This is an absolutely brilliant piece! I am going to save it for future reference. But the strategies and tactics John outlines here show that these loony and dangerous notionss can be countered legally.
Religious people say: "the future is in God's hands" Which is (translated for atheistst) "we don''t know the future (and are not responsible either) . Religious people say: we work "for the glory of God . Translation: we do our very best in the public interest. My observation: God has been replaced by Mother Earth. This has severe consequences: 1. post mortal reckoning taking place on earth now hits our descendants 2. we become responsible for an unknown future (climate change) which creates fear 3. life depends on exploiting the earth but to stick the spade into your mother is a crime. This induces deep fear and guilt.
David: Anyone who says that "the future is in God's hands" is not a Judeo-Christian. Yes, God has been replaced by various atheistic idols — like mother earth... Still not sure why you are posting your comments under the wind lobbyists commentary...
Home rule cites, about 5,400 in the US including all the large ones, have charters that grant them more autonomy than non-charter cities. These links can tell you more:
Overview of ballot measures (including advisory elections)
Barry: TY for that information. I perused it and did not see how it relates to the issue at hand. If a community wants to regulate a proposed wind project (e.g. require science-based setbacks) — but the state has a state law prohibiting them from dong that — exactly what are you advocating that they do?
Petition drives to amend charters can be pretty easy in some states such as Texas. I have worked on several successful efforts. Let me know if you want details.
BACKGROUND:
Texas Scorecard: "Barry Klein: Property Rights Protector"
Thanks, John, for this focused summary as to how to fight the lobbying concerns in their quest to push this idiotic wind and solar charade upon the public. Interestingly, this brought to my attention the appeal of a recent DC Circuit decision to deny a suit brought by the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council and the FAIR Energy Foundation folks. As we've seen previously, courts are inclined to invoke "standing" rules to dismiss cases that attempt to unravel the noose that the EPA has around the public's neck. Tragic, imo. If the appeal (actually, a petition for writ of certiorari) of the DC decision goes before the SCOTUS, it would go a long way in presenting the actual science that would negate the EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding. The Major Questions issue would become a logical target, No doubt you are well aware of the facts in this case as they relate to 2009 finding that greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles contribute to climate change and thus endanger public health and welfare. Give me a break! CO2 as a pollutant? Poppycock! Extrapolating all of this EPA nonsense into the arena of power plants makes all of this green lobby nonsense much more hideous. Hopefully, you may wish to consider writing a focused piece about the illogic GAST data used by the EPA and the green lobbyists to worm their way into every aspect of the US citizen. The Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council and the FAIR Energy Foundation case needs to be brought to the attention of your readers/subscribers. Your efforts to keep those of us who are informed skeptics is appreciated. The more we all know, John, the more we all know...
Reggie: Indeed. A huge flaw in the application of the 2009 MA case is that there never has been a genuine scientific study that has concluded that wind energy saves a consequential amount of CO2.
Jim Wallace's petition before SCOTUS could, if it's heard, be the first scientifically sound argument to blow up the Major Questions debacle that has hamstrung climate realists since the 2009 MA decision. Keeping an eye on it. You may wish to do the sane.
This is an absolutely brilliant piece! I am going to save it for future reference. But the strategies and tactics John outlines here show that these loony and dangerous notionss can be countered legally.
I reacted on "defeating manufactured fear" .
Religious people say: "the future is in God's hands" Which is (translated for atheistst) "we don''t know the future (and are not responsible either) . Religious people say: we work "for the glory of God . Translation: we do our very best in the public interest. My observation: God has been replaced by Mother Earth. This has severe consequences: 1. post mortal reckoning taking place on earth now hits our descendants 2. we become responsible for an unknown future (climate change) which creates fear 3. life depends on exploiting the earth but to stick the spade into your mother is a crime. This induces deep fear and guilt.
David: Anyone who says that "the future is in God's hands" is not a Judeo-Christian. Yes, God has been replaced by various atheistic idols — like mother earth... Still not sure why you are posting your comments under the wind lobbyists commentary...
I regard God as our notion of ignorance.
David: Not sure I understand what you are saying. And what does it have to do with wind and solar lobbyists — where you posted your comment?
I replied to "defeating manufactured fear"
If you go above (or below) your comments, you are in a different commentary.
Home rule cites, about 5,400 in the US including all the large ones, have charters that grant them more autonomy than non-charter cities. These links can tell you more:
Overview of ballot measures (including advisory elections)
https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_Measures_overview
Local Ballot Measures (includes info on non-binding advisory elections):
https://ballotpedia.org/Local_ballot_measure_elections_in_2022
Laws Governing Ballot Measures
https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_ballot_measures
Laws Governing Local Ballot Measures
https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_local_ballot_measures
==============================================
A primer (regarding binding elections)
Local Ballot Initiatives: How citizens change laws with clipboards, conversations, and campaigns
https://ballotpedia.org/Local_Ballot_Initiatives:_How_citizens_change_laws_with_clipboards,_conversations,_and_campaigns
Let me know if I can help further. Feel free to share with your list.
Barry Klein
2125 Hardy Street
Houston, Tx 77026
713-224-4144
Co-founder, Houston Property Rights Association
Barry: TY for that information. I perused it and did not see how it relates to the issue at hand. If a community wants to regulate a proposed wind project (e.g. require science-based setbacks) — but the state has a state law prohibiting them from dong that — exactly what are you advocating that they do?
John,
Petition drives to amend charters can be pretty easy in some states such as Texas. I have worked on several successful efforts. Let me know if you want details.
BACKGROUND:
Texas Scorecard: "Barry Klein: Property Rights Protector"
https://texasscorecard.com/citizen-profiles/barry-klein-property-rights-protector/.
Barry Klein
Co-founder, Houston Property Rights Association
713-224-4144
barrybusybee3@gmail.com
Barry: What "charters" are you talking about?
Thanks, John, for this focused summary as to how to fight the lobbying concerns in their quest to push this idiotic wind and solar charade upon the public. Interestingly, this brought to my attention the appeal of a recent DC Circuit decision to deny a suit brought by the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council and the FAIR Energy Foundation folks. As we've seen previously, courts are inclined to invoke "standing" rules to dismiss cases that attempt to unravel the noose that the EPA has around the public's neck. Tragic, imo. If the appeal (actually, a petition for writ of certiorari) of the DC decision goes before the SCOTUS, it would go a long way in presenting the actual science that would negate the EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding. The Major Questions issue would become a logical target, No doubt you are well aware of the facts in this case as they relate to 2009 finding that greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles contribute to climate change and thus endanger public health and welfare. Give me a break! CO2 as a pollutant? Poppycock! Extrapolating all of this EPA nonsense into the arena of power plants makes all of this green lobby nonsense much more hideous. Hopefully, you may wish to consider writing a focused piece about the illogic GAST data used by the EPA and the green lobbyists to worm their way into every aspect of the US citizen. The Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council and the FAIR Energy Foundation case needs to be brought to the attention of your readers/subscribers. Your efforts to keep those of us who are informed skeptics is appreciated. The more we all know, John, the more we all know...
Reggie: Indeed. A huge flaw in the application of the 2009 MA case is that there never has been a genuine scientific study that has concluded that wind energy saves a consequential amount of CO2.
Jim Wallace's petition before SCOTUS could, if it's heard, be the first scientifically sound argument to blow up the Major Questions debacle that has hamstrung climate realists since the 2009 MA decision. Keeping an eye on it. You may wish to do the sane.
What specifically is the title of the Petition?