

Climate Depot’s Morano comments: “This is a UN article and was published in 2008 in the UN Chronicle. It is now just getting media attention and the author of the article, Professor George Kent, told Climate Depot on July 6, 2022, that the UN article is most definitely not a ‘satire’ but intended to be ‘provocative.’ The UN is now trying to erase history by deleting the essay and falsey pretending that it was merely a “satire.” 

Given how the world has been transformed under the ‘new normal’ of COVID lockdowns, it seems this old UN Chronicle article presciently reveals how the World Economic Forum and the UN & the WHO, seek to rule humanity with an iron bureaucratic fist and wish to keep the ‘masses’ poor, tired, and hungry.” 

Meanwhile, a new July 2022 UN report finds: U.N. says 2.3 billion people severely or moderately hungry in 2021

By: Marc Morano – Climate Depot July 6, 2022 1:59 PM with 0 comments

Climate Depot Special Report 

https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/benefits-world-hunger

Update: UN pulls the essay from its website on July 6, 2022! (UN essay archived here

 

The UN Chronicle issued this statement via Twitter: “This article appeared in the UN Chronicle 14 years ago as an attempt at satire and was never meant to be taken literally. We have been made aware of its failures, even as satire, and have removed it from our site.”


The Benefits of World Hunger – By Professor George Kent  in 2008 – the University of Hawaii – Published in UN Chronicle in 2008 & 2009

Click to access BenefitsofWorldHunger.pdf

Full Text of UN article: 

We sometimes talk about hunger in the world as if it were a scourge that all of us want to see abolished, viewing it as comparable with the plague or aids. But that naïve view prevents us from coming to grips with what causes and sustains hunger. Hunger has great positive value to many people. Indeed, it is fundamental to the working of the world’s economy. Hungry people are the most productive people, especially where there is a need for manual labour.

We in developed countries sometimes see poor people by the roadside holding up signs saying “Will Work for Food”. Actually, most people work for food. It is mainly because people need food to survive that they work so hard either in producing food for themselves in subsistence-level production, or by selling their services to others in exchange for money. How many of us would sell our services if it were not for the threat of hunger?
More importantly, how many of us would sell our services so cheaply if it were not for the threat of hunger? When we sell our services cheaply, we enrich others, those who own the factories, the machines and the lands, and ultimately own the people who work for them. For those who depend on the availability of cheap labour, hunger is the foundation of their wealth.

The conventional thinking is that hunger is caused by low-paying jobs. For example, an article reports on “Brazil’s ethanol slaves: 200,000 migrant sugar cutters who prop up renewable energy boom”.1 While it is true that hunger is caused by low-paying jobs, we need to understand that hunger at the same time causes low-paying jobs to be created. Who would have established massive biofuel production operations in Brazil if they did not know there were thousands of hungry people desperate enough to take the awful jobs they would offer? Who would build any sort of factory if they did not know that many people would be available to take the jobs at low-pay rates?

Much of the hunger literature talks about how it is important to assure that people are well fed so that they can be more productive. That is nonsense. No one works harder than hungry people. Yes, people who are well nourished have greater capacity for productive physical activity, but well-nourished people are far less willing to do that work.

The non-governmental organization Free the Slaves defines slaves as people who are not allowed to walk away from their jobs. It estimates that there are about 27 million slaves in the world,2 including those who are literally locked into workrooms and held as bonded labourers in South Asia. However, they do not include people who might be described as slaves to hunger, that is, those who are free to walk away from their jobs but have nothing better to go to. Maybe most people who work are slaves to hunger?

For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets. No wonder people at the high end are not rushing to solve the hunger problem. For many of us, hunger is not a problem, but an asset.

Notes 1 Tom Phillipps, “Brazil’s ethanol slaves: 200,000 migrant sugar cutters who prop up renewable energy boom”. The Guardian. Online, 9 March 2007.
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/energy/story/0,,2030144,00.html
2 Free the Slaves. Online, 2007. http://www.freetheslaves.net/

UN Chronicle notes: George Kent is a professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Hawaii. He works on human rights, international relations, peace, development and environmental issues, with a special focus on nutrition and children. He has written several books, the latest is Freedom from Want: The Human Right to Adequate Food.

END Full Text of UN Chronicle Essay


Climate Depot Comments: 

There has been some discussion online about whether the article was a satire. See: Article describing “The Benefits of World Hunger” published by the UN goes viral, netizens confused whether it is real or satire

The UN Chronicle is now claiming — after 14 years — that the essay is “satire.” But the author of the essay disputes the UN’s claims. Climate Depot has determined that the UN Chronicle article on “The Benefits of World Hunger” is not a satire, according to the author of the report. Climate Depot spoke with the author, Prof. George Kent, emeritus of the University of Hawaii on July 6, 2022.

Kent also emailed  the following comments to Climate Depot:first published in the UN Chronicle in 2008, and again in 2009 when the UN Chronicle changed its format

Prof. George Kent’s July 6, 2022 email to Climate Depot:

“The essay was first published in the UN Chronicle in 2008, and again in 2009 when the UN Chronicle changed its format.” … “Yes, I wrote that paper. No, it is not satire. I don’t see anything funny about it. It is not about advocacy of hunger. I have not encountered anyone else who thought it might be advocacy. I don’t think the UN would have published it if they thought it was satire or advocacy.

The purpose of the paper was to highlight the point that the only way to understand the persistence of hunger is to recognize is that some people with power benefit from it. This point lit up for me when I was at a conference in India about some sort of assistance program for poor people, when one person, apparently a farm owner, stood up and argued against that asistance. His explicit concern is that the assistance would reduce his supply of cheap labor.

Persistent hunger is due mainly to the shortage of caring.”

Kent, in a phone interview with Climate Depot, said that he now “regrets” not being clearer and said that while his article was trying to be “provocative,”  he was not “advocating” for preventing an end to global hunger.

Meanwhile, a new July 2022 UN report finds: U.N. says 2.3 billion people severely or moderately hungry in 2021 – UNITED NATIONS (AP) — World hunger rose in 2021, with around 2.3 billion people facing moderate or severe difficulty obtaining enough to eat — and that was before the Ukraine war, which has sparked increases in the cost of grain, fertilizer and energy, according to a U.N. report released Wednesday.

“The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World” paints a grim picture, based on 2021 data, saying the statistics “should dispel any lingering doubts that the world is moving backwards in its efforts to end hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition in all its forms.”

“The most recent evidence available suggests that the number of people unable to afford a healthy diet around the world rose by 112 million to almost 3.1 billion, reflecting the impacts of rising consumer food prices during the (COVID-19) pandemic,” the heads of five U.N. agencies that published the report said in the forward.

California to Pivot to Fossil Fuels to Avoid Blackouts. Fossil fuels to the rescue … in California?

California is hardly the first state to realize that transitioning to renewable energy is easier said than done.


In May, The Wall Street Journal reported that energy grid operators across the US were bracing for rolling blackouts heading into the summer.

“I am concerned about it,” MISO CEO John Bear told the newspaper, noting that green energy sources were struggling to produce enough supply to meet rising demand. “As we move forward, we need to know that when you put a solar panel or a wind turbine up, it’s not the same as a thermal resource.”

Nearly two months later, it’s clear that grid operators were not crying wolf.

On Friday, the Associated Press reported that California—a state desperately trying to “quit” fossil fuels—is seeking to tap fossil fuel to avoid blackouts.

“A sweeping energy proposal Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Thursday puts the state in the business of buying power to ensure there’s enough to go around during heat waves that strain the grid. But some critics say the method of getting there is at odds with the state’s broader climate goals, because it paves the way for the state to tap aging gas-fired power plants and add backup generators fueled by diesel.”

Unlike most states, California gets most of its electricity—nearly 60 percent—from renewable sources. But the AP notes the state lacks the storage capacity to dispatch sufficient energy when intermittent energy sources are not producing, something Newsom’s proposal seeks to address.

The governor’s proposal would help “keep the lights on in California,” The Los Angeles Times notes, “making it easier for solar and wind farm developers to sidestep local government opposition, and limiting environmental reviews for all kinds of energy projects.”

The proposal would also likely serve as a lifeline to beachfront gas plants, as well as the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, the Golden State’s largest power plant and only operating nuclear facility.

At first blush, Gov. Newsom’s proposal makes perfect sense. But there’s more to the story.

As I noted in May, energy industry leaders had made it clear that grids are struggling to keep pace with rising energy demands as plants shift from thermal energy sources to renewables.

But California is already familiar with blackouts.

In August 2020, the state experienced a series of rolling blackouts that captured national attention. (This didn’t stop lawmakers from banning gas-powered generators the following year, something many Californians turned to to keep the lights on during the blackouts.)

Following the blackouts, the state water board agreed to allow gas-fired power plants in Redondo Beach, Huntington to continue operating for three additional years, even though they were slated for retirement.

“We feel double-crossed,” Redondo Beach Mayor Bill Brand told the Times. “These retirement dates were set 12 years ago.”

Brand has a point.

Newsom has repeatedly called for the phasing out of fossil fuels and denied that doing so would have an adverse economic effect. His pivot to fossil fuels is prudent because it will reduce the dangerous possibility that Calfornians will again find themselves without power during the peak heat of summer, but it’s also a betrayal ideologically.

For progressives, California is America’s energy blueprint, the model showing the way forward on “green” energy. Turning back to fossil fuels is a move that runs against Newsom’s own rhetoric and the progressive vision of our energy future. It’s an admission that fossil fuels aren’t just important but necessary to human survival.

California is hardly the first state to realize that transitioning to renewable energy—which is not as green as many activists and lawmakers would like you to believe—is easier said than done.

In its eagerness to retire coal plants, for example, Hawaii recently found itself using oil to charge the Kapolei Energy Storage Facility—essentially a huge battery designed to utilize green energy—after renewable energy projects were beset by problems.

The revelation was an embarrassment for energy officials, but it revealed an important reality. While many today see fossil fuels as immoral or even evil, the reality is they provide most of the energy in the US and are vital to human existence and flourishing.

This is not to say that renewable energy sources like solar power are not important and cannot serve a key role. They can (though the idea that they come with no environmental costs is untrue).

But the discussion gets at a key lesson of basic economics: tradeoffs exist.

“There are no solutions,” economist Thomas Sowell famously observed. “There are only trade-offs.”

What we’re seeing in California is that the tradeoffs of “green” energy are getting real for politicians. Having $7 gasoline is painful, but bearable. Having the highest energy bills in the country is not desirable, but it can be endured. Blackouts are where politicians seem to draw the line, and it’s not hard to see why.

Unlike many countries around the world, Americans are not accustomed to blackouts, and it seems the political price to them is simply too high—even for politicians who are green energy evangelists.

AUTHOR

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

RELATED VIDEO: CLIMATE HUSTLE 2: New Climate Documentary

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AWED Media Balanced Newsletter: We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same…” — Ronald Reagan


Welcome! We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.

Here is the link for this issue, so please share it on social media.

Particularly note the ***asterisked*** items below…


— This Newsletter’s Articles, by Topic —


Ukraine:

*** The old world is over: Key takeaways from Putin’s first major speech since Russia’s military offensive in Ukraine

Chomsky On Root Causes Of The Russia-Ukraine War

Back to black: the countries best positioned to replace Russian gas with coal

Ukraine — What You Can Do:

*** Pray for the safety of the Ukrainian people

*** A well-rated source to make a Ukraine donation

COVID-19 — Repeated Important Information:

My webpage (C19Science.info) with dozens of Science-based COVID-19 reports

*** World Council of Health: Early COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines

*** COVID-19: What You Need To Know (Physicians for Informed Consent)

*** If you have received a COVID-19 injection, here’s how to Detox

*** Place Your US Order for Free At-Home COVID-19 Tests

COVID-19 — Therapies:

Fauci Suffers Covid Symptom Rebound After Course of Pfizer’s Paxlovid

COVID-19 — Injection Studies:

*** Study: Serious Adverse Events of Special Interest Following mRNA Vaccination in Randomized Trials

*** (Same Study: Pfizer Vaccine Causes Nearly FIVE “Serious Adverse Events” for Every ONE Person it Kept From Being Hospitalized with COVID-19)

*** Study: Omicron variants escape antibodies elicited by vaccination

*** New England Journal of Medicine: COVID-19 Injections Increase Risk of Infection

Study: Pfizer and Moderna Analysis Re-do

Study: Cases of Brain Damage in Children Increase Following COVID-19 Vaccines

COVID-19 — Injections Other:

*** Poll: 2± M Americans may have had a severe reaction to COVID-19 vaccinations

*** Extensive information about COVID-19 injection batch issues

*** Pandemic of the Vaccinated: Boosters Greatly Increase Risk of Infection

*** Dr. McCullough: Clear and Convincing, These Vaccines Are Causing Death

The Latest Tragedy: Sudden Adult Death Syndrome

Dr. Ryan Cole: How the Covid “Vaccines” Cause Cancer

Newly released documents show that the W.H.O. is orchestrating the FDA’s scheme to skip all future clinical trials for COVID-19 shots

Latest survey shows the COVID-19 vaccines are a disaster: ~750,000 dead in US

700 Million Worldwide Will Die from CV19 Vax by 2028 – Dr. David Martin

A campaign to help people who are suffering from COVID-19 injection injuries

Covid: East Germany Re-Emerges

COVID-19 — Injection Mandates:

*** Trailer – Global Aviation: Fit to Fly?

Army Lt. Mark Bashaw Court Martial For Refusing the Jab: What His Precedent Case Means for All the Military

COVID-19 — Misc:

*** WHO and Lancet Commission Chiefs Come Out In Support of Lab Leak Theory

*** Short video: Life Insurance CEO Reveals US Deaths Are Up 40% Among Working People: “Just unheard of”

*** Review of Naomi Wolf’s book: The Covid Plot Against Humanity

Documentary: The Viral Delusion

WHO and the Precautionary Principle

Sadly, COVID-19 Protocol Pioneer, Dr. Zelenko Passed Away (from cancer)

New Rules of Medicine]

Greed Energy Economics:

Subsidized Wind & Solar Root Cause of Every Power Pricing & Supply Crisis

Renewables (General):

*** Report: No Emission Reduction Gained from Increasing Wind & Solar

*** Breakthrough in U.S. grid storage estimating

All Electricity Sources Pollute

Wind Energy — Offshore:

*** Maryland’s Offshore Wind is a $4 Billion Boondoggle

*** BOEM Comments re proposed Maryland Offshore Wind Project

*** Hurricane risk is real for offshore wind

*** SCC Asked to Put Offshore Wind Failure Risk on Dominion, Not Customers

Wind developer, environmentalists agree on ways to protect whales

Fears fishing grounds will be lost to fleet

Wind Energy — Other:

*** Wind turbines bound for landfill because of hefty recycling expenses

*** A No Wind Solution

*** Southern Idaho Ranches Threatened by Potential Wind Project Development

The Lava Ridge Wind Turbine Project

Report: Leading edge erosion and pollution from wind turbine blades

A land rush for renewable energy is transforming Eastern Colorado

Solar Energy:

In Pandering to the Green Left, Biden Is Underwriting China’s Genocide of Uyghurs

Nuclear Energy:

A More Reliable and Responsible Climate Plan for NY (and elsewhere)

Fossil Fuel Energy:

*** Study: “Climate Impacts“ of Fossil Fuels in Today’s Energy Systems

*** Diesel oil and engine oil is going from scarcity to non-existent

*** Yes, You CAN Blame Biden For High Energy Prices

Is The Global Climate Agenda Dead? G7 Turns To Fossil Fuels Amid Energy Crisis

Dutch join Germany, Austria, in reverting to coal

Gas Versus Electric Heat: Which One Is Better for Your Home?

Power cost hike, supply crunch ahead as last Hawaii coal plant closes

UK Parliamentarians call for fracking review to be based on science

Electric Vehicles (EVs):

Dark clouds on the horizon for electric vehicles

Some Countries Are Having Second Thoughts About Electric Car Mandates

Misc Energy:

*** Activists’ Ideological War On Energy

*** Pro-China Activists Posed as Green Activists to Oppose Mining in North America

*** Tapping into the million-year energy source below our feet

The Mining industry should simultaneously be testing for Geothermal potential

Manmade Global Warming — Some Deceptions:

*** The Many Arbitrary and Capricious Aspects of SEC’s Climate Risk Disclosure Rule

*** SEC’s Climate Falsehood Threatens American Economy

*** The Problematical ‘Social Cost of Carbon’ Construct

*** Important Archived Report: Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?

The Silliness of Carbon Capture and Sequestration

Media Claims CO2 “Traps Heat”! A Big Lie or A Big Stupid???

Climate Policy Mostly the Root of Our Current Evil

SEC Sticks Its Nose in Green Politics and Threatens Economy

Manmade Global Warming — West Virginia vs EPA:

*** The Supreme Court Just Dealt a Major Blow to the Green Left—and a Major Win for Democracy

*** Supreme Court Delivers Massive Blow To Biden’s Climate Agenda

*** EPA doesn’t have power to regulate carbon dioxide

*** Behind Biden’s EPA Power Grab

*** Supreme Court climate case might end regulation

Reining in the Bureaucrats

Time to Reconsider Mass. v. EPA: Reducing CO2 Hurts the Planet and Humanity

In Landmark Ruling, Supreme Court Deals Massive Blow To Biden’s Climate Change Agenda

Manmade Global Warming — Misc:

*** Code Red For Sanity – The Credibility Crisis At The IPCC

*** Methane levels surged in 2020 despite lockdowns

Great Reset: Economically Crippled Germany Pushes ‘Climate Club’ Global Tax Scheme at G7

Tracking the Evolution of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Greenland Gains a Record Ice Mass

Study: Declining tropical cyclone frequency under global warming

Billionaire Climate Elites Have Their Own Rules

US Election:

Election-Integrity.info (10 major election reports by our team of experts, plus much more!)

*** Rise of the Machines

*** New Cracks in the “Most Secure Election” Narrative

*** Yes, Biden Is Hiding His Plan To Rig The 2022 Midterm Elections

FOIAs Reveal Progressive Money Fueling FBI, DOJ, Leftist Activist and Election Official Coordination

US Election — North Carolina:

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of NC Republican Legislators

The Supreme Court NC Ruling Will Prove Vital to Defending Voter ID and Other Laws

Who the hell is ERIC? (And WHY is he in my state budget?)

US Election — Other State Issues:

*** Citizen’s Guide to Building an Election Integrity Infrastructure

*** How Did A Zuckerberg Charity Stooge Win A GOP Primary In Colorado?

Predetermined Algorithms Source of Widespread Election Fraud in Arizona

NY Court strikes down NYC law granting voting rights to non-citizen residents

AG beef with Zuckerberg over election grants will be heard by Louisiana Court

US Politics and Socialism:

The Astonishing Implications of Schedule F

There Are Two Fundamentally Irreconcilable Constitutional Visions

Fascist officials of Aspen threaten to cancel a newspaper because its new owners are unwoke

US Politics and the J6 Committee:

Secret Service lead and presidential driver are prepared to testify under oath that Trump did NOT grab steering wheel or lunge at agents on January 6

US Politics and the Roe-vs-Wade Decision:

*** Tucker Carlson: Roe v. Wade was poison

*** Roe v. Wade is dead

*** State voters will now decide abortion rights

*** Vatican praises Supreme Court’s abortion decision, says being pro-life means supporting other issues as well

Republicans rejoice, Democrats rage after Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade

Sen McConnell: The Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling Is Courageous and Correct

SCOTUS v. Insanity

How John Roberts lost control of the court

Outspoken Dr. Naomi Wolf: On Losing “Roe”

Other US Politics and Related:

*** Russia sets the stage for the War of Economic Corridors

*** The Psychology of Totalitarianism

*** What Congress can do to lower the cost of inflation

AUN-TV and its 11 TV Stations are Seeking Conservative Shows and Programming

Congress Must Protect Innocent Property Owners from Section 404 Civil and Criminal Penalties

Globalism:

Biden’s Disinformation Board 2.0 Spawns Global Censorship

Religion Related:

*** Poll: Number of Americans who believe in God drops to historic low

*** US religious leaders explain why faith in God hit lowest level ever

*** American churches closing faster than new ones can open

*** Christians Revealed as Top Enemy of Elites

High school football coach scores big win at Supreme Court over post-game prayer

Why is Everything Broken?

American Religion Slouching Towards Gomorrah

Education Related:

*** Supreme Court rules Maine tuition program violates First Amendment for excluding religious schools

Rhode Island mother billed $74K for trying to review school curriculum

Tenure’s False Promise

Science and Misc Matters:

*** Google Searches Aren’t What They Used to Be

British man turned away from giving blood after refusing to answer if he was pregnant

Understanding the Causes of Cancer

The Story of the Donkey and the Tiger

Study unveils new way to starve tumors to death


Please use social media, etc. to pass on this Newsletter to other open-minded citizens…If at any time you’d like to be added to (or taken off) the distribution of our popular,  free, worldwide Media Balance Newsletter, simply send me an email saying that.


Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone, as some documents (e.g. PDFs) are much easier to read on a large computer screen… We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize display issues.

Note 2: For recent past Newsletter issues see 2020 Archives & 2021 Archives & 2022 Archives. To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles over the twelve plus years of the Newsletter, we’ve put together   since the beginning of the Newsletter — where you can search by year. For a detailed background about the Newsletter, please read this.

Note 3: See this extensive list of reasonable books on climate change. As a parallel effort, we have also put together a list of some good books related to industrial wind energy. Both topics are also extensively covered on my website: WiseEnergy.org.

Note 4: I am not an attorney or a physician, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or any of my websites) should be construed as giving legal or medical advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent, licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues, and consult a competent physician regarding medical matters.

Copyright © 2022; Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions (see WiseEnergy.org).

Farmer Uprising in The Netherlands

Tomorrow, on the 4th of July, there will be massive protests by Dutch farmers against the Dutch government.

The Dutch government led by Prime Minister Mark Rutte (a fake conservative) wants to drive large numbers of farmers off their lands. Dutch farmers are among the best in the world and they supply the Dutch population with high quality food, every day.

The reason that the government needs to intervene is supposedly to save Nature. They claim that the farmers and their cattle produce too much Nitrogen.

In reality; they want their land to build houses on for mass numbers of immigrants from Africa and the Middle East. Mostly Muslims.

Explained: Why are Dutch farmers protesting over emissions?

Some 40,000 farmers gathered last week in the central Netherlands’ agricultural heartland to protest the government’s plan to slash emissions of damaging pollutants. What is the government proposing, and why are farmers protesting?

By: AP | The Hague | Updated: July 3, 2022 10:01:39 pm

Farmers protested around the Netherlands as lawmakers voted Tuesday on proposals to slash emissions of damaging pollutants, a plan that will likely force farmers to cut their livestock herds or stop work altogether.

The government says emissions of nitrogen oxide and ammonia, which livestock produce, must be drastically reduced close to nature areas that are part of a network of protected habitats for endangered plants and wildlife stretching across the 27-nation European Union.

As tractors gathered outside the parliament building, Prime Minister Mark Rutte said farmers have the right to protest but not to break the law.

Read more.

Si vis Pacem para Bellum

©Matthys van Raalten. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ENOUGH! Holland On The Brink Of Civil War After Left-Wing Government Bans Farming

The Netherlands seems to be ‘sliding into dictatorship’

Dutch rules on emissions affecting farmers threaten food security

Dutch Government acts out against Dutch Farmers who they have illegally disenfranchised in the name of AGW

Breaking: Frustrated Farmers Battle With Torches and Pitchforks

Neil Gorsuch Takes a Stand Against the Tyranny of Unaccountable, Rogue Bureaucracy

“The framers believed that a republic—a thing of the people—would be more likely to enact just laws than a regime administered by a ruling class of largely unaccountable ‘ministers.’”


Without a doubt, Neil Gorsuch is the most libertarian Supreme Court justice of my lifetime. He just proved his constitutional, limited government bona fides yet again with a powerful concurrence inveighing against the tyranny of unaccountable, rogue bureaucracy.

The case in question is West Virginia v. EPA, which was decided Thursday in a 6-3 ruling against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) along the justices’ typical ideological lines.

At issue was the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, a 2015 regulatory scheme devised by the EPA. The plan sought to reinterpret a decades-old statute to discover new authority for the EPA to forcibly transition the energy sector so that new coal power plants could not be built.

The Clean Power Plan never actually went into effect as it was caught up in legal battles. Then, in 2019, the Trump administration sought to repeal the rule and was itself sued. So, it remained a live question: Could the EPA take unilateral action to restructure the energy industry without congressional approval?

The Supreme Court sought to answer this question in its decision. The majority, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, ruled in favor of West Virginia and against the EPA, but did not go so far as to overturn long-held doctrines enabling wide bureaucratic discretion.

Gorsuch, for his part, wrote a concurrence perfectly explaining why rogue bureaucracy must be further reined in. (Full credit to the Brownstone Institute’s Jeffrey Tucker for first highlighting Gorsuch’s concurrence + quotes).

“Vesting federal legislative power in Congress [rather than bureaucrats],” Gorsuch writes, “is vital because the framers believed that a republic—a thing of the people—would be more likely to enact just laws than a regime administered by a ruling class of largely unaccountable ‘ministers.’”

But what about those, like dissenting Justice Elena Kagan, who say that federal bureaucrats need wide latitude because Congress is failing to, in their view, adequately address climate change?

“Admittedly, lawmaking under our Constitution can be difficult,” Gorsuch acknowledges. “But that is nothing particular to our time nor any accident.”

“The framers believed that the power to make new laws regulating private conduct was a grave one that could, if not properly checked, pose a serious threat to individual liberty….” he said. “As a result, the framers deliberately sought to make lawmaking difficult by insisting that two houses of Congress must agree to any new law and the President must concur or a legislative supermajority must override his veto.”

With an empowered, unelected bureaucracy, “agencies could churn out new laws more or less at whim,” Gorsuch adds. “Intrusions on liberty would not be difficult and rare, but easy and profuse.”

This isn’t hypothetical speculation—it’s exactly what we’ve seen under the status quo.

For a glaring example, just consider the Centers for Disease Control’s pandemic-era “eviction moratorium.” The federal agency unilaterally declared that evictions nationwide were prohibited in many circumstances by citing an old statute that gave the CDC director the ability to order in specific places “such measures to prevent such spread of the diseases as he/she deems reasonably necessary, including inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, and destruction of animals or articles believed to be sources of infection.”

They went from that to a nationwide “eviction moratorium.” Stretch, much?

That’s right: Unelected government officials effectively commandeered the nation’s rental market, which caused tremendous dysfunction, trampled over property rights, and sabotaged the supply of rental housing. (For which prices are now surging. Shocker!) And, it was years before the courts finally stopped them and struck down the “moratorium.”

The stakes of this issue are high.

Most Americans might not realize it, but the federal government is actually the biggest employer in the US. Yup: more people work for the feds than any private company. The scope of the administrative state is genuinely hard to grasp.

Tucker describes the administrative state as “the effective governing apparatus of the US,” and a “vast and permanent bureaucracy of 432 agencies and 2.9M bureaucrats who are unreachable by any standard of personnel management.”

He’s exactly right.

The federal government’s vast bureaucracy continues to grow and exercise more power over our daily lives. But the average American has no say in what they do, no recourse if their decisions harm us. At least with Congress or the president, as deeply flawed as they may be, they’re ultimately accountable to voters every 2, 4, or 6 years.

If we want to preserve our freedoms and protect our prosperity over the long run, we need to follow Neil Gorsuch’s lead and rein in the administrative state—before it’s too late.

WATCH:  Brad Reacts to Dumb Tweets About High Gas Prices (CRINGE)

AUTHOR

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Policy Correspondent at the Foundation for Economic Education.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Good Stewardship Rides High in Texas!

They say everything is bigger in Texas – and the same goes for conservation efforts. Yet not everyone is happy with the Texas style of using private land ownership. Are the critics right? Does the Texas style hurt the environment? Or is Texas paving the way for true conservation?

Find out with host @Gabriella Hoffman on the latest episode of CFACT’s Conservation Nation!

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Supreme Court Delivers Massive Blow To Biden’s Climate Agenda

The Supreme Court delivered a massive blow to the Biden administration’s climate change plan Thursday, severely limiting the power of federal agencies.

The Court, in a 6-3 decision, limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate greenhouse gases from power plants, significantly curtailing the power of the federal agency. The decision restricts the agency to regulating individual power plants and not the entire power sector.

“Congress did not grant EPA in Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan,” Justice Roberts wrote in the majority opinion.

The case stems from an Obama-era EPA climate rule and addresses the scope of Congress’s ability to delegate legislative authority to executive agencies.

In August 2015, the EPA adopted the Clean Power Plan that sought to cut carbon emissions by 32% from power plants by 2030.

However, in early 2016, the Supreme Court blocked the plan’s implementation in a 5-4 vote. Plaintiffs successfully argued that the EPA had exceeded its congressional mandate under the 1970 Clean Air Act, which broadly authorizes the agency to issue the “best system of emission reduction.”

The Trump administration repealed the Clean Power Plan and created the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, which included looser restrictions and allowed states to regulate their standards.

“Unlike the Clean Power Plan, ACE adheres to the Clean Air Act and gives states the regulatory certainty they need to continue to reduce emissions and provide a dependable, diverse supply of electricity that all Americans can afford,” former EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said in a statement at the time.

Hillsdale College Associate Professor of Politics Joseph Postell said the case has to do with the EPA’s authority to regulate major sources of air pollution that are stationary, like smokestacks.

“Does the statute allow the Obama administration to force the state of West Virginia to put more clean power into its energy grid as a means of reducing carbon emissions or does the Clean Air Act force the states to implement technology controls at the actual existing plants?” Postell said.

Postell said the new Trump rules regulated only the existing sources of air pollution rather than requiring new energy generation from sources like wind and solar.

“The Trump administration basically advanced version of what is now known as the major questions doctrine,” Postell said. “When there is a question of major importance or a major question. It has to be resolved by Congress and cannot be kicked over to the agency.”

In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated everything the day before Biden’s inauguration, according to SCOTUSblog. While the Biden Administration could reinstate the Clean Power Plan, it has instead chosen to draft alternate power plant emissions rules.

The Biden Administration was awaiting the Supreme Court’s ruling before releasing its plan, the Washington Post reported.

Following the repeal, West Virginia led a coalition of 20 other Republican-led states and coal companies to file an appeal to ask the Supreme Court to challenge the appeals court decision.

The plaintiffs argued that the appeals court wrongly grants “an agency unbridled power—functionally ‘no limits’—to decide whether and how to decarbonize almost any sector of the economy.” They asked the Supreme Court to preemptively intervene before the EPA issues additional emissions reduction plans or rules using this authority.

Click here to read the full decision: Supreme Court — West Virginia vs EPA

AUTHOR

JOSH HYPES

Contributor. 

RELATED ARTICES:

Jen Psaki Says US Needs To Move Away From Crude Oil Altogether Amid Ukraine Crisis

Biden Backs Changing Filibuster To Codify Roe V. Wade

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.