GIVE TIL IT HURTS!

The Bored Class

Death by Green Energy: it’s not just for endangered bird species like eagles anymore.

7th Dead Whale Washes Up Near Planned Green Energy Hotspot – Are Offshore Wind Projects Killing Them?

Despite calls for a halt to the development of offshore wind energy projects following a series of unexplained whale deaths, Democratic New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy says the state will not interfere with the projects.

The death reported last week of the seventh whale in a little over a month alarmed Cindy Zipf, executive director of the group Clean Ocean Action, according to NJ.com.

“This is devastating and shows even more urgency to our call to action for [President Joe] Biden and Gov. Phil Murphy to call for a stop to all activity. Don’t add any more projects and get a comprehensive investigation underway with experts and full transparency with oversight,” she said.

“Is it an omen? Is it an alarm?” Zipf said in comments made before the seventh whale was found, according to The Associated Press. “Never before have we had six whales wash up in 33 days.”

“We should suspend all work related to offshore wind development until we can determine the cause of death of these whales, some of which are endangered,” Republican state Sen. Vince Polistina said, adding, “it’s hard to believe that the death of [seven] whales on our beaches is just a coincidence.”

Aw, come on, it’s GOTTA be. After all, CC religious activists are the good people, you know. Or perhaps the BORED people, at any rate.

The downfall of capitalism will not come from the uprising of an impoverished working class but from the sabotage of a bored upper class. This was the view of the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter in 1942. Schumpeter believed that at some point in the future, an educated elite would have nothing left to struggle for and will instead start to struggle against the very system that they themselves live in.

Nothing makes me think Schumpeter was right like the contemporary climate movement and its acolytes. The Green movement is not a reflection of planetary crisis as so many in media and culture like to depict it, but rather, a crisis of meaning for the affluent.

Take for example a recent interview with Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich on CBS‘s 60 Minutes. Ehrlich is most famous for his career as a professional doom monger. His first major book, The Population Bomb, gave us timelessly wrong predictions, including that by the 1980s, hundreds of millions of people would starve to death and it went downhill from there. Ehrlich assured us that England would no longer exist in the year 2000, that even modern fertilizers would not enable us to feed the world, and that thermonuclear power was just around the corner.

Like the prophet of any religion, Ehrlich is not there to explain the world but to reinforce the upper class’s favorite worldview of the imminent end of the world, something that can only be prevented if we fundamentally change the way we live. Of course, by “we,” they actually mean “you.”

Even supposed grass-roots movements like “Just Stop Oil” or “Last Generation” (of “tomato soup on paintings” fame) are in fact funded by millionaires, like Aileen Getty, the granddaughter of legendary oil-tycoon Jean Paul Getty, and the Climate Emergency Fund.

Just like Kerry, Ehrlich, and these other groups are not really interested in solving the problem of climate change—for example, promoting research in technologies like nuclear energy, carbon capture technologies, and means of adaptation. Instead, they (wish) to elevate their struggle to an ersatz-religion that allows them to simultaneously enjoy their wealth and lecture the rest of the world from a position of moral superiority.

This isn’t about the planet. It’s about the boredom of the bourgeoisie. And they don’t care who has to pay to alleviate it.

More than just that, as I said last night, it’s all about their presumed right to harass, to command, to ban, and above all else, to rule.

3

Once a hapless assclown, always a hapless assclown

When it comes to being consistently, ludicrously wrong over decades, can any contender seriously hope to ever displace reigning champeen of the breed, the loathsome Lefty buffoon Paul Ehrlich?

‘60 Minutes’ Exhumes Enviro Cult Leader For A New Round Of Scaremongering

Earth is headed for a sixth extinction, warned biologist Paul Ehrlich on “60 Minutes” this Sunday. And since Ehrlich has predicted about 20 extinctions over the past 60 years, he’s a leading expert on the issue.

Couldn’t “60 Minutes” find a fresh-faced, yet-to-be-discredited neo-Malthusian to hyperventilate about the end of the world? Why didn’t producers invite a single guest to push back against theories that have been reliably debunked by reality? Because the media is staffed by environmental pessimists and doomsayers who need to believe the world is in constant peril due to the excesses of capitalism. And Ehrlich is perhaps our greatest alarmist.

His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” is among the most destructive of the 20th century. The long screed not only made Ehrlich a celebrity, but gave end-of-day alarmists a patina of scientific legitimacy, popularized alarmism as a political tool, and normalized authoritarian and anti-humanist policies as a cure. Ehrlich’s progeny are other media-favored hysterics by other antihumanists, such as Al Gore or Eric Holthaus or Greta Thunberg, who skipped learning history and science because she also believes we are on the precipice of “mass extinction.” And none of this is to mention the thousands of other Little Ehrlichs nudging you to eat insects, gluing themselves to roads, and demanding you surrender the most basic conveniences and necessities of modernity.

“The battle to feed all of humanity is over,” the opening line of “The Population Bomb” reads. “In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now,” Ehrlich wrote. It was likely, he went on, that the oceans would be without life by 1979 and the United States would see its population plummet to 23 million by 1999 due to pesticides. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years,” he famously told Mademoiselle in 1970.

When Julian Simon offered the biologist his famous wager, Ehrlich responded by saying, “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.” Instead, Ehrlich picked five natural resources he believed would experience shortages due to human consumption. He lost the bet on all counts, as the composite price index for those commodities, copper and chromium and so on, fell by more than 40 percent, despite there being 800 million new people during that time.

It’s not merely that Ehrlich is always spectacularly wrong about the future but that he remains unrepentant. In 2009, Ehrlich argued that “perhaps the most serious flaw” in “The Population Bomb” was that it was “much too optimistic” about the future. “We will soon be asking: is it perfectly okay to eat the bodies of your dead because we’re all so hungry?” Ehrlich warned in 2014. One year later, there were 200 million fewer people suffering from hunger than in 1990, despite there being 2 billion more people inhabiting the Earth.

It would take a lot of work to point to any tangible factor that’s worsened for humans since the 1970s. There is less war, terrorism, poverty, hunger, child mortality, genocide, death due to weather, illiteracy, etc. By nearly every quantifiable measure the environment is also better now than it was 55 years ago — which is why contemporary alarmists have learned to prophesy “climate” catastrophes 30 or 40 years out. Perhaps Ehrlich’s biggest mistake was living long enough to be proven wrong dozens of times. (Then again, in 1932, the year he was born, a man could expect to live to 61. Today they will likely live to be 77. Dr. Doom is 90.)

What a shame. So do us all a favor and drop dead already, you pathetic cretin. Happily, my boy Elon knows how best to deal with “people” like him.


Indeed not. With serial auto-self-beclowning doomshriekers like Ehrlich, the tell is that their “solution” for the latest “crisis” of the moment of the week is always and forever the same: more government power and control, less prosperity, less freedom, less personal autonomy and modern convenience. Yeah, thanks but no thanks, you bawling pudheads. On the upside, though, with “experts” like these, sensible folks will certainly never lack for objects of mockery and ridicule.

4

Hope springs eternal

However manifestly forlorn it may be.

The exhausting toils of the holidays are behind us; the mischief that could be done by the lame ducks in Congress has been done ($1.7 trillion Omnibus Spending Bill); and the time has come for the citizens of this land to get some answers about the escalating trips laid on them by their own government. The House of Representatives is in new hands. You’ll know in pretty short order whether they are capable, trustworthy hands, or just a blur of fast fingers running another three-card-monte table.

The most pressing questions abide around justice, and the gavel of the Judiciary Committee passes from the barely-alive Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) to the very animated Jim Jordan (R-Ohio). He needs to ask FBI Director Chris Wray how it came to be that the Bureau sat in possession of the Hunter Biden laptop during the impeachment of January 2020 and did not offer up to the defense the exculpatory evidence it abundantly contained in the way of business deal memos between the Biden family and officials in several foreign lands, Ukraine in particular. After all, the impeachment hinged on a telephone inquiry Mr. Trump made about just those matters. Was there a good reason for that phone call, or not? Obviously, there was, and Mr. Wray’s conduct looks like obstruction of justice in the highest degree.

Rep. James Comer (R-KY) comes in as chair of the House Oversight and Reform Committee. He announced months ago that he would hold hearings on interesting issues such Hunter Biden’s taxes and exactly who has paid to support his new career as an “artist.”

We’ve got national security concerns with respect to Hunter Biden. We want to know if you remember who bought that expensive artwork when he was an artist for about three days and sold the artwork for half a million dollars. We want to know why the Russian oligarchs who paid Hunter Biden money were mysteriously left off the sanctions list when Joe Biden started putting sanctions on Russians and Russian oligarchs. We’ve got a lot of questions about shady business dealings that Hunter had and whether or not they impacted the Biden administration.

Next Mr. Wray has to answer for the FBI’s infiltration of social media. How did the top lawyer at the FBI, Jim Baker, come to be employed as the right-hand to Twitter’s chief censor, Vijaya Gadde? How did all those former FBI agents land at the company along with Jim Baker, and what did Mr. Wray have to do with the FBI demands to censor news and persons on matters of critical national importance such as vaccine safety and election fraud? How did more than a hundred former federal agents land on Facebook, Google, and other platforms? How did Mr. Wray decide to shut down the avenues of the First Amendment to the Constitution?

Next up: Attorney General Merrick Garland. On what grounds are pre-trial January 6 Riot suspects being held in the decrepit DC federal lockup without bail on rinky-dink charges two years after the event? How does that square with American due process of law? What did he know about the existence of the Hunter Biden laptop and the evidence it contained? What is he doing about it? How did Mr. Garland happen to target for prosecution parents protesting school board policies on race and sexual matters? Of course, Mr. Garland is going to evade answering by using the ploy that all these questions “pertains to ongoing investigations.” Mr. Jordan had better hire a gutsy chief counsel with some brains to penetrate that bodyguard of lies.

If the Special Subcommittee on the January 6 Riot is disbanded, turn the matter over to the Andy Biggs’ Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Let’s hear from Nancy Pelosi’s staff as to why her office (of the Speaker) turned down offers from the Trump White House for national guard protection that day. Let’s also hear from the then-chief of the Capitol Police, Steven Sund, who resigned from that job two days later — in consternation or disgrace? Bring back Mr. Wray and Mr. Garland. How many federal agents were circulating in the crowd the night before and on the day of the January 6 riot? Why was one Ray Epps never indicted for his much-recorded incitements to enter the Capitol? Who opened the magnetically-locked doors from the inside of the building? Stuff like that. What was the decision process for not charging officer Michael Byrd in the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt?

I hope it’s not too impertinent to suppose that the January 6 Riot was engineered by our government to embarrass and punish its political opponents — taking advantage of the First Amendment “right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances,” which was what that crowd had come to do in Washington DC that day. Interesting how a little tweaking here and there turned that into a convenient fiasco. Entrapment, anyone? And how government control and interference over social media and corporate news reinforced the narrative that the stage-managed riot was “an insurrection” — one of many actual “big lies” of our time nurtured by our government against its citizens.

A few other inquiries in this new Congress that need to commence ASAP: Can we hear from Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as to how come the US-Mexican Border is absolutely wide open; why his employees are transporting illegal aliens all around the USA; why he is running a program in Mexico to give Venezuelans and other select alien nationals “advanced authorization” and “two years parole,” then sneaking them into the USA through regular ports-of-entry?

Hey, I have an idea: maybe Miss Lindsey “Talk-talk” Graham can empanel another of his vaunted Blue Ribbon Commissions™ to “get to the bottom” of this extensive litany of corruption, malfeasance, and dysfunction again!

1

“Phasing out” fossil fuels

Alternative suggestion: howzabout we break out the ropes, pitchforks, torches, and loaded mags and begin “phasing out” the Biden/DemonRat/shitlib Climate Change (formerly global warming, formerly global cooling, formerly The Weather) fucktards instead.

The “All-the-Above” Energy Policy Is a Compromise That Reverses Human and Environmental Progress

The Net Zero energy policy pursued by the current administration would essentially, sooner or later, phase out fossil fuels. That would roll back much of the progress America and the world has witnessed since the 19th century in economic and human well-being while increasing pressures on the rest of nature.

An alternative, embraced by many conservatives, is the “all-the-above” (ATA) policy. This approach preserves the option of using fossil fuels but with strict limitations that, however, are not founded on empirical science. Moreover, ATA would hamstring economic growth, increase the cost of living, and particularly hurt those on the lower economic rungs. We all would be poorer.

Feature, not bug.

The fundamental problem with the ATA approach is that it accepts claims that CO2 is an existential problem when there is no empirical corroboration of warmists’ apocalyptic narrative. Instead, the following global trends are widely recognized:

  • Deaths from weather and climate phenomena (heat and cold, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts) have declined 98 percent since the 1920s.  Studies indicate that several-times more people die from cold than heat. Economic losses from such events, as a fraction of wealth or global GDP, have declined.
  • The extent of wildfires peaked globally in the mid-19th century.
  • Cereal yields have tripled since 1961, while food supplies have increased 31 percent.
  • Sea level has risen continually 400 feet since the end of the last ice age with no significant acceleration during the modern age.
  • Access to clean water has increased, mainly because of improved hygiene and engineering solutions for water and sewage treatment.
  • Death rates from climate- and weather-sensitive vector-borne and parasitic diseases have declined.

Importantly, since the Industrial Revolution, virtually every measurable, significant indicator of human well-being has advanced because of the economic growth and technological change that was brought about through the consumption of fossil fuels and the economic surpluses that they generated. Use of fossil fuels freed resources, including most significantly the time and brain power that human beings had to devote previously to agriculture and other tasks where brawn rather than brains were at a premium. Consequently, globally:

  • People are living longer and healthier lives.
  • Income levels have improved, and poverty levels have declined.
  • The human development index has advanced virtually everywhere.

As for environmental health, fossil fuel-related technologies – including machinery, fertilizers and pesticides – have helped increase global food production at least 62.5 percent directly or indirectly and have enabled human beings to spare 20.4 percent of global land area (GLA) for the rest of nature. This exceeds both the habitat lost currently to cropland (12.2 percent of GLA) and the global cumulative area currently reserved or identified as conservation areas (estimated at 14.6 percent of GLA). For context, the area saved from conversion to agriculture is 25 percent larger than North America.

All of the above bulleted points are things unalterably, vehemently opposed by the Goosesteppin’ Left, mind. Once you recognize that incontrovertible fact, everything else begins to make sense. Well, of a sort, insofar as anything the idiots say or do can be said to make any kind of sense at all.

2

Is there really NOTHING they won’t try to meddle with?

Never mind, no need to answer that one.

I’ve written for years and years about how the Climate Temperature Models seem hopelessly broken. So just how broken are they?  This broken:

A major survey into the accuracy of climate models has found that almost all the past temperature forecasts between 1980-2021 were excessive compared with accurate satellite measurements. The findings were recently published by Professor Nicola Scafetta, a physicist from the University of Naples. He attributes the inaccuracies to a limited understanding of Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS), the number of degrees centigrade the Earth’s temperature will rise with a doubling of carbon dioxide.

File this under “prediction is hard, especially about the future”.  Gosh, it almost seems like the climate system is massively chaotic and difficult to understand, or something…

The black lines are the actual temperatures; the yellow bands are the model’s predicted temperatures. Notice that the actual temperatures have diverged outside the yellow predicted ranges (i.e. recorded actual temperatures are lower than predicted for all temperature data bases and all model groups). Long time readers know that I prefer the UAH satellite temperature record because (a) it is truly global and (b) it is only minimally adjusted.  I have been vocal for a long time that adjustments to the other temperature records are excessive, and may be wildly excessive.

Let me emphasize here that the models have been wrong for 40 years.

Of course they have. “Models” are the bunk, “consensus” is the bunk, and unfortunately, so is the Watermelon scam masquerading as contemporary “climate science.” As I said in the comments section: “How arrogant must we humans be–well, SOME humans, that is–that we can assume our knowledge of how the planetary ecology functions is so complete that we can launch reflecting chaff into space to deflect the sun’s rays, in the name of ‘fixing’ climate change?”

1

EV follies

It would take a heart of stone not to laugh, and laugh, and laugh, and laugh.

Wyoming Electric Vehicle Road Trip Nightmare: Man Spends 15 Hours to Travel 178 Miles Across State

A Colorado man learned the lesson of just how bad electric vehicles are for long-distance travel when he discovered that it took him 15 hellish hours to drive from Cheyenne to Casper, Wyoming.

At around 180 miles, this is a trip that only takes about three hours in a gas-powered vehicle. But because he was in an EV, the trip took five times more time to make the distance.

The 15-hour slog was his first attempt at using his EV for the trip to Wyoming. He has made the trip since, too. But he has only been able to shave four hours off that time, even with the experience.

The huge problem is, of course, a lack of charging stations. And since EVs only travel a few hundred miles between charges, that meant he was stuck trying to find places to charge — which were usually way out of his way — and then sit idly for hours as his vehicle charges up.

Certainly, electric cars themselves are not always a problem, especially for local driving. Instead, the problem comes with the Biden administration’s attempts to force Americans to switch to electric vehicles rather than allowing them to determine for themselves what kind of vehicle best fits their needs.

Another problem is the fact that our entire electric grid is not set up to charge millions of electric cars. Already this year California told EV users not to charge their cars during its repeated summer blackouts.

The hilarity rolls on from there, until we slam headlong into a grievous category error.

If individual consumers want to buy a far more expensive electric vehicle only to drive locally, that is their choice, of course. But the government’s idea that we all should be in an EV is simply not a logical goal.

Huston’s closing statement is based on a flawed premise: that FederalGovCo’s true aim here is to facilitate clean, Green transportation to save Mother Gaia and halt the deadly scourge of Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly The Weather™). Not so, I’m afraid, not at all; the true aim here is to inhibit freedom of movement for the Great Unwashed masses to the greatest extent possible, that’s all. Once you’ve got that bit down, the rest is all too logical.

4

The Great Undoing

Sido calls a spade a spade.

One of the marvels of White civilization that we take for granted is how easily one can travel enormous distances in a relatively short amount of time. I am not talking about air travel, that is a whole different beast also resulting from White ingenuity, but rather travel by car.

For example, if I wanted to hop in the car and go see Big Country Expat in Florida I could get there is just over 16 hours, travelling a little over 1,100 miles. Let’s call it 17.5 hours to account for stopping for gas. That means that every hour I would go 62 miles. Back in the pioneer days, going 15 miles via covered wagon in a day was a solid day so I can basically cover the equivalent of four days of wagon travel every hour. For contrast, for me to walk to nearby Toledo, Ohio would take over a day on non-stop walking while I can drive it in about an hour and a half. Riding a bike, something I haven’t done since the 1980s, would take around 7 hours.

Automobiles, cheap gas, the intricate highway system and our travel infrastructure which includes gas stations every few miles on most highways make travelling across our nation a breeze. With a credit card and a reliable vehicle you can go anywhere in the continental U.S. of A in just a few days, even from Bangor, Maine to San Diego in just 48 hours of driving. Add in a built in GPS included with most phones and if you give me an address, I can hop in the car and land right at that doorstep with no preparation.

No one really thinks about it. It just is, just as we rarely think about having unlimited potable water coming from the tap or unlimited electricity (except in California) when we flip a switch. Getting to that point where amazing conveniences are something we don’t even notice took centuries of innovation and hard work.

Undoing all of that innovation and hard work is taking a lot less time.

Well, naturally; after all, it’s easier, especially for a muttonheaded shitlib wrecker who really can’t comprehend doing anything else. Arthur goes on from there to dispense with the EV scam, in the process linking to the incomparable John Wilder’s thoroughgoing, leave-no-rare-earth-stone-unturned evisceration of same. As always, it’s tough to excerpt Wilder’s stuff without leaving out something important, but here’s a taste.

Electric cars are, in most ways, absolutely inferior to cars powered by Oil, Our Slippery Friend™. Why? The technology is relatively new, the first electric car (really a locomotive, but who’s counting) having been invented only in 1842 in Edinburgh by engineer Robert Davidson. It traveled at the breakneck speed of 4 miles per hour, which is roughly 4 miles per hour faster than Davidson could move after a fifth of something that John Walker® (yes that one) might have been selling back then.

So, it’s not fair to judge electric cars, since they have been only developing for 180 or so years. It’s still an infant technology. Oh, wait.

But California has decided to ban the sale of new gasoline cars by 2035. Hurray, California!  You’re geniuses beyond imagination! You’ll single-handedly solve global warming.

Or…will that pesky math get in the way?

Let’s see – in order to get California girls to the beach, it takes 13.8-15 billion gallons of gasoline. We’re skipping diesel for now, and just dealing with gasoline. I’ll use 15 billion gallons because in the immortal words of the captain of the Hindenburg, “Close enough.”

Let’s do the math.

15 billion gallons of sweet, sweet gasoline is 500 TW-h (that’s terawatt hours, which is the metric equivalent 5,000 bushels per fortnight). California produces in electricity, in total…drumroll please, 277 TW-h. So, California produces slightly more than half the electricity needed by its stunning new fleet of cars.

To keep just the same level of energy production available for homes (because, presumably, all new citizens between now and then will live in tents) that California will need to triple the amount of power it produces. If you count in increased uses for the iAndroid™ Eleventy-X® and GameBoxStation 2000©, the grid will have to multiply by four or five times. And, remember, we skipped diesel engines, so it’s nearly certain that my estimate is low.

It all reminds one of Heinlein’s classic quote from The Notebooks Of Lazarus Long.

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now & then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

This is known as “bad luck.”

Indeed. So with shitlibs firmly in charge, we can count on an extended run of nothing but the very worst sort of “bad luck” for the foreseeable future, until enough of us get enough of a bellyful of this shit to remove the icy, dead hand of Leftism from around our necks.

You’ll want to read all of both Arthur’s and Wilder’s excellent posts, folks.

3
11

The long and the short of it

Divemedic ain’t having any of that EV bushwa.

This is why I won’t buy an electric pickup (or any electric vehicle): the new electric F-150 only has a 100 mile range when towing.

Actually, I’m shocked that it’s even capable of towing at all, whether for 300 miles or 300 feet.

Part of owning a vehicle of any type, what makes it such an American experience is that owning a vehicle is freedom. Freedom to go where you want. Electric vehicles with 300 miles or less of range take that from you, tethering you to a short distance from your home. The quintessential American road trip will cease to exist if electric cars become the norm. A part of America will die with the automobile.

That’s the whole idea, natch. At the end of the day, the shitlibs’ determination to hang the EV albatros around American necks isn’t about efficiency, pollution, Climate Change (formerly Global Warming, formerly Global Cooling, formerly “the weather”), saving Gaia, or anything else. It’s about freedom, see—they hate it like the cancer, can’t abide the thought of anybody having any, and will go to any and every conceivable length to put a stop to it forever.

5

Putting fossil fuels into perspective

They power a lot more than just our automobiles.

Fossil fuel powers the economic engine of civilization. With a minor disruption in the supply of fossil fuel, crops wither, and supply chains crash. With a major disruption, a humanitarian apocalypse could engulf the world. Events of the past few months have made this clear. Without energy, civilization dies, and in 2020 fossil fuels continued to provide more than 80 percent of all energy consumed worldwide.

This basic fact, that maintaining a reliable supply of affordable fossil fuel is a nonnegotiable condition for the survival of civilization, currently eludes far too many American politicians, including Joe Biden. Observes energy expert and two-time candidate for governor of California Michael Shellenberger: “One month ago, the Biden administration killed a one-million-acre oil and gas lease sale in Alaska, and seven days ago killed new on-shore oil and gas leases in the continental U.S. In fact, at this very moment, the Biden administration is considering a total ban on new offshore oil and gas drilling.”

Another basic fact, easily confirmed by consulting the 2021 edition of the BP Statistical Review of Global Energy, is that if every person living on Earth were to consume half as much energy per year as the average American currently consumes, global energy production would need to nearly double. Instead of producing 547 exajoules (the mega unit of energy currently favored by economists) per year, energy producers worldwide would need to come up with just over 1,000 exajoules. How exactly will “renewables,” currently delivering 32 exajoules per year, or six percent of global energy, expand by a factor of 30 to deliver 1,000 exajoules?

The short answer is, it can’t. Despite the fanatical, powerful group-think that calls for the abolition of not only fossil fuels but also most hydroelectric power and all nuclear power, the reality is that most nations of the world are going to continue to develop every source of energy they can, and they’re going to do it as fast as they can.

Well, the smart ones will. Sadly, that would seem to exclude any of them currently being misruled by Senile Joe Biden and/or his shadowy Deep State handlers.

“At a time of war,” Biden wrote in an open letter to the industry on June 15, “high refinery profit margins being passed directly onto American families are not acceptable… companies must take immediate actions to increase the supply of gasoline, diesel, and other refined product.”

But US refineries are already operating at 94 percent of their capacity, with US refineries in the Gulf of Mexico running at 98 percent, which is the highest rate in 30 years. Running refineries at a higher capacity than that risks damaging the equipment. As such, Biden isn’t just wrong, he insulted some of the hardest working people operating in one of the most dangerous industries in America.

If Biden wants more American fuel, then he should allow the building of new refineries, right?

That’s the last thing FJB wants, as is evidenced by his actions, which as always speak louder than words.

But, on May 12, Biden’s Interior Department blocked a proposal to open up more than one million acres of land in Alaska for oil and gas drilling. Two days later, Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency blocked plans to expand an oil refinery in the US Virgin Islands.

Biden and his defenders said he had to block the expansion of the Virgin Islands refinery, given how polluting it was.

But had Biden’s EPA allowed the Virgin Island refinery to expand, the owners would have poured nearly $3 billion into retrofitting the plant so it produced gasoline and other products more cleanly, while significantly increasing production at the same time.

In truth, there are many things Biden could have done, and still should do, to lower energy prices. He could invoke the National Defense Act to accelerate the rate of oil and gas permits. He could set a floor of $80/barrel for re-filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), which would be a powerful incentive for the industry, because it would prevent prices from falling to unprofitable levels. Biden could announce trade agreements with American allies to supply them with liquified natural gas, which would incentivize more natural gas production and lower prices.

If Biden got America on a wartime footing, as he should be given Russia’s aggression in Europe, we would see the lowering of oil, gas and petroleum prices in less than one year.

Why won’t Biden do it? Because he has declared war on fossil fuels. “I guarantee you, we’re going to end fossil fuel,” Biden promised a student climate activist in 2019. “I am not going to cooperate with them,” he said, referring to the oil and gas industry.

And indeed, he hasn’t. When oil and gas executives visited the White House in June, Biden snubbed them by refusing to attend the meeting. Instead, at the very same moment, he met with wind industry executives. A few days earlier, Biden administration officials signaled they may support a large new tax on the oil industry proposed by a Senator from Oregon.

All of this has soured the oil and gas industry on investing in production. “If you were an oil company,” a senior executive at a major US bank told me, why would you invest hundreds of millions of dollars into expanding refining capacity if you thought the federal government or investors would shut you down in the next few years? The narrative coming from the administration is absolutely insane.”

Of course it is. Leaving Biden’s personal cognitive impairment out of it, as the venerable old truism has it: liberalism delenda est. It just floors me that, with Biden-caused disaster on every front, the clod’s approval numbers nonetheless remain in the 30-40 percent range, instead of around 10 or 12 percent where they truly belong. Back to the first article for our thrilling conclusion.

According to the most authoritative source on energy in the world, total proven reserves of fossil fuel currently total 49,023 exajoules. This means that just with proven reserves, and if only fossil fuel were used, and if global energy consumption were doubled to 1,000 exajoules per year, there would still be a 50-year supply of energy. How much more fossil fuel can be extracted from unproven reserves is anybody’s guess, but it is a safe bet that twice as much more is available, meaning there’s at least another century’s worth of fossil fuel even if we used nothing else to power civilization.

The benefits of abundant cheap energy are obvious: prosperity and voluntary population stabilization. In the decades to come, other forms of energy will be further developed. If hydroelectric power doubles, while nuclear power and renewables both go up by an order of magnitude, the three together would provide 636 exajoules of power per year. Under that scenario, fossil-fuel use could remain near current levels, and total global energy production would still double to 1,000 exajoules.

What is impossible, however, is for renewables alone to achieve this level of growth. More than half of renewable energy today comes from biofuel and biomass, which—ironically—is already wreaking havoc across the tropics as hundreds of thousands of square miles of rainforest are incinerated to make room for cane ethanol and palm oil plantations. And then there are the minerals required for the wind turbine towers, the silicon photovoltaics, and the billions of megawatt-hours of battery farm capacity. Where are the Malthusians when you need them?

Same place they always were—everywhere you look, for as far as the eye can see—in the bodily posture typical of their kind: with their heads jammed so far up their flues they have to yawn to see daylight. There’s a good reason why the ceaseless warnings of impending disaster issued by such as they never quite come to fruition: the purblind boobs arrive at their dire conclusions by projecting current conditions into the future unaltered, never taking technological advancement, human ingenuity and adaptability, and the ineluctable flux and churn of life on this planet into account.

Doomsday predictions can make for moderately interesting reading now and then, but ought to be taken no more seriously than you do your daily horoscope, the extended weather forecast, or your chances of winning gazillions playing the Powerball. Harmless entertainment, if that’s your bag, but not necessarily reliable indicators of what tomorrow will bring.

Update! Don’t let FJB’s play-acting at being “concerned” by the suffering his hideously expensive gas prices is inflicting on ordinary Americans fool you. This is exactly what he and his fellow shitlibs have dreamed of for years and years.

If you had the unpleasant experience this July Fourth weekend of paying close to $5 for a gallon of gas, you can always comfort yourself with the idea that your pain is for a good cause: the “liberal world order.” 

So said Brian Deese, White House director of the National Economic Council, when he was asked on CNN: “What do you say to those families who say, ‘Listen, we can’t afford to pay $4.85 a gallon for months, if not years. This is just not sustainable’?”

Deese, like his boss Joe Biden, is unmoved by the suffering of ordinary Americans, more than two-thirds of whom say gas-price increases are causing them hardship, according to a recent Gallup poll.

“This is about the future of the liberal world order, and we have to stand firm” until Ukraine defeats Russia, declared Deese.
He was echoing the president, who had referenced the Ukraine war a few hours earlier in Madrid, when he dismissed a similar question: “The war has pushed prices up. [Oil] could go as high as $200 a barrel…How long is it fair to expect American drivers and drivers around the world to pay that premium for this war?”

Biden responded with cold indifference: “As long as it takes,” he said.

If only there was some way Real Americans could properly thank him for it.

6

You’ll freeze to death in the dark and like it

Never for one moment kid yourself that they aren’t one hundred percent serious about forcing us all back into pre-Medieval serfdom.

Imagine one of your kids freezing to death in your home. Eleven-year-old Cristian Pineda’s mother found her son dead during the Texas blackout in February 2021. Or you have a power outage for three days, losing a couple of hundred dollars worth of food because your refrigerator didn’t work, as Michelle Jones did last summer. The food she had just bought to feed herself, her daughter, and her granddaughter spoiled without electricity.

This is likely to become all too common in the future.

Why?

Because shitlibs, that’s why. No other reason than just that, no need to hunt around for one. Let’s just get right down to the nuts and bolts of the thing, shall we?

Progressives favor energy policies that will make grid failures more frequent, widespread, and prolonged. They want to close coal plants without enough full-time power ready to take their place. They seem unconcerned about reliability. They want coal plants torn down even if we have to keep paying them—like selling your car to get a newer one while you still owe lots on the first.

The people of the upper Midwest will pay the price this summer. Their multi-state grid operator, MISO, has warned that it will be 5 GWs short of electricity this summer. California also could be up to5 GWs short, enough to power 1.3 million homes. Texas warned that there might not be enough electricity for last week’s unexpected 90° weather, or for hotter days coming this summer.

What do they all have in common? Increasing their reliance on solar and wind and closing coal plants. A dirty green secret is that coal is full-time power and wind and solar are not. Electric grids must have full-time, on-demand power all the time—plus some—or blackouts are guaranteed.

Another dirty secret: wind and solar produce little or no energy 70% of the time. This means that to replace 1,000 MW of coal, it will take 3,500 MW of wind turbines’ “nameplate capacity,” or 5,000 MW of solar’s. That’s about 1,200 3 MW wind turbines or 13 million solar panels, in either case occupying nearly 40 square miles.

About 240 coal plants in the United States deliver about 22% of our electricity. About 71,000 wind towers produce about 9% of our electricity on a part-time, when-the-wind-blows, basis. We are adding about 3,000 wind turbines a year, in the whole country. If wind didn’t have the part-time problem, those 3,000 could replace 2.5 coal plants a year. At that rate, it would take 96 years to replace them all.

Progressives have been demanding that we close coal plants faster than 2.5 a year. If we want our electric grid to serve us full time, we need to reject this policy. We also need to stop everything they do to make coal and natural gas more expensive because that will raise our electric rates even faster.

We need to stop everything they do, period, and without any shilly-shallying around, before it’s too late to undo the damage they’ve already done and our laxness has irrevocably sealed our fate. Hey, as I’m fond of telling all and sundry: it’s never too early to start stacking Commie corpses.

Yes, it would be wonderful if sane, functional adults could cede the Left a remote island of their very own someplace where they could all be free to indulge their bong-fueled Utopian fantasies to the fullest and not bother those of us who actually kind of enjoy air conditioning; electric refrigerators, ranges, and lighting; clean, drinkable water on tap; indoor toilets and our modern sewer system; the unparalleled freedom and mobility afforded by privately-owned and -operated automobiles; and a lifespan longer than, say, 45 to 50 years or thereabouts.

You can’t be a shitlib and be for all those fine things; you just can’t. Liberalism and the blessings of life in a modern post-industrial society are mutually exclusive, and that’s flat. The irresolvable contradiction between the two is what makes the spectacle of gaggles of stinking, hairy-pitted Earth Mother repops stumbling into each other whilst putting some mileage on the ol’ Birkenstocks abling over to the city park for the annual Earth Day shindig—all of the vacant bints frenetically thumbtyping on their decidedly nonorganic, non-renewable iPhones, naturally (ahem)—so amusing. The nump-brained tree sloths are so impenetrably clueless they still wouldn’t get it if you mimeographed a microscopically-detailed crib sheet explaining the problem in simple, introductory-level terms for them to pore over.

Just remember, they’re smarterer than you, by lots and lots. If you don’t believe it, just ask ’em.

1

Big, big savings!

Goobermint, just doing what goobermints do.

The headline probably has you thinking about the high cost of the EV – so high that whatever you “save” by not buying gas ends up costing you a great deal. But that is only one of the ways EVs don’t save you money.

Another one is tires.

EV tires wear out faster because EVs are much heavier than other cars – because EVs are weighed down by 1,000-plus pounds of batteries. For example, a Tesla Model 3 – which is a compact-sized car about the same size as a Honda Civic – weighs close to 3,900 pounds (two tons) empty. The Civic weighs just shy of 2,900 pounds – a difference of…1,000 pounds.

That weight weighs down on the tires, which must absorb the load – which increases when the car goes around a curve or runs over a pothole. There is also the increased friction that comes from stopping that load, once set in motion. EV touters like to tout the fact – which is one – that EV brakes last longer because the EV uses regenerative braking to partially slow the car, rather than brake pads. Basically, the electric motors that propel the car are used to slow it – and convert inertia back to electricity, to help top off the batteries.

But the tires are still scrubbing against the asphalt.

But – wait! – if I buy an electric car, I will save money on oil and filter changes! Certainly. In the manner of “saving” on utility bills via the purchase of a $500,000 house with triple-pane Andersen casement windows in place of a $250,000 house with double-pane standard-type windows.

Then there is the biggest maintenance cost of all – the battery pack. Which will cost you more, because it’s so huge – in order to move the EV at highway speeds for any significant distance. This, in turn, results in it being so heavy – which increases the amount of power needed to move it plus the car it’s installed in, reducing efficiency.

You do get the power – and the acceleration – but it costs you. Especially if you use either as doing so discharges the battery, rapidly – which means needing to recharge it more regularly. The “faster” you do that, the greater the load/stress imposed upon the battery, costing you battery life. And when the time comes to replace the battery, that’ll cost you more than it costs to replace a non-electric car’s transmission or engine – and maybe both, together.

Plus the oil and filter changes.

Buy an EV if it floats your boat. But don’t kid yourself that doing so is “saving” anything – including the Earth.

If it floats your boat, you say? Better watch that loose talk there, buddy; that’s exactly the kind of subtle advocacy for individual self-determination that will surely get you Gulagged in the land of the “free” and the home of the “brave” nowadays.

6

The return of the Stone Age

Your Leftist masters would like to remind you not to get too attached to having air conditioning, lights, kitchen appliances, and all the other blessings of modern civilization, ‘kay?

Over Half The Country At Risk Of ‘Energy Emergencies’ This Summer, Electric Grid Analysis Shows
Millions of Americans across the Midwest, Southwest and West are expected to face blackouts throughout the summer months, an industry analysis concluded.

A variety of factors, including drought conditions and low wind conditions, are expected to put Americans in roughly 28 states at risk of experiencing blackouts this summer, according to a report from the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), a U.S. regulatory authority, published Wednesday. The region managed by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) across 15 Midwest states is at the highest risk of “energy emergencies” during the summer due to capacity shortfalls, the analysis showed.

“The Western Interconnection, Texas, Southwest Power Pool (SPP) … are at ‘elevated risk’ of energy emergencies during extreme conditions,” NERC added. “[MISO] is in the ‘high risk’ category, facing capacity shortfalls in its north and central areas during both normal and extreme conditions due to generator retirements and increased demand.”

Bold mine, because I found it so funny I nearly sprung a short rib chortling at it. Don’t miss the aerial photo of an ugly, useless scar on the Nevada landscape included in the article.

SI SI PUEDE!!!

Our good friend Steve says it so I don’t have to.

Today is April 22. You know what that means: This evening, bring an electric heater outside and turn it on. Start up your oldest, dirtiest lawn mower and let it run for an hour. Change the oil in your car and dump the old down the storm drain. Take a dump on the HOA president’s front porch.

Keep your eye on the goal: to cause shortages and a destroyed environment and a general sense of crisis so that watermelons can continue to shout about dooooom and raise money. Because you know that’s what it’s all about, right? Keeping the watermelon’s shriveled, red, commie souls wrapped in lots of greenbacks.

Precisely so. It’s just now dusk where I live, so I need to go around hitting dem switches and making dem needles jump, boyo. Let’s make this year’s goal to tax those generators, turbines, and coal-burners (not the miscegenating women, the power plants, ya jerk) so severely it causes disastrous shutdowns all across the benighted plain, folks! Remember, every breaker you trip or fuse you blow makes another shitlib Watermelon cry.

7

Hidden truths

Wanna ban ICEs in preference for EVs? You got problems, pal.

The Environmental Downside of Electric Vehicles
At one time, “Saving the Environment” and “Fighting Climate Change” were synonymous. That is no longer true. The quest for Clean Energy through electric vehicles (EVs) epitomizes “the end justifies the means.”

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), an electric vehicle requires six times the mineral inputs of a comparable internal combustion engine vehicle (ICE). EV batteries are very heavy and are made with some exotic, expensive, toxic, and flammable materials.

The primary metals in EV batteries include Nickel, Lithium, Cobalt, Copper and Rare Earth metals (Neodymium and Dysprosium). The mining of these materials, their use in manufacturing and their ultimate disposal all present significant environmental challenges. Ninety percent of the ICE lead-acid batteries are recycled while only five percent of the EV lithium-ion batteries are.

Oil has been so demonized that we tend to overlook some of its positive traits as a power source relative to the battery power of EVs. The power for an internal combustion engine, oil, is a homogeneous commodity found abundantly around the world (especially in our own backyard). In 2019, the four top oil producing nations were the United States, Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Canada. In contrast, the power for EVs is dependent on a mixture of diverse commodities from just a handful of third world countries.

In spite of the environmental hysteria about oil drilling, the surface area disturbed is relatively small since the oil is extracted from under the ground. In contrast, many of the materials prominent in the clean energy revolution are obtained through open-pit horizontal mining which is extremely damaging to wide areas of the environment.

Specific details follow, all of which add up to bad news for the Green-Weenie Left’s deception and coercion program. Heberling headlines his closing ‘graphs with another home truth the Envirotwits aren’t gonna like.

It’s Time to be Honest about Clean Energy
In December, President Biden issued an Executive Order saying the United States government will “provide a strong foundation for American businesses to compete and win globally in the clean energy economy while creating well paying, union jobs [except in mining] at home. Today’s executive action further reinforces the President’s directive to Buy American [except for clean energy raw materials] and ensure that equity [in the US, but not in Third World countries] and environmental justice [in the US, but nowhere else] are key considerations.”

For all the “happy talk” about Clean Energy, our actions simply show a superficial commitment. We don’t want to do the heavy lifting that it will take to make the transition to Clean Energy. Our role in the Clean Energy revolution will be limited to the final assembly of electric vehicles. But hey, that is good enough for our virtue signalling Earth First environmentalists and politicians.

What is needed, however, is an honest and comprehensive evaluation of the entire life cycle of clean energy from raw materials through disposition. There are pros and cons to all forms of energy. To date, all we have heard are the benefits of clean energy. It is now time to highlight the true costs of clean energy which must include the negative societal and environmental impact as well.

Fat chance. Leftists want what they want, all annoying obstacles like facts, fairness, or honest evaluation be damned. The decision has been made; their tiny minds are firmly closed to any further discussion, investigation, or newer data which refutes their premises. As they so childishly proclaim: The Science, She Is Settled™. Just never you mind that this Declaration of Ignorance directly contradicts the verymost fundamental of the concepts that define true science. Shut up, you. So We have spoken. So it shall be done.

Ecotards are bound and determined to save Gaia, even if they have to kill all of us to do it.

3

The Green Deceit

Screwing the energy-policy pooch—and most Americans, too—on purpose, so as to pimp expensive, unreliable Green “solutions”—a ruinous shell game built entirely on a foundation of brazen lies.

Joe Biden Is Doing Everything Possible To Avoid Unleashing American Energy Production
Americans are coping with the highest gas prices ever recorded, compounded by inflation, with the national average reaching $4.33 per gallon earlier this month, according to an AAA tracker. On Thursday, a Federal Reserve analysis recorded inflation at a four-decade high, which followed a survey from Salary Finance out Wednesday reporting 1 in 5 Americans are running out of cash between paychecks.

After 14 months actively suppressing oil and gas production in the name of climate change, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine hampered the Oval Office’s diplomatic menu as the United States enthusiastically forfeited its energy independence. In the run-up to its full-scale invasion, Russia supplied more than 10 percent of the world’s crude but is now throttled by western sanctions against the primary source of revenue for the Kremlin’s war machine. Following the United States’s stint as an energy-independent net exporter of oil under President Donald Trump in 2018, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) forecast the United States will revert to its role as a net importer this year under Biden.

Repeated use of U.S. reserves without a plan to permanently increase U.S. oil and gas production was described by Montana Republican Sen. Steve Daines as a “band-aid on [a] bullet wound.” It showcases an administration dedicated to pulling every lever possible to avoid allowing American producers to ramp up production to meet the nation’s energy needs. According to the EIA, Americans consumed an average of nearly 20 million barrels of oil a day, putting the White House release of 1 million barrels per day into perspective.

Instead of opening American energy projects the administration has shut down such as drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and permits for the Keystone XL Pipeline, Biden has continued to harass the oil and gas industry, and suppress production in the process. Just this week, Bloomberg reported the Biden administration is planning to delay oil leases in the Gulf of Mexico for a third consecutive year, signaling to the industry that the White House has no plans to endorse long-term production to reclaim energy independence.

No, of course not. Why, that would be just AWFUL, a horrible mis-ordering of government priorities. Everyone knows that you just don’t go around promising to “reclaim(ing) energy independence” until the job of bringing a once-mighty nation to its knees, destroying its economy, and breaking its people to your will via impoverishing them and denying their freedom of movement has been completed. Then and only then, once their desperation and misery has reduced them to abject pleas for government to step in and “help,” can you resume your forked-tongue eructations promising “energy independence” for one and all again.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Comments policy

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't. Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

"Mike Hendrix is, without a doubt, the greatest one-legged blogger in the world." ‐Henry Chinaski

Mike @Substack

Allied territory

Alternatives to shitlib social media:

Fuck you

Kill one for mommy today! Click to embiggen

Notable Quotes

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Claire's Cabal—The Freedom Forums

FREEDOM!!!

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
Daniel Webster

“A slave is one who waits for someone to come and free him.”
Ezra Pound

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
Frank Zappa

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.”
John Adams

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
Bertrand de Jouvenel

"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged."
GK Chesterton

"I predict that the Bush administration will be seen by freedom-wishing Americans a generation or two hence as the hinge on the cell door locking up our freedom. When my children are my age, they will not be free in any recognizably traditional American meaning of the word. I’d tell them to emigrate, but there’s nowhere left to go. I am left with nauseating near-conviction that I am a member of the last generation in the history of the world that is minimally truly free."
Donald Surber

"The only way to live free is to live unobserved."
Etienne de la Boiete

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil."
Skeptic

"There is no better way to stamp your power on people than through the dead hand of bureaucracy. You cannot reason with paperwork."
David Black, from Turn Left For Gibraltar

"If the laws of God and men, are therefore of no effect, when the magistracy is left at liberty to break them; and if the lusts of those who are too strong for the tribunals of justice, cannot be otherwise restrained than by sedition, tumults and war, those seditions, tumults and wars, are justified by the laws of God and man."
John Adams

"The limits of tyranny are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
Frederick Douglass

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine."
Joseph Goebbels

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
Ronald Reagan

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it."
NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in."
Bill Whittle

Best of the best

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

Contact


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

Copyright © 2023