New York Times Writer: If Your Workplace is Too Cold in Summer, BLAME MEN

Is there anything that progressives can’t blame on men? According to New York Times writer Pam Belluck, even your chilly workplace is the fault of men.

This isn’t an exaggeration, the New York Times is promoting the article on Twitter with these exact words:

“Chilly at work? Blame men.”

Here’s an excerpt from the story:

Chilly at Work? Office Formula Was Devised for Men

Summers are hot in Omaha, where heat indexes can top 100 degrees. But Molly Mahannah is prepared.

At the office, she bundles up in cardigans or an oversized sweatshirt from her file drawer. Then, she says, “I have a huge blanket at my desk that I’ve got myself wrapped in like a burrito.” Recently, “I was so cold, I was like ‘I’m just going to sit in my car in like 100-degree heat for like five minutes, and bake.’”

Ms. Mahannah, 24, who posted on Twitter that at work she felt like an icy White Walker from “Game of Thrones,” said a female co-worker at her digital marketing agency cloaked herself in sweaters, too. But the men? “They’re in, like, shorts.”

The article goes on to associate this absurd suggestion with global warming:

Right. It happens every summer: Offices turn on the air-conditioning, and women freeze into Popsicles.

Finally, scientists (two men, for the record) are urging an end to the Great Arctic Office Conspiracy. Their study, published Monday in the journal Nature Climate Change, says that most office buildings set temperatures based on a decades-old formula that uses the metabolic rates of men. The study concludes that buildings should “reduce gender-discriminating bias in thermal comfort” because setting temperatures at slightly warmer levels can help combat global warming.

It’s difficult to imagine a news outlet like the New York Times advising readers to “blame women” for anything, isn’t it?

(Image: Source)

Obama Continues His War on Coal and Power Plants With New Climate Change Proposal

The Obama administration has been awful for the nation’s coal producers and now it’s about to get worse. Obama has unveiled a new proposal to fight climate change.

CNN reported:

Obama unveils major climate change proposal

The Obama administration unveiled a major climate change plan on Sunday aimed at a large reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the nation’s coal-burning power plants. On Monday, President Barack Obama started selling it to the public at a White House event.

“Today after working with states and cities and power companies, the EPA is setting the first ever nationwide standards to end the limitless dumping of carbon pollution from power plants,” Obama said Monday from the White House, adding shortly thereafter “Washington is starting to catch up with the vision of the rest of the country. ”

The “Clean Power Plan” is the final version of regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency, which President Barack Obama called “the biggest most important step we’ve ever taken to combat climate change,” in a video released by the White House on social media Saturday night.

The Washington Times points out the downside of Obama’s plan:

Obama climate change plan to kill jobs, raise electric bills; could pose health risk

Key pieces of Mr. Obama’s environmental plan, including proposals to increase ozone standards, limit carbon emissions from power plants and continue mandating more ethanol in U.S. gasoline supplies, will bring with them serious side effects in the coming months and years, critics and some analysts say.

Those effects could include higher electricity rates and the loss of jobs in the manufacturing and energy sectors. And by continuing to push the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) — which began during former President George W. Bush’s administration and requires that ethanol be blended into gasoline — despite serious questions about its effectiveness and viability, some analysts contend the administration is putting Americans’ health at risk.

You may recall this video which came out before the 2008 election:

Fundamentally transforming America, one step at a time.

(Image: Source)

Progressive Rag: “To Save The Planet We Must Shrink The Economy; Curb White Population”


Many have wondered why President Obama’s economic plans don’t seemed geared toward actual economic growth or uniting the American people. From causing energy bills to skyrocket to fighting Climate Change, to looking to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour, everything the Progressive left supports appears geared towards shrinking the economy instead of growing it and causing more division among the American people.

Well… it appears, according to a Progressive news source, that’s the whole point.

According to the Progressive rag, People’s World, in an article titled The Way To Save the Planet: Shrink The Economy, we must basically destroy our economy, and the population of white people in the world must decrease, if we are going to save the planet from (the fiction of) man-made Climate Change:

Significant segments of our movement celebrate a “green new deal,” that will create an economic boom and new jobs while greening our economy. This is dangerous self-deception. Everyone needs living-wage jobs, but if the additional millions of job-holders produce more products and consume as the typical living-wage worker and their families do today, we’ll collectively emit even more carbon and make the problem worse.

Therefore we must couple the new green jobs with significantly reduced hours and substantially increased wages/salaries for all workers, including professionals. These workers and their families must spend their increased funds and free time in a manner that does not produce more greenhouse gases. This complex of interactions won’t work without careful planning and re-education. We’ll make no progress if we create more consumers taking part in the throw-away society.

Progressive environmental activists are also reluctant to talk about population. We believe in sharing the world’s resources more equitably, but don’t calculate what that means as the global population approaches eight billion. The issue of population control has racist roots and a history of unequal practice. In addition, five hundred million relatively affluent North American and Western European whites produce 80 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, while billions of people of color in the third world have tiny carbon footprints. While masses of people living in poverty are not responsible for global warming, increasing their level of consumption to that enjoyed in the “developed world” will have a profoundly negative impact on the world’s carbon footprint.”

So while many on the political right are pushing to find “common ground” with those on the Progressive left in the hope of uniting the American people, it would appear that in reality the Progressives don’t want to unite with us. Because in the end they want to take the economy back to the stone age, if not bury it completely, all the while reducing the world’s population of affluent white people in order to save the planet.

When you look at President Obama and the Progressive left’s actions through those Climate Change, Marxist colored glasses….it now all begins to make some sort of twisted sense. And while the majority of Americans will continue to live in denial about where this dark, Progressive agenda will lead, President Obama and the Progressive left are getting nearer to seeing their dreams…become a reality.

DEAD BROKE: The Clintons Made Over $140 Million in the Last Seven Years

Remember when progressives insisted Mitt Romney’s wealth made him too out of touch with ordinary Americans to be president? Apparently, that standard doesn’t apply to Hillary Clinton.

In the last seven years, the Clintons have amassed a fortune worth over $140 million.

From CNN:

Clintons earned nearly $141M from 2007 to 2014, tax returns show

Hillary and Bill Clinton earned nearly $141 million over the course of eight years and paid $43 million in federal taxes, according to tax returns her campaign released Friday.

In a lengthy statement and on her campaign website, Clinton detailed that she and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, paid more than $43 million in federal taxes from 2007 to 2014, over $13 million in state taxes and donated nearly $15 million to charity over the same period.

The couple earned a total of $140.9 million, with an adjusted gross income of $139.1 million, the returns show.

Last year, Hillary Clinton claimed that she and Bill were dead broke when they left the White House.

Even the liberal talking heads at CNN are having trouble with the hypocrisy.

Video via the Washington Free Beacon:

Progressives: It’s not evil when WE do it.

(Image: Source)

Surprise! Judge Blocking Planned Parenthood Videos Raised Big Money for Obama

Screen Shot 2015-07-28 at 5.28.10 AM

Since the left can’t dispute the horrific content of the Planned Parenthood videos, their best bet is to use the force of government to block them and that’s just what they’re doing.

A judge has actually granted a restraining order against the group behind the videos from releasing new ones and naturally, the judge was a big fundraiser for Obama.

Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist reported:

Obama Appointee And Bundler Blocks More Video Releases By Group Behind Planned Parenthood Sting

A federal judge late Friday granted a temporary restraining order against the release of recordings made at an annual meeting of abortion providers. The injunction is against the Center for Medical Progress, the group that has unveiled Planned Parenthood’s participation in the sale of organs harvested from aborted children.

Judge William H. Orrick, III, granted the injunction just hours after the order was requested by the National Abortion Federation.

Orrick was nominated to his position by hardline abortion supporter President Barack Obama. He was also a major donor to and bundler for President Obama’s presidential campaign. He raised at least $200,000 for Obama and donated $30,800 to committees supporting him, according to Public Citizen.

Nothing suspicious about that, right?

Obama Honoree’s Spouse: Americans Must “Abandon” Cars and Airplanes In The Green Energy Future (VIDEO)

David BBill Blittersdorf speaking to the Addison County Democrats, June 7, 2015. (Image: Screenshot)

When Obama told the American people that they will no longer be able to eat everything they want, or be able to drive their SUVs, and keep their thermostats set at 72 degrees, most people just laughed. But undeterred Obama doubled down on his agenda by saying that they (Progressives) were going to fundamentally transform the United States of America. Again most Americans didn’t take him seriously.

But nearing the end of his second term it would be hard to argue against the fact that the President has indeed transformed the United States, and not for the better. But he hasn’t done it alone and his transformation isn’t complete. So the President still needs needs help and people with vision. The kind of vision he can only get from Progressives and true Climate Change believers, like Jan and David Blittersdorf.

In 2009 Jan (Bloomstran) Blittersdorf, Chairwomen and CEO of NRG Renewables, was invited to the White House to meet with President Obama and discuss green jobs and economic growth. That meeting must have gone well because in 2012, Jan was honored by the President and named a White House Champion of Change for her roll in “advancing the green energy future”.

Fast forward three years and in June of 2015 Jan’s husband, and Democratic Party donor, David Blittersdorf, was asked by the Addison County Democrats to give a speech about what exactly his vision (assuming his wife Jan shares the same vision) of what the new green energy future entails. Well according to Mr. Blittersdorf, in his green energy future Americans won’t be driving cars, flying in airplanes, living in the country, or even commuting to work. If that isn’t anti-American enough for you then Mr. Blittersdorf’s vision also includes a nationalized electric grid, and a country where, because renewables will only generate 20-30% of the energy we consume now, Americans will have to drastically cut back on their usage. Here is a transcript of part of his speech:

“We could probably do 20-30% of what we are used to living on for energy.

So what’s that mean?

It means conservation, efficiency, all these other things have to be in play. Otherwise none of this works. Renewables and reducing energy use is critical. So all of this stuff has to happen.

…Carbon tax, We gotta do a carbon tax. …Sweden has done a carbon tax. It works…

…Electricity is going to become our number one energy carrier: wind, solar, hydro. So we are going to change from about 25% of our energy coming from electricity, we are going to end up at 69-90%. Eventually we’ll be mostly electric. Because we are going to get off liquid fuels. And hard fuels, coal.

We must move to an electrified mass transit. And I put this in here but people don’t want to face the fact that we’re probably going to have to abandon the car. The car has been our number one reason we consume so much energy. Suburbia is built around the car. Our highway system is heavily subsidized around the car. It takes a lot of energy to run a car centric system. The sad thing is China is adapting the car. We sold more cars last year in China than were sold in the United States. Something like 18 or 19 million cars. and they think within 10 years they are going to be selling 40 to 50 million cars. And there is about a billion cars in the world. There are people in the world that say, well we’re shooting for 2 billion. We don’t have the energy to run cars. It’s not going to work.

So we must go to mass transit and re localizing..we got to get people to live where they work. They can’t be living everywhere. And in Vermont people like to live 10, 20, 30 miles from work. That’s going to disappear. The 10 acre lot way out in the middle of nowhere one a dirt road is not going to be working anymore. It’s going to get expensive to live like that. So we have to get closer to where we work.

And we are going to switch to heating, electric heat pumps. We’re going to electrify our heating systems. And when we go to mass transit we’re going to electrify our trains. It’s much more efficient to run an electric train than it is to run diesel locomotive. About 3 times more efficient.

And the idea that we are going to be flying around in airplanes is one of the worst consumers of energy and in emitting carbon. It’s really nice, but I tell my kids who are in their 20’s, if you want to travel, travel now. Don’t wait 50 years it will cost you ten times as much.”

Video below:

For those of us who have been studying Obama’s green agenda for years, Mr. Blittersdorf’s vision is nothing new. As a matter of fact it’s known as Agenda 21, the UN plan to spread Sustainability around the globe.

But unfortunately for most Americans, the idea that Mr. Blittersdorf’s vision could actually come to fruition is still laughable. But to the rest of us, especially considering how far President Obama has shoved Sustainability down the throats of Americans already, we find his vision anything… but funny.