Grounded: President Trump Helps Nancy Pelosi and her Fellow Democrats Reduce their Carbon Footprints

Pelosi and Trump

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Trump. Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America [CC BY-SA 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart – President Trump blocked Nancy Pelosi and her entourage from using an Airforce jet for a seven day tour of Europe, Egypt and Afghanistan – though he suggested they could book commercial flights if they want.

President Trump apparently caught Democrats by surprise – their Air Force bus was photographed circling Capitol Hill after President Trump’s order.

I am sure you will all join me in commending President Trump for helping Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Democrats avoid the hideous carbon cost they would have incurred, had they used an airforce jet for their world tour.

House Democrats no doubt deep down appreciate President Trump’s reminder of their climate responsibilities; Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Democrat’s believe that climate change is an existential crisis.

309 thoughts on “Grounded: President Trump Helps Nancy Pelosi and her Fellow Democrats Reduce their Carbon Footprints

    • They should have locked the doors and driven them to the place where MS 13 is most likely to cross.

    • Hey, Admins: It is Air Force, not airforce or Airforce, although some of us ‘other than USAF’ types call it the Air Farce.

      Thanks for posting the article. Anyone besides me notice the “shark’s teeth structure’ in Mr. Trump’s Presidential signature????? 🙂

      • Make fun of the Air Force as much as you want, but they are the only branch that can totally destroy the earth in less than an hour.

        • Now, Paul, you know I meant that with love and admiration. Just because I was Navy does not mean I view the Zoomies with anything but respect and admiration and enduring…. luv.

          After all, they have Warthogs and the Navy and Marines don’t. And the Army mostly has air tankers for air drops of runaway gamma goats – stuff like that. <3

          • This conversation reminds me of my military experience. Have you heard this one:

            Task a Marine sergeant with securing a building and he will take a squad of riflemen and charge the building.

            Task an Army sergeant with securing a building and he will send a private out to check all the locks.

            Task an Air Force sergeant with securing a building and he will get on the phone and call a real estate company.

            SR

          • Actually, my time in US Army, we would call in artillery and level the building then secure the rubble.

        • It may be merely a rumour but I heard that the air force is the arm of defence that fly into battle from a friendly airdrome, fire missiles from a safe distance, run away bravely and are home in time for tea and medals.

          Said with much respect for all arms of the services

          Ex-Weapons tech/Leut
          (20 years Royal Australian Navy)

    • Trump made a huge mistake. He should have let them fly to Afghanistan and then told them they couldn’t come back.

      • Got to agree with you Rebel.
        Although you may want to consider a night time HALO jump for arrival into Afghanistan, and then keep the jet right on going back home. When they call for a ride back home, we can tell them to follow the heroin from Asia into Mexico. We want them back, as much as we want heroin and other drugs coming into the country to addict our citizens.
        If they hurry they may get to the border before we build a wall, to keep them out!

  1. I hope Pelosi supporters take not that she was planning to be away for seven days and therefore isn’t sincere about ending the shutdown.

  2. Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!! So, let me get this straight. Democrats, after decrying the “government shutdown” took off for 10 days vacation during Christmas/New Years, then last week they went to Puerto Rico for a tax payer funded “convention” with lobbyists, and today they were headed off on a 7 day world tour junket, again totally at tax payers’ expense and we are all supposed to believe they give s shyte about America? Really?!?!?

  3. Eric Worrall nails it again but this time with a great headline. Real humor is the best tactic to show up the lunacy of every “chicken little and the sky is falling.”

      • Four more days. According to federal rules after 30 days a permanent reduction in force (RIF) can be implemented:

        “…An agency is required to use the RIF procedures when an employee is faced with separation or downgrading for a reason such as reorganization, lack of work, shortage of funds, insufficient personnel ceiling, or the exercise of certain reemployment or restoration rights. A furlough of more than 30 calendar days, or of more than 22 discontinuous work days, is also a RIF action. (A furlough of 30 or fewer calendar days, or of 22 or fewer discontinuous work days, is an adverse action.)…”

        https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/reductions-in-force/

        • That’s partly true…

          There are two types of furloughs according to the Office of Personnel Management… Emergency Furlough (the type currently in effect) and Administrative Furlough (the type which could realistically trigger a “reduction in force” in the future)… A planned Administrative Furlough coupled with an organizational restructuring plan from the Office of Management and Budget is required in order to initiate a reduction in force that will survive the unavoidable legal challenge. Reductions in force furlough regulations and SES competitive furlough requirements are not applicable to Emergency Shutdown Furloughs because the ultimate duration of an emergency shutdown furlough is unknown at the outset and is dependent entirely on congressional action, rather than agency action…

          https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/furlough-guidance/guidance-for-shutdown-furloughs.pdf

          The pdf link provided is to the OPM’s September 2015 Guidance for Shutdown Furloughs

        • The government has shut down, but …

          There were 380 new federal job postings (for the general public) today alone.

          There are 7,100 postings that are still open (for the general public)

          There are around 30,000 Federal postings total.

          They like to increase staff … they do not like to cut staff.

          • Don’t know.

            Typical posting is open for less than 3 weeks; although some are open ended to allow for a long list to draw from … for a year or so.

            The 20K some postings that are reserved for current fed employees don’t represent growth … just transfers and ladder climbing.

          • Remember Parkinson’s laws:

            Work expands to fill the time allotted.

            Expenditures rise to meet income.

            An administrative department increases staff at a fixed rated unrelated to the state of whatever (if anything) is to be administered. 🙂 🙂

  4. All packed with no where to go. I am sure the troops are quite relieved they don’t have to deal with Nancy Palsy and her fellow travellers.

  5. Taking the pizz………….. the more the better.
    Time to read the BBC’s version….

    Trump………without the mr……i bet.

    In a letter to Pelosi on Thursday, President Trump wrote that due to the shutdown, a trip to Egypt, Brussels, and Afghanistan would be delayed, declaring, “In light of the 800,000 great American workers not receiving pay, I’m sure you would agree that postponing this public relations event is totally appropriate.”

    “I also feel that, during this period, it would be better if you were in Washington negotiating with me and joining the strong border security movement to end the shutdown,” the president continued.

    Pelosi is welcome to fly on a commercial aircraft to make the trip, he told the House speaker.

      • oops the first quote was from brietbart. [first post].
        the 2nd post was the Brussels Broadcasting Caliphate.

        Trump,……..not mr not president, no respect.

        • Thanks Mr. Ashe. I have heard it called many things but from now I will always refer to the BBC as the Brussels Broadcasting Caliphate. Appropriate in so many ways!

  6. Perhaps it’s time to keep all greens on the ground. To save the planet! I’m sure Pelosi, Ocasio, Gore, and DiCaprio will all understand
    :).

  7. Thank you President Trump for exemplifying precisely what is not happening across the pond with Brexit.

    Sadly our PM seems unable or unwilling to shut down our parliament in order to accept your generous offer of a trade deal when we leave the EU 100%.

    Responsible members of the UK look forward to re establishing mutually profitable relations with the US unencumbered by EU regulations.

    • I know I’m old school, but if there were a need to visit those areas, wouldn’t that be a role for the Senate?
      What information is a member of the House of Representatives going to gain by visiting that area that would be useful in representing their district in Congress?

      Another junket for the entitled.

      • I know I’m old school, but if there were a need to visit those areas, wouldn’t that be a role for the Senate?
        Perhaps you should brush up on things:
        The House Armed Services Committee is responsible for funding and oversight of the Department of Defense and defense policy generally. This includes ongoing military operations, the organization and reform of the Department of Defense, counter-drug programs, acquisition and industrial base policy, technology transfer and export controls, and detainee affairs and policy.

        • “The House Armed Services Committee is responsible for funding and oversight of the Department of Defense”

          This sounds like like minding the books – making sure funds are not being misspent, etc. It would be reasonable to send auditors and observers. What need is there for the Speaker of the
          House and a bunch of Representatives to go overseas? Is Ms. Pelosi going to sit down at a table and look through accounting books? Would she be able to understand them if she did?

          I agree with George Daddis’ point.

          SR

          • What need is there for the Speaker of the House and a bunch of Representatives to go overseas?

            Under-the-table deals & misc payoffs, of course.

          • I wonder how much Nannee was planning to collect from each of them for those seats, she never does anything for free!

        • Phil: Yes, the House has that oversight. But 20 congress persons? Couldn’t they just send their Pakistani IT team? They could take a quick side trip to neighboring Pakistan to visit all the money they liberated from Ds.

  8. It’s childish and irrational of me, but I’m just enjoying the hell out of this.

    Not, however, looking forward to Pelosi’s next move …

    • Pelosi’s extreme position of refusing to even sit down and talk with Trump about the wall is going to hurt her politically.

      There are already a bunch of nervous democrats who at least want to sit down and negotiate with Trump and their numbers will increase as time goes on. Ond Democrat said last week that he had 63 calls at his office supporting Trump and the wall and five calls against. He said it looked to him like Trump had a lot of support. I’ll bet a lot of other Democrats are getting the same impression.

      Meanwhile, Nancy refuses to even talk. Steny Hoyer thinks the Democrats ought to negotiate and he is second in command in the House. Nancy’s position may become untenable soon.

      Nancy, you can’t look like you are not going to budge. It’s politics. People expect you to budge a little at least. If you don’t, then even the rubes realize you are an impediment and flag you as the problem, not Trump.

      As an aside: I heard an interesting claim the other day. The claim was that if California had been left out of the vote count for the 2016 presidential election, than Trump would have won the popular vote by 1.2 million votes over Hillary.

      So all we have to do is get California to declare itself independent from the US and then we will have conservative rule in the US locked in for a while.

      • Not even necessary to subtract the whole state of CA. If you subtract NYC and LA, the numbers of popular votes is reversed.
        Ditto if you subtract a realistic estimate of fake and illegal votes.

        • I bet Trump would beat Hillary by 10 million votes today.

          I just saw a new poll a few minutes ago showing Trump’s approval among Hispanics was up 19 points to 50 percent. And this, during this wall controversy.

          Black support for Trump is also much higher than when the 2016 vote was held.

          2020 might be another 49-State landslide for Trump like Reagan got on his second time around. If Reagan had won 1,000 more votes in Minnesota, he would have won Minnesota and all 50 States. His opponent, Mondale, was from Minnesota.

      • And what is it, precisely, that can be negotiated? Trump wants the loot for his wall. No loot, end of chat. This has already happened. So, the only way to negotiate with him is to give him what he wants? That’s not negotiation.
        The key thing you’re missing here is that One-Term-Trump is a colossally immature cretin who has no business being in the position he’s in. The rest of the world knows it. At least 1/2 of the US knows it. Even the Russians know it, and they’ve got Putin. The clock is ticking, the days are gradually passing by, and the end to this insane foray into the outer edges of collective insanity will be over, and the world will heave a collective sigh of relief.

        • Adrian Mann — a supporter of lethal drugs, gang violence, criminals, human traffickers and permanent dependents coming across the border. Nice.

        • Trump made a legitimate campaign promise. If Trump delivers the wall he will not be a one term president. The so-called “deplorables” will vote him in as President a 2nd term. The greatest beneficiaries of a wall will be the Hispanic and African-American communities. So if your are against the wall, as a liberal, than you are against the very group of people you profess to support.

        • Trump has massive support amongst the rapidly growing nationalist/populist movement across the Western World and beyond. Only legacy propaganda media-brainwashed gail to see it.

  9. Let Nancy travel by means of galleys, with oars pulled by slaves, as that is the sort of society her policies would lead to.

  10. Since Nancy won’t let Trump give the State of the Union Address from the House, Trump should just give it from the Oval office, and prevent all of the grandstanding that the Democrats were planning.

    • Yeah, the Democrats are probably going to turn the State of the Union address into a circus if it takes place in the House chamber, so Trump should give the speech from the Oval Office, or go down on the Southern Border in front of a friendly crowd. You know he will be talking about the wall and how the Democrats refuse to defend the border and the US, so the southern border would be a good backdrop. And we can listen to the crowd chant “Build that Wall !!! about a thousand times during the speech.

    • He could do it in the Senate Chamber instead of the House. Need lots of extra chairs, though. Nothing says it should be in the House, or even a live speech at all.

      • Extra chairs for whom? Who says the House had to be invited? Next time, those posers claiming to be Republicans can grow a set and back the President and enact his policies. They had two years to get the funding done for the wall. No seat for you!!

      • Do it in the Senate, and if there aren’t enough chairs for the Democrats, tough noogies. It was their choice.

    • Since Nancy won’t let Trump give the State of the Union Address from the House

      An empty & childish threat — she has no authority to do that. It isn’t her House, it’s America’s.

  11. Trump just won the vote of all the troops in Afghanistan; now none of them will have to stand around while Pelosi makes cute noises for the cameras.

    • Pelosi’s deputy chief of staff, Drew Hammill, said on Twitter that the Brussels stop was required for pilot rest and that her group had planned to meet with top NATO commanders there “to affirm the United States’ ironclad commitment to the NATO alliance.”

    • Good comment Charles. Scientific American, Science, Nature, National Geographic, etc., all jumped the shark years ago and they are not blogs at all.

    • David….both links are Scientific American….just like this link (WUWT) they do science, opinion, commentary, etc….all under one name Scientific American…just like this link WUWT

      • Scientific American has been deeply political since at least the 1980’s, when they went over the top on nuclear war and SDI issues. My favorite for the most over-the-top was an article on how much damage would be done if the Soviets did ground burst nuclear weapons on nuclear power plants.

      • A distinction without a difference.
        As always you are looking for an excuse to ignore anything that you can’t refute.

      • @David Dirkse – really? You really want to use this particular apologetic?

        http://www.scientificamerican.com – the front page mixes “articles” and “blogs” together – without any way to discriminate between them, other than rolling over the link and observing the destination. WUWT explicitly marks every article (well, almost, someone occasionally forgets the tag) as “politics,” “opinion,” “humor,” (my personal favorite), etc.

        The ONLY reason there are two sites is that one is paywalled. When running two or more sites, with some content paywalled and some content “free,” it is technically much simpler to segregate them. Exposing an occasional piece of the paywalled content on the “free” site is then a simple matter, and avoids the risk of accidentally exposing all of the paywalled content.

    • David Dirkse January 17, 2019 at 5:03 pm
      You really need to learn to read and comprehended.

      For a Blog or periodical to truthfully claim it is science orientated on subjects such as climate, then it would have to expound the viewpoint that the science is never settled and MUST be challenged and debated in an open and fair manner.
      Anytime a politician makes a statement like the Science is settled or the debate is over, such organization have the responsibility of informing the public of this misrepresentation.
      Have any of the publication you endorse meet those minor requirements of intellectual honesty and professionalism? Show me, only a few truthful words. If you cannot then don’t pretend they are science oriented publications. They should be cataloged it the fantasy section.

      Oh and this Blog read the quote below. It includes News

      “About Watts Up With That? News and commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news by Anthony Watts”

      michael

    • For someone who claims to be above talking about politics, talking about politics is all you ever do.
      For a leftist, something is only wrong when someone else does it.

    • Fascinating, a blog can’t do science?
      Are there any other stupid bigotries that you would care to share with the class?

      • David Dirkse January 17, 2019 at 6:43 pm

        Failed didn’t you. Couldn’t find a single source I’m. waiting.
        As elevator music plays.
        Smile smile smile

        “Being about science doesn’t mean it is doing science.” True but irrelevant, but no publication does “science” by your own definition.

        michael

      • Once again Dirkse tries to create a division where there is none.
        First off, neither magazines nor blogs do science. They publish science. I realize that such a distinction requires an IQ above room temperature to comprehend, but perhaps someone will find a way to explain it to David anyway.
        Secondly, David has yet to demonstrate that nobody publishes real science here. All he can manage to do is whine that amongst the science, there are articles with a pointed political view that offends his precious self.

        There is no earthly reason why a blog, or a magazine can’t do both.
        David is just once again desperately searching for a reason to ignore what he can’t refute.

    • Um, maybe you’ve forgotten that “climate science” as presented by the mainstream media is mostly politics. Even august science journals like Nature has published climate science that had little actual science. WUWT had never claimed to be a science website. But keep justifying your comments. It’s entertaining.

    • Have David’s posts been deleted? I’m sure (based on past experience as well as judging by the replies I do see) they were nonsense but I’m not seeing them but I sure am seeing a lot of replies to them. Would be nice to see the replies in context to the nonsense they were replying to.

      • I have the same question and request. Yesterday I saw a comment quibbling that CTM shouldn’t be commenting. I intended to reply that there was no problem with a moderator expressing an opinion as long as having an opinion counter to the moderator didn’t get your comment deleted. Before I could post, the quibbling comment disappeared.
        Perhaps the quibbling comment was removed for good cause, but now I cannot confirm that. I much prefer the method of clipping offensive comments, with an explanation, over simply disappearing comments.

        SR

    • If we had just sat down and reasoned with the 9/11 hi-jackers it would have all turned out differently. I wonder why the 2400 people who died that day didn’t happen to think of that?

      Seriously, tho, some people are hard to convince.

    • Charles this link got me to thinking. I thought if the (Berlin) Wall had never come down would comrade Merkel have still been behind it? Not sure that the author was selling his dislike of walls as well as he thought he was.

  12. So, you don’t think science and politics are intertwined? I’d hazard to guess that the vast majority of climate scientists are government employees and subject to the whims of politics.

    • I’m working in a government organization that is largely environmental sciences focused and about half climate change or atmospheric chemistry. It’s virtually 100% political. I guess it could be 99%. The leftists there wear their politics. The skeptics like myself generally don’t rock the boat.

      • How do you know? I’ve worked in close to a dozen federal and state labs and a few more internationally. Some might as well have been extensions of the Democratic party, their bulletin boards are so biased.

        I will admit that I am jaded because of the things I have seen.

      • “2100 of them. Hence “small sample size.”

        Tell that to the people who publish “science” about 97% consensus!
        LOL.
        No, better not…you will get kicked out of the warmista brotherhood.
        Cast out…the worst fear of a virtue signaling lefty.

    • Get out of here you nugget. climatastrology is politics in a lab coat, same all the other none science practising sciences of post modernism.
      Worthless leftist drivel out of all of them 63 sexes etc. not one of them does experimentation or real lab work

      Pure Marxist filth.

    • They are not as intertwined as you think.

      A classic Dirkse rebuttal, solid, irrefutable and backed by pages of documented facts.

      PS: Another standard Dirkse tactic when losing, bring up ever more unrelated comments.

      • I know that you are desperate to yet again change the subject, but do you have to act so pathetic at the same time?

    • They might think they are, just as they think they think they are tolerant.

      In reality, they are at least intolerant.

  13. When it takes a humorous political jab towards a hypocritical politician to get your panties in a wad, it shows you’re about the politics and not about science and climate.

    Of course, climate “science” is often more about politics than science, unfortunately. How is this news to you?

    • somehow you think all of their articles about Trump….are not about politics

      …boy do they ever have you snowed

    • I clicked on that provided link of yours, David.

      The one of the top stories being promoted was “How to win public support for a global carbon tax”.

      Bang. Right there on the home page. I didn’t open the article so not sure if it actually jabs or not, but not completely sure Nature is a good example for the argument you are trying to support.

      Also I am a tad worried about you. I have been skimming through this thread and took a bit of note to the time stamps on all your replies. They do seem ever so slightly close together.

      Are you sure you are not sitting on your computer trapped in a cycle of type/post/refresh? For a topic you seem a tad annoyed about you do seem to be spending a lot of your own time engaged. Make sure you take a few breaks, okay? Walk around a bit. Maybe duck outside for a bit and get some fresh air. I made the mistake during the Christmas break of sitting down a bit too long and ended with fluid build up in my feet. Mildly painful.

      Look after your health, David. The Science! will still be here when you get back 😀

      • So as long as a publication has specific sections for political articles and editorials, it’s not really publishing political articles and editorials? The stupid, it burns.

    • I don’t know about “political jabs,” but the first thing that caught my eye on the page you linked to was “How to win public support for a global carbon tax”. That’s not science – that’s political. And according to the web page, it’s not science, it’s “Comment”.

    • Ahem. Caps for emphasis. https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/other-subs

      “…Correspondence
      These items are ‘letters to the Editor’: short comments on topical issues of public and POLITICAL INTEREST…”

      So you’ve now establised Nature as a political publication and not a scientific one. Must be why real scientists don’t submit there or read any of the articles, eh?

  14. This is so great! After the most recent smear of Lindsey Graham, I woulda thought dems could go no lower. But you take away their junket??!! I mean, these folks routinely accuse Trump of doing evil, but at least it was done to someone else! Now you take away their all-expense paid (don’t even need to use campaign $) no f’ing airport crap trip? It’s on. Keep an umbrella near, Nancy is gonna be feces-flinging mad over this.

    • But Graham has come out (pun intended) and said that Trump shouldn’t have done it. “One adolescent stunt doesn’t justify another.”

      How refreshingly unRepublican it is of Trump to fight back. Pelosi blocks SOTU show, and Trump says, “I can play these games too.” Instead of doing like a thousand other Republicans and just taking it.

      Thanks again, President Trump!

  15. No the real scientists, at this site, have debated the so-called climate scientists and the latter have been thoroughly beaten both at the science and the general logic of their position.

    The planet is actually cool. A slightly warmer planet would be beneficial to most life.

      • “Trumpism: a disfigured Americanism”

        Marked as “research.”

        @David Dirkse, you are honestly one of the most pathetic trolls I have ever run across. I don’t even have to scroll ONCE through search results to deal with your claims.

        [Please do not insult honest, hard-working trolls and trollops on this site by comparing them to CAGW alarmists. It is not polite, and hurts their feelings. After all, “somebody” has to make sure all the goats pay to cross the bridge. .mod]

      • @Charles – my most abject apologies. I’ll try to be a better person in the future.

        Not so much because I’m a nice person – but I came THAT close to losing a keyboard there…

    • David Dirkse: How many real scientists do you speak for? I’m sure you’re not one, ’cause you certainly waste your time here. One comment at a time.

    • Real scientits , they are the folk who worship at the alter of ‘The’ science and talk in absolute truths, often citing Proof and wielding credentials in favor of evidence.

      I can see why they’d not come here too often, having one’s authority challenged would upset them.

      • >Karlos51
        >scientists don’t talk of “Proof.”

        Good grief. Mathematical proofs are not alcoholic drinks. A proof of concept is not a beer.

    • PhD scientist here. I visit quite often to blow off steam and for the entertainment value. Sometimes I learn something, too.

      It beats getting fired if I challenged the wrong belief at work.

    • Once again Dirkse reveals that he has no interest in honest debate.
      There’s one article that David finds to be overly political, and from that he concludes that all articles here are identical to the one that got his panties in such a knot.

      Neither logical, nor honest, but all liberal.

    • Yes and yes.

      In the private sector, furloughs are intended to save money in lieu of laying people off permanently. Typically, private workers are not compensated for being off. Sometimes they are but not often.

      What good is done in the case of these government “shut downs?” The workers get paid even though they were off, taxpayers suffer from longer waits, lack of services. The government probably ends up spending more money in the long run. For example, I know that some lab animals suffer and die from not being cared for. Some government scientists are conscientious and sneak in and do what is necessary, but it is silly that they have to take risks to do so.

      • Personal Finance 101:

        1. Live within your means
        2. Maintain enough liquid assets for 6 months of unemployment
        etc.

        Too many federal workers chose poorly.

        • I saw a headline on Drudge a few months back that claimed that 78% of families live paycheck to paycheck.
          It’s scary that financial responsibility is such a foreign concept these days.

  16. I can’t work up any sympathy for unionized government workers missing a pay check or two.

    The government is on strike. The shoe is on the other foot…

    • Not so much union.
      US Coast Guard is going without pay. Border patrol and TSA agents without pay. National Park Rangers… no pay. Not good.

      But the best part is the EPA is mostly on furlough… along with NOAA and NASA climate modelling groups.

      Heck, if the EPA never came back to work… no one would notice.

      • Sure they’d notice; it’s the sudden reduction in that radiating pain that seems to center around the buttocks…

      • “…along with NOAA and NASA climate modelling groups.”

        Children won’t know what fraudulent data is anymore.

  17. The Dimocrats should remember that Trump holds more cards than they do, and he has “trump” cards, like the one he just played on Pelosi’s little vacay.
    Trump has far more ways to hurt them than they do to hurt him… that should have been obvious to them, but they are blinded by their raging Dreangement Syndrome panic attacks.
    The only thing the Dems have going for them is a compliant, main stream media.

    And knowing Trump has more ways to hurt them, the Dims should remember former AG Eric Holder’s words..
    “When they go low, we kick them.”

    Well, Ms. Nancy went low with her SOTU cancellation letter, and Trump just kicked her.

    The Dims should now sit back and ponder the realization that they are holding a weak hand.

  18. It is comments like yours that remind of the Halo Effect, by trying to claim that one blog post represents all blog posts on this site.

      • Let me clean that up….OCD’ed chatter box got in they way

        “God doesn’t forbid it and neither do the moderators.”

        obviously!….LOL

      • No David.

        A moderator is human being just like you … with an opinion and set of values. Your reasoned opinion is not worth more than his reasoned opinion.

        What a moderator must not do, unlike some unethical site moderators do on alarmism sites do, is edit, selectively delete portions, or in any way use “moderator site edit privileges” to change or delete a comment. That is unethical.

        That you do not seem to grasp that distinction tells me you are a young person with little life experience. When you grow up out of your Peter Pan years, then you too will be a skeptic of BS climate change claims.

        Joel O’Bryan

        • Ah, here is where I intended to post this comment. I had the same point to make as Joel:
          Yesterday I saw a comment quibbling that CTM shouldn’t be commenting. I intended to reply that there was no problem with a moderator expressing an opinion as long as having an opinion counter to the moderator didn’t get your comment deleted. Before I could post, the quibbling comment disappeared.
          Perhaps the quibbling comment was removed for good cause, but now I cannot confirm that. I much prefer the method of clipping offensive comments, with an explanation, over simply disappearing comments.

          SR

      • I am a moderator who comments here, but unlike YOU, I don’t go whining openly and over and over about how this blog is run.

        Meanwhile at the top of the page click on the ABOUT button to read the following:

        About Watts Up With That? News and commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news by Anthony Watts”

        Since the topic here was about reducing CO2 emissions on people by politicians who wants to reduce yours by force, it is an appropriate observation to make.

        Since you have currently 190 comments approved, despite your history of complaining about the blog and how it is operated.

        Snicker…….

      • “…Why are moderators permitted to comment here? Unethical to say the least…”

        Go tell RealClimate.

    • Hey David,
      You spelled “unscientific” wrong:
      “God forbid should a someone commenting here profess the mainstream unscientific viewpoint.”
      There, fixed it for you.
      You are welcome!

      Pray do tell us, if you please…what exactly is a “real scientist”?
      It seems your definition is someone who agrees with the climate mafia regarding global warming panic mongering.
      I would bet there are hundreds of people here who have forgotten more “real science” than you will ever learn.

      • So a “real scientist” is someone who does not publish here?

        You mention several people who comment here regularly, which is at odds with your assertions that anyone who is a real scientist looks at the site offerings, and departs without saying anything.
        You did not mention that there are many professionals here, active and retired, in numerous areas of science and engineering.
        Admit it…you are just enjoying badmouthing people who do not toe the alarmist line.
        The reason people that you consider “real scientists”, by which it can be easily inferred that what you mean is alarmists within the climate mafia orthodoxy, is very simple, and has nothing to do with them being unwelcome (they are not, which is more than any alarmist site can say), but with the fact that they cannot control the narrative here, and would be challenged directly, and in ways they could not refute in any factual way.
        The people you speak of do science by assertion, and ignore the scientific method, substituting what they call “peer review” for established principles of the discipline that has brought us from the dark ages to an industrial society in a short span of time.
        They alter data to fit their pronouncements, do research which invariably has a predetermined outcome, ignore when their predictions prove utterly false, move the goal posts constantly, and in general just keep being wrong while suffering the worst collective case of selective attention, confirmation bias, and ignorance of the history of science, human history, and earth history, that has ever been observed in the world of professional discourse.

        That is the truth, and whining about what other people choose to talk about will not change it.

      • “For laughs, a “real scientist” would not consider a spelling mistake fatal (like you do.)”

        And an intellectually honest person would not make stuff up about what other people consider to be true, like you do.
        Or fail to recognize the distinction between a personal opinion and the stated beliefs of some other individual, again as you do.
        You are swimming over your head, son.
        Is it past your bedtime yet?

      • Real scientists are willing to publish in many places.
        Real scientists appreciate feedback and are willing to let others try and refute their work, regardless of who those others may be.
        As someone who worships the climate science idols, I’m not surprised that you are unfamiliar with such a concept.

      • You grow ever more incoherent David.
        What is this about “impact factors”?
        So, now the reason people you consider ‘real scientists” do not publish here or spend time commenting is due to something called an impact factor?
        Are you serious?
        Impact factor defines science in your mind?
        Impact factors and consensus are the stuff of politics, so you have now come full circle, pal.
        Keep digging.
        (The rest of that is all but incomprehensible, so whatever. Starting to believe you are a paid troll, and if so you are one of the more unhinged ones.)

    • You didn’t save yourself with that deflection away from your hyperbolic comment and have indeed now doubled down by not recogizing your error. Interesting that “mainstream scientific viewpoint” is a euphemism for “consensus”. Familiarize yourself with the First Rule of Holes.

      • Typical David, rather than actually deal with the arguments, he just declares that it isn’t real science, for a large variety of bogus and refuted reasons.
        As always, David is looking for an excuse to ignore what he knows he can’t refute.

      • I see that David has given up on his previous lie, and has no moved on to another.
        Instead of no science happening here, he now wants to argue that the science doesn’t matter because none of the people he idolizes come here.

        Of course they don’t, they prefer to stick to sites where anyone who disagrees with them can be banned.

      • Wow, yet another “fact” known only to the great, the omnicient DD.
        It really is amazing how he holds himself in such high regard. And with so little justification.

    • Once again David puts politics ahead of science. By declaring that only scientists who agree with him are mainstream.
      As to politics, he’s so far to the left that he considers socialist to me centrist.

  19. Why these people keep trying to take on Trump with these tactics I don”t know, are they stupid?. Pelosi thought she was clever with her SoU stunt.

    Who is laughing now?

    What do they say ‘Never challenge a pig to a wrestling match in a dung pit, you lose because the pig enjoys it and beats you with experience’.

    • IMO Trump’s junket cancellation not only sent a strong message in its own right, it is an attempt to goad her into actually deferring the SOTU.
      Then he can bring down the hammer constitutionally using the second and third clauses of A2§3 (clause one is SOTU). Clause three allows him to convene a joint session of Congress for ‘extraordinary Occaisions’. He just declares the longest (partial) shutdown ever over the southern border crisis an ‘extraordinary Occaision’. Then he is required by clause to to propose ‘nessessary and expedient’ measures. Necessary comprises the wall and immigration reform. Expedient is some form of narrow DACA in return.
      All on national television. He cannot lose and Dems cannot win.

  20. So, in your simple mind, a site can be about science, or it can be about politics. It can never do both?
    By the way, your idea of a real scientist is one who believes as he’s told to believe.

    • As always, David actually believes that he and he alone is the arbitrator for what is acceptable and what isn’t.

      Nobody does science in places like SciAm, they publish there work there, just like people do here.
      You are creating a distinction that has value and merit only to yourself, the reason why you are doing it is because you know you can’t refute what is being presented here, so you create a little fig leaf for yourself so that you can show how magnanimous you are by merely ignoring what you can’t deal with.

      • I see that when it comes to lying, known can take a back seat to David.
        Plenty of articles here deal with science, as do most of the posters.

        Why don’t you try to deal with the science, instead of pretending that only those who agree with you do science?

  21. It has been observed on WUWT for years that the climate debate is not really about science. It is indeed politics–and IPCC stands for InterGOVERNMENTAL Panel on Climate Change, so perhaps we should not be surprised. This site is about all aspects of the question, so it includes plenty of both politics and science, and occasionally astronomy that is likely to interest us.

    • Hmm, in your opinion, science is never debated?
      I guess in your world, science is dictated by gods from on high and everyone else is required to accept it.

      Once again, David demonstrates that he has absolutely no idea what actual science is.

      • Actually I do debate special relativity quite regularly .. the problem I have is I can’t prove it’s wrong so I have to accept it’s right 🙂

      • That post of mine was in reference to a post that has been deleted. I was not speaking to ladylifegrows. I apologize if the edit made it appear that way.

    • The “climate debate” is not about science, it is about politics.

      Actually, the climate debate is about public policy. Although the root word of politics is policy, sometimes there does not seem to be much public policy debate in politics. A good example are your comments so far, where none of them are about public policy. Particularly offensive are your comments about “scientists doing science.” That is very elitist, especially considering that many people who frequent WUWT have degrees in science (i.e B.S., M.S. and so on). Some are published. Others may not have formal degrees but are very clearly practicing science. The elitist view that science can only be done by a restricted priesthood is not very democratic. In a democracy , every citizen has an inalienable right to debate public policy. WUWT is the premier marketplace of ideas discussing public policy with an emphasis on climate policy. Although debate is moderated, it is done lightly. Democracy requires dissent and debate.

    • Plate Tectonics was once debated in scientific journals and the consensus was it was wrong;
      The existence of DNA was once debated;

      David,
      I am curious what your views would on accepting someone as subject matter expert, in your world, would those people have to have advanced degrees?

  22. It’s probably somehow illegal, but Trump could earn some points by contributing to the various drives people are running to help some of the furloughed workers. He probably has deeper pockets than Nancy.

    • Absolutely nothing illegal about what Commander-in-Chief Trump did to postpone Congresswoman Pelosi’s trip to Europe, Africa, and Asia on US military aircraft with military security.

      As President Trump pointed out, Ms Pelosi is free to use commercial air travel from her congressional travel budget to make the trip happen.

      Dems just found out they hold a weak hand in this game of poker with President Trump, the chief executive of the Executive Branch.

      • Joel, I could be reading it wrong but I don’t think D.J. was suggesting the trip postponement was illegal. It looks to me like D.J. was suggesting the idea that he was proposing in his post (that the president could earn some points by contributing to various drives to help furloughed workers) might be illegal.

      • Absolutely nothing illegal about what Commander-in-Chief Trump did to postpone Congresswoman Pelosi’s trip to Europe, Africa, and Asia on US military aircraft with military security.

        As President Trump pointed out, Ms Pelosi is free to use commercial air travel from her congressional travel budget to make the trip happen.

        But then his administration apparently leaked that they were planning to do so which would have put their lives and those of their security at risk. That’s a no-no.

        • Pelosi tried to say that Trump’s life was at risk because the Secret Service was not being paid. Next day she is ready to hop on a plane to Afghanistan. How anyone cannot see the stupidity and hypocrisy of her actions is beyond me.

    • I can’t think of any reason why the president, as an individual, couldn’t donate as much of his own money to any cause that he wants to.

    • Yeah but he doesn’t like putting his hands in those pockets, he preferred using other peoples money. His illegal use of the Trump Foundation has been stopped so I don’t think you’ll see any donations from him.

        • The Trump Foundation has been dissolved by court order for engaging in “a shocking pattern of illegality”, according to the N.Y. attorney general.

          • Funny, that same office is still investigating the Clinton Foundation, seems they are having a difficult time getting the subpoenaed items they have been asking for the last 4 years. Wonder why that is?

  23. Trump is also commanded in chief of the US military. Build the wall. It’s a legitimate US military concern for the security of our country.

    • I don’t know about building the wall, but since border force has no funding, perhaps he should call in the Army to guard the southern border & the Navy to patrol the ocean.

      • That is what I have been advocating for since 1990, after the debacle of Simpson-Mizzoli. Designate the entire southern border as open military reservation, compensate landowners the same as is done with other military reservations around regular military bases, and deploy on rotation basis every single member of the US military, 60 day cycle, for “training”. First year go heavy on Combat Engineers, Seabees and BEEFs and build the damned wall and onsite living quarters/fortifications. Problem solved. Whilst they are around deal directly with the drug cartels, they have openly declared themselves enemies of America, treat them as such.

        • A few years some proposed that as a response to the pressure being put on big cats around the world, we turn the border into a nature preserve and import all the lions, tigers, whatever that we can find into it.

          Warning: Trespassers will be eaten.

          • They would certainly be an integral part of any barrier constructed by US military. And lots of concertina. Overwatch positions with interlocking fields of fire. Ya know, all the bells and whistles.

  24. I submist this for WUWT readers’ consideration of all the BS spewing forth currently from Trump-derangeded Democrats:

    For the record regarding House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s demand that Trump postpone his State of the Union (SOTU) address, currently scheduled for January 29th.

    The US Constitution says this:

    Article II, Section 3.
    He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may on extraordinary Occasion, convene both Houses, or either of them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper…”

    Speaker Pelosi’s requesting Trump delay his SOTU speech is a (constitutionally) weak demand in regards to the President’s clear constitutional authority to order them to convene and to listen to him give the SOTU.

    To be absolutely clear, under the US constitution the President can call both Houses of Congress together, despite Pelosi’s objection, and he can read them his SOTU. He can lecture the Democrats.
    If individuals in the Dimocrat Party decide not to attend, then the entire US electorate can then see what children the Democrats have become.

    • To be absolutely clear, under the US constitution the President can call both Houses of Congress together, despite Pelosi’s objection, and he can read them his SOTU. He can lecture the Democrats.

      No, it is commonly understood that the later part of the passage, about the President’s ability to convene Congress on “extraordinary occasions,” is usually related to the presidential power to bring Congress back in session during a recess or adjournment.

      • So you agree that the Majority Leader of the House in Congress cannot prevent the President from delivering to Congress his SOTU at his time of choosing. That is my reading of it.

        Pelosi has no clothes.
        Dimocrats are holding weak cards to the President’s strong hand in this regard.

        • So you agree that the Majority Leader of the House in Congress cannot prevent the President from delivering to Congress his SOTU at his time of choosing. That is my reading of it.

          He can deliver it in writing whenever he chooses as many presidents have, he delivers it in person to the Congress at their invitation. Richard Nixon delivered his in writing in 1973 for example, Reagan didn’t give one in 1981.

          • Excellent idea, while he is standing on the Capital Building steps giving the SOTU address to the Americca people he can politely turn and hand Nannee and Chuckee their copies. The expressions of burning hatred on their faces will make great campaign ad footage for lots of candidates. Even Democrats could use it as they run against the Democrat Party’s publicly stated platform. The winning, it just keeps coming!

        • He should do it at noon, on the steps of the Capital Building and invite the America people to the Mall. And do it short notice, give Nannee and Chuckee zero chance to respond in any way other than coming outside and participating. When you got them down is when you put the boot in.

  25. His letter is so well put he mentions different reasons why the trip wouldn’t be appropriate without being nasty or rubbing her nose in it. In so doing he does just that showing she doesn’t care about those her actions are affecting as she and her cronies are off on a jolly thank you very much.

    James Bull

  26. She retains her carbon-based footprint, but her anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions will be progressive for the foreseeable future. At least until the government places civil rights first, and pursues a policy of emigration reform to reduce collateral damage at both ends of the bridge and throughout, then the monotonic process will likely reverse, as the prophecy is poorly considered, especially by its advocates and activists.

  27. At least he’s been bipartisan as he’s also cancelled his delation’s junket to the Davos economic conference.

  28. Seen on Facebook, Diamond and Silk
    “I disagree with the President cancelling the military flight for Pelosi.
    I would have waited …. then cancelled the return flight.”

  29. The Lady will need to find an airline with seats available for herself and a small staff. She will need to go through all the palaver which other passengers endure with taking off their shoes and putting them with personal belongings, especially electronics, on a conveyor belt and watch them disappear to be xrayed. Meanwhile she will go through scan and be patted down by a female staff member. Then she can go and wait interminably for a plane . This may then have to wait for an hour or more
    on the runway until it is cleared for takeoff because of delays in other planes schedules caused by stormy weather. ( caused by global warming)
    All this is supposing that the staff will be on the job and not absent because of the shut down in Government jobs. ( If the staff are not employed by a private security firm)

  30. I am very surprised that the Dems are playing politics with the southern border. After all, they have previously voted to approve funding for the existing fence and wall. It is a legitimate security threat to the homeland, and God forbid that some malicious evil force doesn’t breech the porous border and do significant damage in an attack against the country. Then the Dems would wear that through the next election cycle, handing another larger win to Trump in 2020. Why would they risk that kind of total defeat, because they want to play politics against Trump on any issue they can? Anyway, it was an election pledge to the people that a wall would get built if DJT won the election! And he won fair and square the Presidency. Arguing the election results perpetually via blocking of the legitimate will of the people in the election of Trump is a recipe for disaster.

    That the Democrats don’t understand or take seriously the terror threat is astonishing. Let’s hope that nothing untoward happens in continental USA because of this political spat, because it will go very, very bad for all future Democrats if their actions wind up causing harm to the people or infrastructure of the USA. I would suggest the Dems would be wise to find a reason to support a hardened southern border, if they really are patriots who want to secure the country. Controling one’s own border’s are in part what define a country, and the majority of USA citizens want a safe and secure border. This is elementary common sense. Why play politics with an apple pie motherhood issue? In the final analysis, IMHO, and notwithstanding the partial Govt shutdown, the porous southern border is a tragedy of unrealistic immigration, but on a more dangerous larger level, a threat of international terrorism to the USA is just being invited to arrive on these shores. Not to mention the human smuggling epidemic and criminal drug smuggling and money laundering. This has to be a net negative for the Democrats in the long term.

    • “Why would they risk that kind of total defeat, because they want to play politics against Trump on any issue they can?”

      That’s what they are doing. They think resisting Trump at every turn is a political wimmer. It may impress their radical base but I don’t think moderates and independents will be swayed by this kind of behavior.

      The real problem the Democrats have with Trump is that Trump is successfully undoing their liberal/socialist agenda and the Democrats fear he will continue doing this if they don’t put up a fight. And he will. So the Democrats are actually in a battle for the hearts and minds of Americans and they see themselves losing as long as Trump is in charge. And they are correct.

      Trump is an existential threat to socialism. That’s why the socialists are fighting back so hard. They don’t want to become irrelevant and there is a chance that may happen. For example, Trump now has 50 percent support in the Hispanic community. This and many other signs have the Democrats panicked about their agenda going forward.

      Conservatism is winning in the United States. The Democrats don’t like it one bit because it is a rejection of the Democrat agenda. So they mindlessly resist anything and everything Trump. It’s kind of pathetic really.

      • “The real problem the Democrats have with Trump is that Trump is successfully undoing their liberal/socialist agenda and the Democrats fear he will continue doing this if they don’t put up a fight.” Actually, the more they fight the more he gets done, if they were to simply stop fighting the momentum would fall.

  31. French Mr. Macron could seize the opportunity to lend an A380 + Fueling Credit Card to Capt. Travolta and help the climate concerned VIP’s to their junkets.

    Mr. Travolta has serious climate refences and is the first non test-pilot to fly an A380 after all. *palmface*

    Dutch King Willem-Alexander, who doubles as 737 co-driver in between global warming energy conferences, could equally seize the opportunity.

    No stress, the list of climate concerned jet-seters is quite well populated indeed.

  32. Hmmm… is this a climate blog or a Republican party supporters website?

    I don’t think it can speak with authority on climate if it mixes in partisan politics.

    Still, if it continues in this vein I shall stop commenting again… so I guess you’ll all look forward to that!

    • Chicken or egg ? Better wonder why the climate scam is historically part of the leftist rhetoric efforts.

    • It seems Griff has admitted that this site speaks with authority on climate issues.
      Oopsy Daisy! Accidentally told the truth, huh Griff?

    • Griff, how can it speak with authority on climate if it doesn’t mix in partisan politics, the whole CAGW scam is nothing but partisan politics.

    • First off, climate and politics have been mixed together for decades. When you alarmists decided to use the fake alarm to dictate political politics.

      Your fake concern is duly noted. Of course you don’t complain when alarmist sites start talking politics. Then again, you agree with them so why would you complain.

      Any excuse to cut and run while losing.

    • And yet you spew leftist political crap here, my, my, is that your oxen bleeding in the ditch over there? Perhaps you should not have allowed it to be gored! Stopping the massive amount of “greenhouse” pollution these unneeded airliner trips would have put out seems to be EXACTLY what you claim to want. Guess we all see the truth, now.

  33. Went to catch a few z’s, come back and David and all of his comments missing?
    What happened?
    Was he banned?
    Discovered to be someone already banned?
    Usually there’s moderators comments when something gets removed.

    (They were removed for off topic thread hijacking) MOD

    • Yeah, I was kind of wondering that myself. Lots of replies to David, but no posts from David in the thread. What’s going on, MODs?

      (The replies to David vanished yesterday, now they are back which surprised me) MOD

      • Mod, had there been an explanation posted at the time that David’s comments were removed much questioning and rehashing would have been spared, enabling the thread to get back on track, and stay there, sooner.

        Please use the “clip with explanation” process whenever possible.

        SR

    • It was very merciful of you to remove such things from the permanent record of the interwebs.

      I hope David has thanked you for removing his embarrassing comments.

  34. The Trumpster delivers yet again. He cares about “Climate Change” Grab-em-by-the-Pelosi doesn’t.

  35. Agree with your stance on climate skepticism,but not with supporting a President guilty of treason.
    Are you all fond of Putin controlling the USA?

    • If true then to judge from the employment numbers and general economic figures Putin is doing an excellent job. Perhaps we could persuade Vlad to take over the UK which is in dire need of a leader with fibre, moral or otherwise.

    • Please site the crime and the legal affidavit specifying treasonous crimes.

      No criminal complaint has been entered against President Trump or against the Office of the President.

      We need you to present your evidence.

  36. Griff,
    I agree this site shouldn’t show partisan politics.
    It cheapens the science and will alienate those who are open minded leftists such as myself.

    • “Griff,
      I agree this site shouldn’t show partisan politics”

      Says the person who just called President Trump a traitor and a puppet of Putin in the post just above. Perhaps this person doesn’t understand the meaning of “partisan”.

      • To the left, bipartisanship is Republican and Democrats working together to pass the Democrats agenda.

        Since the left views themselves as the center, against which all else must be measured, it’s normal for them to consider any opposition to their desires as being political. While supporting their position is just the natural order of the world.

      • I said there should be no partisan politics .Anyone stupid enough to believe Trumps daily lies can never be taken seriously by the mainstream public.
        I’m the exception as I’ve been following this blog for a decade.
        I’m trying to persuade my leftist friends of the AGW skeptic position.
        It doesn’t help if you are all immediately dismissed as IDIOTS because you follow a moron liar white supremacist. Traiter to the USA .
        I’m losing faith in this website even though I know Anthony Watts is correct in his science.

        • Again, your jealousy is duly noted, your refusal to accept actual facts is also noted, please feel free to let the world know how jealous and close-minded you are, often and loudly.

      • [“Open minded leftist”.???

        Ok, I believe Santa, but open minded leftist….., not in this world.]

        Exactly the same ironic comment can be applied when talking about an “open minded rightest”.

        Same dog, different lamppost.

        Ultimately, this site is showing far more comments related to the left-right political divide in the US than to where AGW is occurring or not.

        • However a right minded person will use their own money and talents to make a change and difference silently without a whole bunch of public bandwidth.

          Left minded person will want to tax everyone and everything toward anything they do not like.

          And there are plenty of scientific discussions on this site. I have lived on the planet nearly 50 years and I have yet to see any climate or environment change. Nor have I seen from the historical records that climate or weather has changed.

          • SLR 8 inches since recorded messurements began with most rapid increases over last two decades. Increasing acidification of the oceans.

          • Most SLR studies are dubious and are just as likely measuring land sinking. Again there is no standardization in the measurements themselves to be trustworthy. Each group or researcher develops their way of measuring SLR. Beside human beings as well all other lifeforms deal with SLC every single day of the year.

            Also if you are a champion of the AGW then your default position is man is evil so it seems you should be cheering that nature is fighting to reclaim its realm. I am fairly certain that SLR has been on the rise since the end of last ice age.

            Nice try on the oceans. Chemistry is my primary background with a fair bit of general engineering. I work in the pharmaceutical industry. The oceans are very slightly heading toward neutralization.

            And neither of these items suggests man-made climate change.

  37. I’m going to buck the trend here and condemn President Trump’s action. He should not have cancelled their flight to Afghanistan. He should have cancelled their return flight.

    • While that would have created an interesting situation, it would have disabled Trump’s strong argument that Pelosi et al should be home working in a passable funding bill.

      SR

      • And, blocking their return would have enabled Pelosi’s argument that Trump endangered the junket’s security.

        SR

        • Actually there is plenty of security for them at Bagram, and it would only of taken 7-9 days for them to get commercial passage back to US. Just think of the lost educational experience for them!

  38. The trip was a weekender, not a week long. Pelosi was going to go commercial until the White House announced the trip to a war zone, which they never do for security reasons. Finally, Trump went to Afghanistan during the shutdown, so…

    Both sides are wrong on this shutdown, ICE supports the compromise Trump refused to sign – use the equipment coming back from Afghanistan to support the border with drones and technology. Dems need to give him a billion for wall repairs and both sides should settle the best solution, and quit fighting.

    • It takes two to Tango. Nancy needs to come to the table and negotiate. Trump is there waiting for her.

        • Trump has offered three compromises which Nannee and Chuckee rejected before even reading them, so yes, last meeting they refused to even negotiate and he walked out. Ball is in their court and they slashed it with a razor and threw their rackets down. Now they got no leg left to stand on, Trump has the high ground and is digging in.

  39. KEEP IT APOLITICAL.
    I’m a leftist who wants to convert other leftists and Dems to the AGW skeptic position.
    You have zero credibility amongst Democrats because you support a liar.
    He’s also a traiter .
    Hes also an IDIOT who can’t begin to comprehend or begin to explain global warming skepticsim.
    You guys are blowing it by shoeing partisanship.
    We are on common ground with AGW skepticism.
    Embrace that and further the cause

    You can be white supremisists or capitalist 1 % ers on other websites.

    • Trump said CAGW was a hoax and it is. It’s a political movement, not a scientific one — the Climategate emails exposed this. They even coined a name for their political movement: “The Cause”.

      Your Lefty friends don’t care about the truth, and if try to “convert” them, you will be accused of “fact mongering”. LOL.

      The fact that you accuse anyone that agrees with Trump on this issue is a “white supremacist” is telling and exposes your bias and racism.

      It would be great if this topic could only be about science, but the media and progressives want nothing of that.

    • The fact you are so jealous of a person simply because he is so much more intelligent, and far more successful, than you will ever be does not reflect well on you. You should work on that.

  40. What I’m saying is this website can’t be used as scientific evidence by Democrats .
    It will be immediatly dismissed as right wing BS without even a second thought.
    The skeptic position is correct IMO
    It’s a shame no Dem or leftist will ever take it seriously because of your political trappings.

    • Leftists dismiss anything they don’t like out of hand to begin with. Catering to their mental illness helps no one. Let me help you out, make your self assigned task a bit easier. “Climate changes, constantly, it always has. Humans are not causing it to change and can not stop it from changing.” There ya go, facts that leftists will dismiss out of hand, it just saves you lots of time using a single sentence, then you can move on to something productive instead of beating that dead horse.

  41. I suggest Anthony Watts that you delete this entire thread and keep up the good science.
    It’s just bad PR.

    • So let me get this straight…

      You want to subvert free speech whilst professing to being an “open minded liberal”?

      And as far as the open mined liberal part is concerned — it seems based on your comments above you have already judged and convicted the President of treason. If Mueller had even a picogram of evidence of treason against Trump his investigation would be over. Please again I am not sure what Trump has done that treason should be leveled toward him. Also keep in mind that while, in your world, as you have stated Trump the idiot has beaten the dims and liberals at every turn, perhaps yall should be looking in the mirror. Sun Tzu has a lot to say about mis-characterizing your enemy.

      I did not vote for Trump but I am also not unhappy that he beat Hillary.

      Trump did a very politically intelligent action here. Not the action of an idiot.

      I also still need the treason evidence or you are just sufferring from TDS. Trump is a lot of things but being an idiot or traitor are not his flaws. The youtube videos are out there of Trump and he has been very consistent on his view and trade and politicians since at least the late 70’s. Trump is also a YUGE supporter of Unions.

      Most politicians are unable to speak with any gravitas in any technical area, I think there is only one Engineer and a couple of MD out all the 535 members of Congress. Holding Trump to a singular high pillar that nearly every member fails to meet only reenforces my view of your TDS.

    • You don’t like it so you want it to vanish. Way to support free speech, skippy. Thought you were all about saving the planet from humanity? Stopping these 5 international airliner flights is a step in that direction, and yet you don’t want anyone to talk about it. Hmmmm.

  42. It’s not that I don’t agree with your right wing stances.(and I dont)
    It’s that your vocal positions interfere with the science being accepted by those who are not right wingers.
    You are blowing it big time.

    • Those who refuse to accept reality will not be brought to it by saying it differently. Leftism is a mental disorder which brings poverty, starvation and misery everywhere it gains any power. Current example? Venezuela. Leftists , whom you say you embrace, are determined to make all the developed world into Venezuela, Zimbabwe, North Korea, Cuba. We ain’t having it.

      Again, even though you show a total inability to comprehend it, one last time. Climate changes constantly, it always has and it always will. Humans are not causing it to change and can not stop it from changing. Please continue to refuse delivery of reality, Accusatory Occasional-Cortex is your new darling in Congress and she has a plan for you, America will not go along with your leftist insanity. Have fun starving in the mud.

    • Mojomojo,

      Most leftist already hate this site. Most hated it long before Trump arrived on the political stage but they will still come. The fact that you think Trump changed anything of the long standing hate is more evidence of some irrationality on your part. The haters of the site before Trump are still hating.

      Climate change needs evidence.
      Trump committing treason needs evidence.

      Both of the above endeavors need quality control of that evidence(data) and be able to show that data is free from corruption and collected through a validated Quality by Design methodology.

      To proclaim either without evidence is irrational and irresponsible.

  43. Nancy Pelosi is a true American heroine who has the Donald by his short and curlies. She is killing him politically and he is completely clueless on how to deal with her. I love watching the CNN reports when she comes up with a new humiliation.

    On a seperate issue on reducing CO2 emissions. US sceptics can contribute by eating less meat. You should start tomorrow: https://edition-m.cnn.com/2019/01/16/health/new-diet-to-save-lives-and-planet-health-study-intl/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fedition.cnn.com%2F

    [Heroine? Surely you jest As for meat, we’ll consider it when you show proof you are actually doing it -mod]

Comments are closed.