Monthly Archives: September 2017


If I were a vicious anti-Trump derangement nut and global warming extremist terrified of Trump and his policies (as is Jennifer Lawrence and others) I'd be blaming the destructive intensity of Hurricane Maria squarely on him for the following reasons 1. Pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord to phase out the use of fossil fuels; 2. Rolling back Obama era EPA regulations on coal production and cutting CO2 emissions; and 3. Vigorously advancing toward his goal of making America energy independent and turning it into a fossil fuel hyperpower - NUMBER ONE in all areas of "dirty" energy production to supercharge the US economy.
If I were a Trump hating psycho I'd say that his pro-fossil fuel agenda isn't fooling nature; and that the increase in US CO2 emissions, and coal, oil and gas production since he took office, has had an effect on the weather and contributed to this hurricane season; that it's disrupted and effected the stability and delicate balance of the climate just enough to trigger the ferocity of this year's hurricane activity - making Harvey, Irma and especially Maria more intense and deadly than they would have been had Hillary won the election, or Obama (the man who lowered the rising seas) continued in office.  
Never mind that in 2015 when 195 mostly hypocritical nations signed the Paris Climate Accord (called a "fraud" by former NASA's James Hansen) mankind's consumption of fossil fuels hit an all time record (see); and that 2016 was most likely another record-setting year (the data isn't available yet) as third world "dirty industrialization" (China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, etc.) unstoppably moves huffing and puffing ahead gigantically increasing atmospheric CO2 emissions (see).
   In other words, if there's a link between human CO2 and Harvey, Irma and Maria (for which there is no evidence) Trump can't be blamed for it as he's a new comer on a world stage; where human industrial carbon output (despite Obama's and the EU's efforts to cut it) are rising with world demand, and the millions of indigent human beings needing the wealth created by fossil fuels to lift them out of poverty.
Now if the nutters aren't directly blaming Trump's climate policies for Harvey, Irama and especially Maria (which has devastated Puerto Rico) then it's his HEART that's the problem. With President Trump's approval rating rising in every poll because of his "leadership and compassion" in handling the disasters caused by Harvey and Irma on the mainland CNN this morning tried to rain on Trump's parade and show that in his response to Maria ravaged Puerto Rico he has been an unfeeling, cruel, heartless bastard and that this disaster is his Katrina thrice over.
Indeed, Chris Cuomo after hearing the hysterical unhinged rants of San Juan's incompetent mayor to the Trump administration on how desperate things are in her city concluded that Trump's response has been terribly short of what it should and could be; and that the problem is his heartlessness and lack of compassion and empathy; that he's not feeling the pain and suffering of Puerto Ricans enough; and that he needs to have his "heart broken" and humanized. Meaning what? That he had heart for the people of Texas and Florida where he's been roundly praised for his response to Harvey and Irma? But he's completely unfeeling toward Puerto Ricans, and that it's a racial thing - evidence that he's bigoted against Hispanics and couldn't care if they live or die?
But Puerto Rico's progressive Democratic governor begs to differ. Contrary to CNN and the brain broken Trump hate media, Governor Ricardo Rossello gives President Trump high marks for his "quick," proactive massive response to Maria. "The Trump Administration," said Rossello, " has given me everything I asked for; and has done everything POSSIBLE to help Puerto Rico." Indeed, the governor has said that Trump has pushed FEMA to its limits of what it can POSSIBLY do just now given the distribution problems caused by the storm; and that the ball now is in Congresses court "to come up with an aid and recovery package" for the island. In other words, Trump's response to Maria has been as competent and praiseworthy as was his response to Harvey and Irma in Texas and Florida. Unlike anti-Trump derangement nuts Rossello refuses to play politics with this disaster and fault the President for not doing the IMPOSSIBLE and make Maria look like Trump's Katrina. No. Maria isn't Trump's Katrina; it's the third in a series of bright shinning moments - signs of a great presidency in the making on its way to a second  term.
 In an interview with PBS Newshour this eveningRosselló thanked the Trump administration for their prompt response:
JOHN YANG: Governor, are you getting all the aid you need or getting it fast enough from the states?
GOV. RICARDO ROSSELLO: First of all, we are very grateful for the administration. They have responded quickly.
The president has been very attentive to the situation, personally calling me several times. FEMA and the FEMA director have been here in Puerto Rico twice. As a matter of fact, they were here with us today, making sure that all the resources in FEMA were working in conjunction with the central government.
We have been working together. We have been getting results. The magnitude of this catastrophe is enormous. This is going to take a lot of help, a lot of collaboration. So,  my call is to congressmen and congresswomen to take action quickly and conclusively with an aid package for Puerto Rico.
We are in the midst of potentially having a humanitarian crisis here in Puerto Rico which would translate to a humanitarian crisis in the United States. So, I call upon Congress to take action immediately. You know, Puerto Ricans are proud U.S. citizens.
On Saturday, the Associated Press reported:
Rossello and other officials praised the federal government for planning its response in detail before the storm hit, a contrast with what Puerto Rico has long seen as the neglect of 3.4 million Americans living in a territory without a vote in Congress or the electoral college.
"This is the first time we get this type of federal coordination," said Resident Commission Jenniffer Gonzalez, Puerto Rico's non-voting representative in Washington.
This is from American Maritime Officers Currents,
CNBC, CBS reports reveal the truth about relief supplies in Puerto Rico: The much-needed cargo was delivered by Jones Act carriers long before Wednesday, and ongoing service has brought even more; distribution over land by truck is the actual obstacle separating Americans from crucial supplies.

In a televised report available on the CNBC website, the network reported thousands of containers are stranded in port in Puerto Rico awaiting distribution to island residents. This much-needed cargo was delivered by Jones Act carriers with dedicated service to Puerto Rico. Deliveries began as soon as the ports were opened to vessels last weekend and are continuing. 

A broadcast report by CBS News Correspondent David Begnaud circulated via Twitter with the following introduction is available through the link below: When @ricardorossello told us there was food water & medicine sitting in the port of Puerto Rico, we went looking. Here's what we found. # 





After the storm President Trump quickly moved tens and thousands of tons of food, water and medical supplies to San Juan and other ports for distribution. But corrupt and incompetent mayors like San Juan's unhinged Carmen Cruz didn't make keeping access to Puerto Rico's ports a priority as the storm closed in. In a desperate attempt to hide her incompetence and keep her job Cruz is using the Trump Administration as a scapegoat for her failures - and is so extreme in her hatred of Trump that she won't attend FEMA meetings. Pathetic.


Action Jackson writes

Maria/Puerto Rico is no Katrina. Not by a long shot.

New Orleans has multiple ground routes into the city. That means recovery operations moves into the city at 40 to 60 miles per hour. ALL recovery operations supporting Puerto Rico’s recovery cover the last 1,100 miles via surface shipping moving at 20 miles per hour – max.

And once the recovery assets arrive in Puerto Rico they MUST flow through a single port to be off loaded.

The logistic movements into the two cities are totally different BEFORE the you break the bulk cargo containers down into truck/people sized loads.


Supplies from the U.S. sitting undistributed at ports in Puerto Rico.

But there's the impossible problem of impassible roads and the terrible dearth of trucks and drivers to distribute supplies caused by Maria. With good reason Puerto Rico's governor gave President Trump high marks for acting quickly in giving him "everything he asked for" and bringing tons of vital supplies to PR's ports ready for wide distribution when the means of delivery are available. By the time the President lands in San Juan next week much of this problem will be resolved; and with the world looking on seeing the President pointing to all the great good that's being done he will look like a hero saving the island and its people; and the malice and hatred of the anti-Trump media once again will be defeated.




The destroy Trump media's attempt to turn Maria into Trump's Katrina by blaming him for not doing the impossible is not going to work especially with first hand accounts like the following by Puerto Rican born Colonel Michael Valle.

Speaking today exclusively and live from Puerto Rico, is Puerto Rican born and raised, Colonel Michael A. Valle (”Torch”), Commander, 101st Air and Space Operations Group, and Director of the Joint Air Component Coordination Element, 1st Air Force, responsible for Hurricane Maria relief efforts in the US commonwealth with a population of more than 3 million. Since the ‘apocalyptic’ Cat 4 storm tore into the spine of Puerto Rico on September 20, Col. Valle has been both duty and blood bound to help. 

Col. Valle is a firsthand witness of the US Department of Defense (DoD) response supporting FEMA in Puerto Rico, and as a Puerto Rican himself with family members living in the devastation, his passion for the people is second to none. “It’s just not true,” Col. Valle says of the major disconnect today between the perception of a lack of response from Washington verses what is really going on on the ground. “I have family here. My parents’ home is here. My uncles, aunts, cousins, are all here. As a Puerto Rican, I can tell you that the problem has nothing to do with the US military, FEMA, or the DoD.”
While Governor Rossello praised President Trump for the speed at which he acted in response to Maria, what is less known is the anticipatory naval measures he took to help the island in case the worst happened.
 This is provided by Navy Captain Jerry Hendrix in the following Q&A:

>>TH: So, it seems like everybody has blasted Trump administration’s response to the Puerto Rico crisis. Has that criticism been fair?

>>JH: No, I don’t think so. First of all, there was a fair amount of anticipatory action that is not being recognized. Amphibious ships, including the light amphibious carriers Kearsarge and Wasp and the amphibious landing ship dock Oak Hill were at sea and dispatched to Puerto Rico ahead of the hurricane’s impact.

>>These are large ships that have large flight decks to land and dispatch heavy-lift CH-53 helicopters to and from disaster sites. They also have big well-decks — exposed surfaces that are lower than the fore and aft of the ship — from which large landing craft can be dispatched to shore carrying over 150 tons of water, food and other supplies on each trip. These are actually the ideal platforms for relief operations owing to their range of assets. The ships, due to their designs to support Marine amphibious landings in war zones, also have hospitals onboard to provide medical treatment on a large scale. That these ships were in the area should be viewed as a huge positive for the administration and the Department of Defense. . . .

>>Puerto Rico is an island that suffers from its position in the middle of the Caribbean and its physical separation from the U.S. Its roads were in disrepair and its electrical grid was antiquated prior to the hurricane. The island has also suffered for years from ineffective local government and rising local territorial debt.

>>The Navy used to operate a large Navy base there, Naval Station Roosevelt Roads. I spent six months on the island in 1993, but when the island’s population protested the presence of the training range at nearby Vieques Island, the Navy shuttered the base, taking $300 million a year out of the Puerto Rican economy.

>>If they still had that Navy base they’d be in better shape, but local politicos wanted it gone.



Jimmy Kimmel Applauds Susan Collins for ‘Putting People Ahead of Party’ With Graham-Cassidy Decision · Mediaite

Thank you @SenatorCollins for putting people ahead of party. We are all in your debt.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., participate in a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, Jan. 23, 2017, to announce the Patient Freedom Act of 2017, a possible GOP replacement bill for the Affordable Care Act. J. Scott Applewhite AP

It just gets worse and worse for brain-dead, pizza expert Democrat puppet/propagandist Jimmy Kimmel who is way out of his depth when it comes to the issue of healthcare reform and doesn't know his ass from his elbow. Not only is he for repealing and replacing  the collpsing Obamacare train wreck with single payer healthcare - which flopped seven times in California, and in 11 other states - but now he's laughably found a new healthcare hero in Maine's Liberal Republican Senator Susan Collins for opposing and dooming Graham-Cassidy before the September 30th budget reconciliation deadline. Why is it laughable? Because Jimmy it seems knows next to nothing about this woman he's so effusively praising. It seems that Jimmy is ignorant that Senator Collins along with her party was opposed to Obamacare from the start seeing what a disaster it would be; and seeing that she and the GOP were right she fought Obamacare every inch of the way wanting it repealed and replaced with most of her party. Indeed, Jimmy it appears doesn't know that Collins watching Obamacare collapsing of its own weight ironically, three days after Trump's inaugural, introduced with Senator Cassidy a comprehensive replacement plan for the ailing, failing program called "The Patient Freedom Act of 2017."


Indeed, what Jimmy Kimmel doesn't seem to know and wants to stay oblivious to is that Collins believes that her bill is the right one for America; and if Mitch McConnell were to replace Graham-Cassidy with Collins-Cassidy as the path forward that Susan Collins (who is considering running for governor of Maine see) unquestionably would vote for it as the right law for America; and Jimmy the puppet, taking his talking points from Chuck Schumer, would do a 180 on Collins demonizing and excoriating her and her bill (like he's done to Cassidy and Graham and their bill) as a heartless, right-wing, deceiving bitch who wants to deny health insurance to millions of Americans and those with preexisting conditions (which would be a blatant lie as it was with Cassidy). Jimmy would say apologetically to his dumb, stupid addle brained audience that he doesn't understand what happened to Collins; that he was fooled into believing she was a brave and sensible Senator who put people above political self-interest and party politics when all the time she was scheming to replace Graham-Cassidy with her own bill because she wants to be Maine's governor. Indeed, Jimmy would be repeating word for word what puppet master Chuck Schumer said in opposition to Collins-Cassidy back in January - without first reading the bill (see) :

“It is nearly impossible to keep the benefits of the Affordable Care Act without keeping the whole thing. Ultimately, this proposal [Collins-Cassidy] is an empty facade that would create chaos – not care – for millions of Americans (see).”


To be sure, that evening we'd hear Jimmy the puppet on his unfunny show referring to Collins-Cassidy as the "CHAOS BILL;" and Collins and Cassidy as "SENATORS CHAOS" wanting to mindlessly smash Obamacare to bits, destabilize the US healthcare system, and deprive insurance or essential life saving benefits to millions. Jimmy would say 'If you think Graham-Cassidy was bad Collins-Cassidy is much, much worse and would hurt even more people.' In other words, though hypocrite Jimmy wants to repeal and replace Obamacare with single payer believing it's the ultimate solution for insuring everyone while cutting costs (which it wouldn't do) Obamacare being the next best thing should stay in place pretty much as it is making little adjustments and cosmetic changes that would be spun as profound system saving reforms while it continues to disintegrate.


Indeed, Obamacare for Jimmy though not ideal at best is a means to the greater end of totalitarian, single payer, centralized government one size fits all control; whereas Collins-Cassidy like Graham-Cassidy (two forms of federalism) moving in the opposite direction would return more power and money to the states, letting them decide what healthcare systems best suits their people. Indeed, if Graham-Cassidy is replaced by Collins-Cassidy Jimmy following Schumer will call it Trumpcare, say that it's racist, sexist and evil as hell; and warn us that if it replaces Obamacare tens and thousands of Americans would die in the streets untreated for sickness and disease from lacking health insurance. This is what this putz would do to Susan Collins the woman he's now praising (along with John McCain) as a Republican hero.







“Somehow Japan and England and Canada and Germany, France, they all [with single payer socialized medical systems] figured health care out...... "
Late night leftist La La Land millionaire healthcare clown Jimmy Kimmel admitting his utter stupidity and ignorance on the issue of healthcare reform joked on his show that he's "an expert on eating pizza, not healthcare." And so he clownishly is. For who but an unfunny, know nothing, leftist dope and resident of LA would point to single payer countries like Canada, England and France as models for the USA when single payer badly flopped in Jimmy's own state of California - flopped not once, not twice, not thrice, but a total of SEVEN times over the last 25 years (see). 25 years and 7 attempts at single payer and no leftist mastermind or genius (who makes Jimmy look like spit) can figure out how to make it work. Why? Because of the prohibitive, staggering, economy crushing costs. But moronic, unfunny, pizza expert Jimmy, who lectures the GOP, you and me and physicians like Senator Cassidy on healthcare (and calls him a liar when he clearly distorts what he says see) wants Obamacare repealed like Donald Trump; but stupidly replaced with unworkable single payer as the national system for America.
Heck, only a ridiculous unfunny asinine klutz would want for 320 million Americans what can't work for the 40 million folks of America's largest state. Indeed, California's latest and 7th stab at single payer, Senate Bill 562 (opposed by progressive Democratic Governor Jerry Brown) had an unfinancable price tag of $400 billion in start-up costs, and another $200 billion to sustain it annually (this would increase over time see). Think about it: in the first two years single payer would cost California's over burdened tax payers $600 billion (more than three times the state budget of $185 billion), and $200 billion every year thereafter.
Think about it: with a population of 40 million and roughly 13.6 million taxpayers the costs for California single payer would be (if evenly spread) $30,000 per tax payer in the first year, and $15,000 every year in perpetuity for annual costs. If SB 562 was passed and signed into law the next bill would be for the largest tax hike of any state in US history; this would effectively drive millions of citizens and thousands of businesses (but not rich clown Jimmy) out of the state leaving it a wreck like a San Andreas earthquake. In other words, the cure of single payer for California is worse than the disease of millions lacking health insurance (who get healthcare anyway); for the impact on California's economy (with so much money flowing to Sacramento away from consumers and the private sector) would be a jobs killing, depression causing disaster - for everyone but rich, unfunny, pizza men like Jimmy. And this is why Governor Brown refused to endorse the bill; and why it was shelved in the State Assembly following SB 840, 810, 2123 and other failed single payer bills over the years.
Failed Single Payer Green Mountain Care in deep blue Democrat Vermont.
But California, which is batting 0-7 on single payer, isn't alone in this fiasco; single payer has met with the same fate in 11 other states: Vermont, New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, Colorado, Hawaii and Montana (see). In other words, the allegedly greatest, best, most ethical and moral health insurance system ever devised by man is batting 0-18 in the United States - striking out a total of 11 times in 11 states and 7 times in the Golden State. No one in any of these 12 states, despite all of their brainpower, expertise (and the example of single payer countries like Canada, Great Britain, Sweden, France, Spain and Australia, etc.), could figure out how to make it affordable for their citizens. And if we follow clowns like ignorant, stupid single payer Jimmy it's the Republican's fault, or the insurers or Big Pharma or Fox News. The problem is never with single payer itself which is on the brink of collapse in Great Britain - rated as the number 1 healthcare system in the world (see and see).

Think about it: "The states," as Supreme Court Justice Lewis Brandeis said, "are the laboratories of democracy." If single payer can't be made to work in any one of 12 states (and 7 times in our largest state) how could it work  border to border, coast to coast for the nation unless we massively raise federal taxes to pay for this monstrosity, and greatly damage the national economy and struggling middle class? Is it any wonder Schumer and Pelosi remain non-committal on single payer (see and see)? They know it's a loser politically that could severely damage Democrat chances of winning back the Congress and White House. Fixing Obamacare is politically safer than centralized socialized medicine which the public didn't want before Obamacare became law (and didn't want Obamacare either), and don't want especially now. 
But the Jimmy Kimmels of the country are dauntless. Making the typical tired ignorant argument that single payer works in other countries and can be made to work for us is just plain brain dead dumb. Not only does single payer not work well in many other countries (where they have rationing, scarcity, long waiting lines, higher taxes and government subsidies to make insurance and drugs affordable see and see), but huge differences in population, tax structure, military expenditures, debt load and unfunded liabilities are by themselves sound, sensible reasons why single payer is wrong for America nationally as it is for states individually.
Police battle rioters in broken, busted, bankrupt socialist Venezuela.
Indeed, America with the federal government $20 trillion in debt and with $107 trillion in unfunded liabilities ($27 trillion of which is Medicare) a one size fits all massive bureaucratic centralized government-run single payer system would break this nation completely (see). We'd end up like bankrupt, busted socialist Venezuela and Greece with blood, rioting and chaos in the streets - with everyone having health insurance but many unable to get healthcare when sick because the government is exhausted and broke (see and see).
No. The public is against socialized medicine. Given the enormous disgust and mistrust of the American people with Washington and the federal government - which has done massive harm to the "disappearing middle class" - the national mood is one of revolt, and against giving the government more power than it has over their lives and fortunes. Washington is way too powerful, spending way too much way beyond its means; it's mismanaging the nation's finances and future and been dysfunctional for years - and the trust is gone.
Indeed, the national mood is toward deregulation and decentralization with more money and power flowing back to the states from DC. And that's why despite what Jimmy Kimmel says (and many associations oppose) that Graham-Cassidy, a federalist approach to fixing our healthcare system, is in sync with the anti-Washington spirit of the times, and the needs of individual states to decide their own healthcare fate. If a state likes its Obamacare it can keep it; if it wants single payer it can have that too. It's a practical, down to earth (not perfect) approach for fixing our healthcare mess - made worse by seven years of Obamacare which even pizza clown Jimmy wants to replace, but with a single payer nationwide system from outer space.


"A huge impediment to solving the [global] climate crisis is Fox News," says Science Guy Bill Nye - who also accuses the network  of suffering from "psychological delusions" and feeding its audience "a steady diet of vitriol and paranoia.'
Dear Mr. Science Guy,
assuming that you're doomsday hysteria is justified and that there is a worsening, catastrophic "climate crisis" imperiling the planet caused by human industrial activity and CO2 emissions, how, for God's sake, is Fox News a "huge impediment" to resolving it? 
I mean get real! How, for example, is Fox to blame for the failure and flop of Europe's huge, costly, ten-year  experiment in renewable energy (wind, water and solar)? Heck, despite the EU spending up to $1 trillion of tax payers money (to subsidize the transition to a green energy future) how is Fox responsible for rising Euro CO2 emissions (see and see) and the soaring cost of Euro energy for consumers (increasing 63% in nine years see) when both were supposed to steadily fall? Who's responsible for Europe failing to become the model of a world saving, green energy economy to prevent Climageddon? In short, how is Fox to blame for Europe becoming a "green energy basket case" - a model to avoid?
And do tell me how is Fox to blame for the revolution taking place in third world developing states? How is it to blame for the "dirty," fossil fuel powered, CO2 "polluting" industrializing of China (see), India (see), Indonesia (see)    , Brazil (see) and other poor developing countries? How is Fox responsible for these four countries alone increasing CO2 emissions by 5 billion tons since 2005, while Europe decreased there's by 600 million tons making its reductions meaningless by comparison - negating what good it allegedly did? Did Fox cause the Industrial Revolution which these nations are understandably emulating as they lift millions of people out of poverty, illiteracy and misery like we in the West did long ago? I feel embarrassed even asking such questions.
And while I'm on the subject of the third world what does Fox have to do with America, Canada, Europe, Australia and Japan, etc. lacking the tens and trillions of dollars needed to transition the third world to green energy economies so they can stop their massively growing "dangerous carbon polluting" of the Earth (see)? Is it Fox's fault that America, Europe and Japan are drowning in fiscal debt to the tune of $45 trillion and can't afford this staggering transfer of wealth without massively raising taxes on working class people and greatly damaging their economies (see)?  
And please tell me what on Earth does Fox have to do with fossil fuels being the cheapest, most efficient, reliable and wealth creating form of energy known to man? They are a gift from God and Nature for the development of mankind fueling the greatest creative epoch in innovation and enterprise in history. Is it Fox's fault that wind, water and solar power (as we see in Europe) aren't competitive with coal, oil and gas, and perhaps won't be so for decades (see)? Is it Fox's fault that electric and hybrid vehicles are currently too expensive for common use? Does Fox set market prices favoring fossils over renewables? Does it ban the advertising of green cars on its network? Does it have that much power over markets? Is it that anti-green? You can't be stupid enough not to answer no. 
Indeed, Mr. Science Guy, what does Fox have to do with the global consumption of oil, gas and coal combined breaking all existing records in 2015 (see), and most likely surpassing that in 2016*? What does Fox have to do with more people in developing states electrifying their homes by coal-fired plants (see), and buying gas guzzling cars by the millions for the first time in their lives (see and see)? Is it any wonder that atmospheric CO2 reached the 410 ppm mark in March? And it's going to climb even higher with no help from Fox - as it makes the planet more fruitful and green a blessing to hungry and starving human beings (see).
*2016 did top 2015 as 2017 is predicted to top 2016 (see). 
Get real, Mr. Science Guy, what does Fox have to do with the Paris Accord becoming another worthless Kyoto, and with your impractical, ridiculous green energy utopianism? How is Fox to blame for alarmists like you having no feasible, practical, realistic fiscal, financial and economic solutions for the climate crisis you envision in your catastrophe obsessed brain? Really sir, who is it that's delusional with serious truth and reality problems living mentally in deep space light years from Earth?
The truth is this: If "delusional," "denialist,"  "anti-science" Fox  were to suddenly disappear from network TV nothing would change; you'd still lack an answer and concrete plan for preventing "Climageddon," or the "Venus Syndrome," or the "Sixth Extinction" - or whatever name you want to give to your apocalyptic fears.
Face the facts Mr. Science Guy: the global warming movement was doomed from the start. The vilifying of Fox, Breitbart, the Koch Brothers, Anthony Watts, Rush Limbaugh, conservative talk radio and thousands of skeptical internet sites like mine are scapegoats for the failure of your bankrupt cause to frighten mankind away from use of fossil fuels with visions of far off doom. Alarmists like you have tried every trick and scare tactic in the book to make mankind deathly afraid of CO2 (an invisible, beneficial trace gas and plant food) and nothing has worked. Instead of decarbonizing we have the runaway use of fossil fuels expanding the work of lifting all boats and millions of poor folks in third world crap holes. As another doomsday science guy (Guy McPherson) rightly says (see): in the climate wars between anti-industrial warmists and pro-industrial deniers 
And so it has as the evidence shows. Fossil fuel powered industrial capitalism roars head irreversibly spreading progress to the remotest and most primitive parts of the world; it's too powerful, unstoppable, there's nothing better to replace it. And until that changes, which seems a long ways off, all you can do to calm your fears, and find some peace of mind, is to hope that we "deniers" are right; and that you, your waning movement and hysterical doomsday climate "science" got fossil fuels and CO2 catastrophically wrong.  
All the best,
The most humane solution for saving the world is to kill Fox News and everyone over 60.



In the debate about climate change, and to advance their hysterical socialist agenda against fossil fuel powered industrial capitalism, AGW extremists like Al Gore, Bill Nye, Michael Mann, Jim Hansen and Stephen Hawking (who warns that Trump if not stopped will turn Earth into a hellish Venus) link without evidence the intensity and behavior of cyclones and hurricanes like Harvey and Irma to human CO2 emissions and global warming. But what they conveniently ignore and don't want the public to know is the truth about hurricanes and cyclones during periods of global cooling and semi-ice age conditions. That from the Little Ice Age of the 16th to the mid 19th century (which was very cold and global in scope with the oceans losing vast amounts of heat see) to the periods of 1880 -1910 and 1940-1975 (see) when rising global temperatures went into reverse and cooled, some of the most destructive hurricanes and cyclones in human history took place.  
Indeed, to start with, of the top ten deadliest storms known to man half happened during periods of global cooling. These five GLOBAL COOLING DISASTERS are as follows:
1.The Bhola Cyclone (the very worst ever), which hit East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) with Category 4 winds killing a staggering 500,000 people, occurred in 1970 - 30 years into the mid-20th century's 35 year cooling period (see).
2. The Haiphong Typhoon which hit Vietnam in 1881 and killed 300,000 people occurred 2 years into the 1880 - 1910 30 year cooling period (see).
3. The Calcutta Cyclone of 1737 which killed an estimated 300,000 people occurred 113 years before the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850 (see).
4. The Great Indian Cyclone of 1839 which also killed an estimated 300,000 people occurred 11 years before the end of the Little Ice Age (see).
5. Typhoon Nina of 1975 (the 4th deadliest tropical cyclone on record) which landed on mainland China and Taiwan  killing 229,000 people, occurred at the very end of the mid-20th century's global cooling period (see).
Similarly, of the top 12 deadliest hurricanes to hit the continental United States five occurred during periods of global cooling. These are as follows:
1. The Galveston Hurricane of 1900 (the deadliest in US history) which killed up to 12,000 people, occurred 20 years into the 1880 - 1910 30 year cooling period (see).
2. Hurricane Audrey of 1957 (the 6th deadliest storm in US history) hit the Texas/Louisiana border killing 416 17 years into the mid 20th century's global cooling period (see) .
3. The Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944 (a Cat 4 and the 7th deadliest storm in US history) made landfall in Virginia and worked its way up the East Coast hitting Long Island and Rhode Island killing between 300-400 people. This disaster occurred four years into the mid 20th century's global warming period (see).
4. Hurricane Camille of 1968 (a Cat 5 and the 8th worst storm in US history) hit the Mississippi region killing 256  29 years into the 35 year mid-century global cooling period (see).
5. Hurricane Agnes of 1972 (the 11th worst storm in US history) hit Pennsylvania killing 122 people 3 years before the end of the mid-20th century global cooling period (see).
But there's more, much more. Below is a list of 26 devastating hurricanes - 20 of which occurred during the Little Ice Age (over a period of 300 years) - that hit the US mainland, the Caribbean region and Central America each killing at least 1000 people:  

List of deadliest Atlantic hurricanes - Wikipedia (see)

Pre-HURDAT era


Hurricanes reported to have caused possibly or known over a thousand deaths of more. Please note that the number of deaths in some places are located in the "areas affected" column..


NameDates activeAreas affectedDeathsRefs
Straits of FloridaSeptember 5 16221,090
Cuba and FloridaOctober 16441,500
Martinique and GuadeloupAugust 14-15 16662,000
BarbadosSeptember 27 16941,000+
BahamasJuly 31 1715Bahamas, Florida Treasure Coast Hurricane of 17151,000– 2,500
MartiniqueAugust 5-7 17671,600
HavanaOctober 15 176843– 1,000
NewfoundlandAugust 29– September 9, 1775North Carolina, Virginia, Newfoundland4,000 – 4,163
Pointe-à-Pitre BaySeptember 5 17766,000+
The St. Lucia Hurricane of 1780June 13 1780Puerto Rico St. Lucia4,000-5,000
The Savanna-la-Mar Hurricane of 1780October 1-5 17803,000
San CalixtoOctober 9–20, 1780Lesser Antilles, Puerto Rico, Hispaniola, Bermuda27,501+
Solano's HurricaneOctober 18-21 1780Gulf of Mexico2,000
Florida1781                                    2,000+
Central Atlantic Hurricane of 1782September 16 1782destroyed Admiral Thomas Graves fleet3,000+
Great Cuba Hurricane of 1791June 21-22 17913,000
Martinique and DominicaAugust 25 18133,000+
Hurricane Santa Ana of 1825July 26-27 1825Caribbean and Puerto Rico1,300+
Great Caribbean-Louisiana Hurricane of 1831August 10-17Barbados, St. Vincent, Haiti, Cuba Louisiana2,500 
Sea Islands August 15 – September 2, 1893 Category 3 hurricane 120 mph (195 km/h) 954 hPa (28.17 inHg) Georgia, South Carolina $1 million* 1,000–2,000 deaths.
Chenier Caminanda September 27 – October 5, 1893 Category 4 hurricane 135 mph (215 km/h) 948 hPa (27.99 inHg) Yucatán Peninsula, Louisiana, Mississippi $5 million* 1,000–2,000 deaths.
San Ciriaco August 3 – September 4, 1899 Category 4 hurricane 150 mph (240 km/h) 930 hPa (27.46 inHg) Lesser Antilles, Puerto Rico, Eastern United States $20 million* 3,433 deaths.
Monterrey August 20–28, 1909 Category 3 hurricane 120 mph (195 km/h) 955 hPa (28.20 inHg) Greater Antilles, Mexico $50 million* 4000 deaths.
Flora September 26 – October 12, 1963 Category 4 hurricane 145 mph (230 km/h) 940 hPa (27.76 inHg) The Caribbean, Florida $529 million* 7,193 deaths. 
Fifi-Orlene September 14–24, 1974 Category 2 hurricane 110 mph (180 km/h) 971 hPa (28.67 inHg) Jamaica, Central America, Mexico $1.8 billion* 8,000 deaths.
*The damages costs listed aren't adjusted for inflation.
But I'm not done. Below is a list compiled by the Weather Underground of the 35 (actually 37) deadliest tropical cyclones in recorded history. You will notice that 20 of the 37 (55%) occurred during periods of global cooling.

The 35 Deadliest Tropical Cyclones in World History

RankName / Areas of Largest LossYearOcean AreaDeaths
1.Great Bhola Cyclone, Bangladesh1970 (Nov 12)Bay of Bengal500,000
2.Hooghly River Cyclone, India and Bangladesh1737Bay of Bengal300,000
3.Haiphong Typhoon, Vietnam1881West Pacific300,000
4.Coringa, India1839Bay of Bengal300,000
5.Backerganj Cyclone, Bangladesh1584Bay of Bengal200,000
6.Great Backerganj Cyclone, Bangladesh1876Bay of Bengal200,000
7.Chittagong, Bangladesh1897Bay of Bengal175,000
8.Super Typhoon Nina, China1975 (Aug 5)West Pacific171,000
9.Cyclone 02B, Bangladesh1991 (May 5)Bay of Bengal138,866
10.Cyclone Nargis, Myanmar2008 (May 3)Bay of Bengal138,366
11.Swatlow, China1922 (Jul 27)West Pacific100,000
12.Great Bombay Cyclone, India1882Arabian Sea100,000
13.Hakata Bay Typhoon, Japan1281West Pacific65,000
14.Bangladesh1942 (Oct 14)Bay of Bengal61,000
15.India1935Bay of Bengal60,000
16.Calcutta, India1864Bay of Bengal60,000
17.Barisal, Bangladesh1822Bay of Bengal50,000
18.Sunderbans coast, Bangladesh1699Bay of Bengal50,000
19.India1833Bay of Bengal50,000
20.India1854Bay of Bengal50,000
21.Wenchou, China1912 (Aug)West Pacific50,000
22.Bengal Cyclone, Calcutta, India1942Bay of Bengal40,000
23.Bangladesh1912Bay of Bengal40,000
24.Bangladesh1919Bay of Bengal40,000
25.Canton, China1862West Pacific37,000
26.Bangladesh1965 (May 11)Bay of Bengal36,000
27.Backerganj (Barisal), Bangladesh1767Bay of Bengal30,000
28.Barisal, Bangladesh1831Bay of Bengal22,000
29.Great Hurricane, Lesser Antilles Islands1780Atlantic22,000
30.Chittagong, Bangladesh1963 (May 28)Bay of Bengal22,000
31.Great Coringa Cyclone, India1789Bay of Bengal20,000
32.Nagasaki Typhoon, Japan1828Western Pacific15,000
33.Urir, Bangladesh1985 (May 28)Bay of Bengal15,000
 tr33.Tacloban, PhilippinesNovember 1912Western Pacific15,000
35.Devi Taluk, SE India1977 (Nov 12)Bay of Bengal14,204
36.Bangladesh1965 (May 31)Bay of Bengal12,047
So what are we to conclude from the evidence of so many terribly destructive cyclones and hurricanes during little ice ages and periods of falling global temperatures? That hurricanes now are not stronger than in the past. And that those who differ saying that hurricanes Harvey and Irma are "unprecedented," that they are "what man-caused climate change looks like," and that much, much worse is coming if we don't wisen up (and spend trillions to transition to a green energy future) are speaking utter nonsense making fools of themselves and a mockery of science.

Extremely Intense Hurricanes: Revisiting Webster et al. (2005) after 10 Years: Journal of Climate: Vol 28, No 19 






Why is it that President Trump is ignoring the dire warnings coming from climate scientists, green politicians and save the Earth activists and journalists the world over linking devastating hurricanes Harvey and Irma to rising CO2 inducing fossil fuel consumption which hit an all time high in 2016? Is it because his economy boosting, pro-middle class, capitalist agenda to turn America into a fossil fuel hyperpower is recklessly making him deaf, dumb and blind to the evidence of science that CO2 levels now at 410 ppm is disruptingly and dangerously high? Is he simply stuck on the stupid idea that catastrophic anthropogenic climate change and global warming is a fake science hoax devised by the enemies of industrial capitalism? Those progressives who want to move the world to a centralized socialist economic and energy model of redistributing wealth from rich to poor countries? And to replace fossil fuels with green, clean, safer but more costly, less efficient and reliable renewables (see) ? Is that it?

Behold the Great Beast of the 6th Extinction!/sarc

Indeed, is Trump just simply an irresponsible, reckless, menacing anti-science freak let loose on the world stage contributing and leading the way to humanity's doom and extinction as some like mastermind cosmologist Stephen Hawking hysterically warn? I don't believe so for a second. I don't believe that in Trump's refusing to believe in the linkage between Harvey and Irma and human activity in the massive, growing, wealth creating use of fossil fuels (especially in poor developing third world states) he is ignoring the facts of climate science. I am certain, and the facts as you will see prove me right, that Trump sees the science, the real science: the raw empirical data gathered by meteorologists and weather historians on hurricane and cyclone activity going back over a century; and that he has solid, irrefutable proof that those who accuse him of being a dangerous, science denying cretin and ignoramus, and find or theorize a nexus between extreme weather events and anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 are either liars or fools.


What are the facts the President sees that makes him so confident that wealthy climate activists like Al Gore and Leonardo Di Caprio were innocent of influencing Harvey, Irma and other powerful storms with their polluting, fuel burning flights across the world? These are the facts straight and simple taken from scientists and weather historians:

Though a guilty Al Gore may think that he's partly responsible for Harvey and Irma, he is wrong.

Beginning in 1910 on a timescale of 107 years divided into two periods of 53 years (1910 to 1963 and 1964 to 2017) there was a significant increase (see chart above) in anthropogenic (man caused) CO2 emissions of 119* parts per million (ppm); and, at the same time, there was a dramatic decrease in devastating hurricane activity hitting the US (see chart below). Indeed, while 1910-1963 saw 40 ppm of man caused CO2 added to the Earth's minutely warming atmosphere there was a total of 12 Category 4-5 hurricanes making landfall on the US . And while 1964-2017 saw an increase 79 ppm of man caused CO2 there was a total of only 6 Category 4-5 hurricanes hitting this country. In other words, there was nearly a doubling or 100% increase of CO2 emissions in the second period over the first while Category 4-5 hurricane activity was cut by half or 100%. That is a huge, dramatic drop and shouldn't have happened according climate change or anthropogenic global warming science. 

*Scientists tell us that currently man is increasing the level of atmospheric CO2 by 2 ppm per year. But in the earlier days of the 20th century when so little of the world was industrialized our CO2 output could not have been more than 1/2 ppm per year.

It's all about system change to socialism, not climate change  (see and see).

Now as there are three other categories of hurricanes (1, 2 and 3) the drop that President Trump is seeing in the Cat 4s and 5s isn't limited to them. For during that same period of 107 years there was a total of 47 Category 3 hurricanes that hit the US: 27 during the first period and 20 during the second totaling a 25% reduction.  

Now when these 47 Cat 3 hurricanes are added to the total number of destructive storms it gives us 39 Cat 3, 4 and 5 hurricanes during the first 53 years when there was less atmospheric CO2 verses 26 of these hurricanes during the last 53 years when there was more CO2. That amounts to an overall 33% drop in the three worst types of hurricanes - pretty substantial.

But the pattern that the President sees for the Cat 3,4 and 5 hurricanes he also sees for the least damaging: Cat 1 and 2. Now starting with Cat 2, during the 107 year period there was a total of 43 of these storms; that breaks down to 28 during 1910 - 1963, and 15 during the last period. That's a huge drop of 57%.

And lastly, for the Cat 1 hurricanes - the most common, numerous and least destructive of all - the total number of these for the entire 107 years was 62. This breaks down to 37 during the first period, and 25 for the last period, showing a 33% drop. Not too shabby.

Now, of course, what is true for each of the five categories of hurricanes taken separately is true of them taken together in combination. For the total number of hurricanes (categories 1-5) for the entire 107 year period is 169; that breaks down to a 104 for the first 53 years and 65 for the second. In other words, in the period that we're in (where atmospheric CO2 is more abundant) there's been a 63% decline in overall hurricane activity over the previous period - a huge drop.

The above are the facts as are known to Donald Trump and his science advisers. The fact that despite growing fossil fuel powered industrialization over that last 107 years there has been a steady decline in hurricanes of all categories hitting the U.S.. Indeed, Trump sees that this decline is most significant in the two most destructive categories of hurricanes (4-5) which run contrary to predictions that these would exponentially increase over time. One needs to recall the failed predictions in the wake of Hurricane Katrina of a decade of horrific catastrophes pounding the U.S. and Florida when there was a record 11 year drought instead. Indeed, so far 17 years into the 21st century we have had uncharacteristically mild hurricane conditions.

So on the basis of historical and scientific evidence (and catastrophically failed predictions) President Trump does well to ignore the desperate, hysterical cries and name calling of apocalyptic, end of the world messianic lunatics to reverse course and build on the ignorant, growth killing, climate change agenda of his ignorant and misguided predecessor. Wisely Trump will continue to dismantle that agenda that needlessly cost us billions in jobs and growth as he rightly denies any trace of human footprints in Harvey and Irma, and rebuilds America's economy, infrastructure and energy sector.

National Hurricane Center / Tropical Prediction Center

Chronological List of All Hurricanes which Affected the Continental United States: 1851-2004.

1851JunTX, C11977 mb80-----
1851AugFL, NW3; GA, 13960100“Great Middle Florida”
1852AugFL, SW1197780-----
1852AugAL, 3; MS, 3; LA, 2; FL, NW13961100“Great Mobile”
1852SepFL, SW1198570-----
1852OctFL, NW2; GA, 1296990“Middle Florida”
1853Oct *GA, 1196570-----
1854JunTX, S1198570-----
1854SepGA, 3; SC, 2; FL, NE13950100“Great Carolina”
1854SepTX, C2296990“Matagorda”
1855SepLA, 3; MS, 33950110“Middle Gulf Shore”
1856AugLA, 44934130“Last Island”
1856AugFL, NW2; AL, 1; GA, 1296990“Southeastern States”
1857Sep &NC, 1196180-----
1858SepNY, 1; CT, 1; RI, 1; MA, 1197680“New England”
1859SepAL, 1; FL, NW1198570-----
1860AugLA, 3; MS, 3; AL, 23950110-----
1860SepLA, 2; MS, 2; AL, 1296990-----
1860OctLA, 2296990-----
1861Aug *FL, SW1197070“Key West”
1861SepNC, 1198570“Equinoctial”
1861NovNC, 1198570“Expedition”
1865SepLA, 2; TX, N1296990“Sabine River-Lake Calcasieu”
1865OctFL, SW2; FL, SE1296990-----
1866JulTX, C2296990-----
1867JunSC, 1198570-----
1867OctLA, 2; TX, S1, N1; FL, NW1296990“Galveston”
1869AugTX, C2296990“Lower Texas Coast”
1869SepLA, 1198570-----
1869SepRI, 3; MA, 3; NY, 1; CT, 13963100“Eastern New England”
1869Oct &ME, 2; MA, 1296590“Saxby’s Gale”
1870JulAL, 1198570“Mobile”
1870Oct *FL, SW1, SE1197070“Twin Key West (I)”
1870OctFL, SW1197780“Twin Key West (II)”
1871AugFL, SE3, NE1, NW13955100-----
1871AugFL, SE2, NE1296590-----
1871SepFL, NW1198570-----
1873SepFL, NW1198570-----
1873OctFL, SW3, SE2, NE13959100-----
1874SepFL, NW1; SC, 1; NC, 1198570-----
1875SepTX, C3, S23960100-----
1876SepNC, 1; VA, 1198080-----
1876OctFL, SW2, SE1297390-----
1877SepLA, 1; FL, NW1198570-----
1877OctFL, NW3; GA, 13960100-----
1878SepFL, SW2, NE1; SC, 1; GA, 1297090-----
1878OctNC, 2; VA, 1; MD, 1; DE, 1; NJ, 1; PA, 1296390-----
1879AugNC, 3; VA, 23971100-----
1879AugTX, N2; LA, 2296490-----
1879SepLA, 33950110-----
1880Aug #TX, S33931110-----
1880AugFL, SE2, NE1, NW1297290-----
1880SepNC, 1198770-----
1880OctFL, NW1198570-----
1881AugGA, 2; SC, 1297090-----
1881SepNC, 2297590-----
1882SepFL, NW3; AL, 13949100-----
1882SepLA, 2; TX, N1296990-----
1882OctFL, NW1198570-----
1883SepNC, 2; SC, 1296590-----
1885AugSC, 3; NC, 2; GA, 1; FL, NE13953100-----
1886JunTX, N2; LA, 2297385-----
1886JunFL, NW2; GA, 1297385-----
1886JunFL, NW2297385-----
1886JulFL, NW1198570-----
1886AugTX, C44925135“Indianola”
1886Sep #TX, S1, C1197380-----
1886OctLA, 3; TX, N23955105-----
1887JulFL, NW1198175-----
1887Aug *NC, 1194665-----
1887SepTX, S2297385-----
1887OctLA, 1198175-----
1888JunTX, C1198570-----
1888AugFL, SE3, SW1; LA23945110-----
1888Sep &MA, TSTS98555-----
1888OctFL, NW2, NE1297095-----
1889SepLA, 1198570-----
1891JulTX, C1, N1197780-----
1891AugFL, SE1198570-----
1893AugNY, 1; VA, 1198675“Midnight Storm”
1893AugGA, 3; SC, 3; NC, 1; FL, NE13954100“Sea Islands”
1893SepLA, 2297385-----
1893OctLA, 4; MS, 2; AL, 24948115“Chenier Caminanda”
1893OctSC, 3; NC, 2; VA, 13955105-----
1894SepFL, SW2, NE1; SC, 1; VA, 1297590-----
1894OctFL, NW3; GA, 1; NY, 1; RI, 13955105-----
1895Aug #TX, S1197365-----
1896JulFL, NW2297385-----
1896SepRI, 1; MA, 1198570-----
1896SepFL, NW3, NE3; GA, 2; SC, 1; NC, 1; VA, 13960110-----
1897SepLA, 1; TX, N1198175-----
1898AugFL, NW1198570-----
1898AugGA, 1; SC, 1198075-----
1898OctGA, 4; FL, NE24938115-----
1899AugFL, NW2297985-----
1899AugNC, 33945105-----
1899OctNC, 2; SC, 2295595-----
1900SepTX, N44936125“Galveston”
1901JulNC, 1198370-----
1901AugLA, 1; MS, 1; AL, 1197380-----
1903SepFL, SE1, NW1197680-----
1903SepNJ, 1; DE, 1199070-----
1904SepSC, 1198570-----
1904OctFL, SE1198570-----
1906JunFL, SW1, SE1197975-----
1906SepSC, 1; NC, 1197780-----
1906SepMS, 2; AL, 2; FL, NW2; LA, 1295895-----
1906OctFL, SW3, SE33953105-----
1908May &NC, TSTS98955-----
1908JulNC, 1198570-----
1909JunTX, S2297285-----
1909JulTX, N33959100“Velasco”
1909Aug #TX, S1195565-----
1909SepLA, 3; MS, 23952105“Grand Isle”
1909OctFL, SW3, SE33957100-----
1910SepTX, S2296595-----
1910OctFL, SW2295595-----
1911AugFL, NW1; AL,1198570-----
1911AugSC, 2; GA, 1297285-----
1912SepAL, 1; FL, NW1198865-----
1912OctTX, S2297385-----
1913JunTX, S1198865-----
1913SepNC, 1197675-----
1913OctSC, 1198965-----
1915AugTX, N44945----“Galveston”
1915SepFL, NW11988---------
1915SepLA, 44931----“New Orleans”
1916JulMS, 3; AL, 33948---------
1916JulMA, 11--------------
1916JulSC, 11980---------
1916AugTX, S33948---------
1916OctAL, 2; FL, NW22972---------
1916NovFL, SW11--------------
1917SepFL, NW33958---------
1918AugLA, 33955---------
1919SepFL, SW4; TX, S44927---------
1920SepLA, 22975---------
1920SepNC, 11--------------
1921JunTX, C22979---------
1921OctFL, SW3, NE23952----“Tampa Bay”
1923OctLA, 11985---------
1924SepFL, NW11985---------
1924OctFL, SW11980---------
1925No-DeFL, SW11--------------
1926JulFL, NE22967---------
1926AugLA, 33955---------
1926SepFL, SE4, SW3, NW3; AL, 34935----“Great Miami”
1928AugFL, SE22--------------
1928SepFL, SE4, NE2; GA, 1; SC, 14929----“Lake Okeechobee”
1929JunTX, C11982---------
1929SepFL, SE3, NW23948---------
1932AugTX, N44941----“Freeport”
1932SepAL, 11979---------
1933AugTX, S2; FL, SE12975---------
1933AugNC, 2; VA, 22971---------
1933SepTX, S33949---------
1933SepFL, SE33948---------
1933SepNC, 33957---------
1934JunLA, 33962---------
1934JulTX, S22975---------
1935SepFL, SW5, NW25892----“Labor Day”
1935NovFL, SE22973---------
1936JunTX, S11987---------
1936JulFL, NW33964---------
1936SepNC, 22--------------
1938AugLA, 11985---------
1938SepNY, 3; CT, 3; RI, 3; MA, 33946----“New England”
1939AugFL, SE1, NW11985---------
1940AugTX, N2; LA, 22972---------
1940AugGA, 2; SC, 22970---------
1941SepTX, N33958---------
1941OctFL, SE2, SW2, NW22975---------
1942AugTX, N11992---------
1942AugTX, C33950---------
1943JulTX, N22969---------
1944AugNC, 11990---------
1944SepNC, 3; VA, 3; NY, 3; CT, 3; RI, 3; MA, 23947---------
1944OctFL, SW3, NE23962---------
1945JunFL, NW11985---------
1945AugTX, C22967---------
1945SepFL, SE33951---------
1946OctFL, SW11980---------
1947AugTX, N11992---------
1947SepFL, SE4, SW2; MS, 3; LA, 34940---------
1947OctGA, 2; SC, 2; FL, SE12974---------
1948SepLA, 11987---------
1948SepFL, SW3, SE23963---------
1948OctFL, SE22975---------
1949Aug *NC, 11980---------
1949AugFL, SE33954---------
1949OctTX, N22972---------
1950AugAL, 11980----Baker
1950SepFL, NW33958----Easy
1950OctFL, SE33955----King
1952AugSC, 11985----Able
1953AugNC, 11987----Barbara
1953SepME, 11---------Carol
1953SepFL, NW11985----Florence
1954AugNY, 3; CT, 3; RI, 3; NC, 23960----Carol
1954SepMA, 3; ME, 13954----Edna
1954OctSC, 4; NC, 4; MD, 24938----Hazel
1955AugNC, 3; VA, 13962----Connie
1955AugNC, 11987----Diane
1955SepNC, 33960----Ione
1956SepLA, 2; FL, NW12975----Flossy
1957JunTX, N4; LA, 44945----Audrey
1959JulSC, 11993----Cindy
1959JulTX, N11984----Debra
1959SepSC, 33950----Gracie
1960SepFL, SW4; NC, 3; NY, 3; FL, NE2, CT, 2;4930----Donna
1960SepMS, 11981----Ethel
1961SepTX, C44931----Carla
1963SepTX, N11996----Cindy
1964AugFL, SE22968----Cleo
1964SepFL, NE22966----Dora
1964OctLA, 33950----Hilda
1964OctFL, SW2, SE22974----Isbell
1965SepFL, SE3; LA, 33948----Betsy
1966JunFL, NW22982----Alma
1966OctFL, SW11983----Inez
1967SepTX, S33950----Beulah
1968OctFL, NW2, NE12977----Gladys
1969AugLA, 5; MS, 55909----Camille
1969SepME, 11980----Gerda
1970AugTX, S33945----Celia
1971SepLA, 22978----Edith
1971SepTX, C11979----Fern
1971SepNC, 11995----Ginger
1972JunFL, NW1; NY, 1; CT, 11980----Agnes
1974SepLA, 33952----Carmen
1975SepFL, NW33955----Eloise
1976AugNY, 11980----Belle
1977SepLA, 11995----Babe
1979JulLA, 11986----Bob
1979SepFL, SE2, NE2; GA, 2; SC, 22970----David
1979SepAL, 3; MS, 33946----Frederic
1980AugTX, S33945100Allen
1983AugTX, N33962100Alicia
1984Sep *NC, 33949100Diana
1985JulSC, 11100265Bob
1985AugLA, 1198780Danny
1985SepAL, 3; MS, 3; FL, NW33959100Elena
1985SepNC, 3; NY,3; CT,2; NH,2; ME,1394290Gloria
1985OctLA, 1197175Juan
1985NovFL, NW2296785Kate
1986JunTX, N1199075Bonnie
1986AugNC, 1199065Charley
1987OctFL, SW1199365Floyd
1988SepLA, 1198470Florence
1989AugTX, N1198670Chantal
1989SepSC, 44934120Hugo
1989OctTX, N1198375Jerry
1991AugRI, 2; MA, 2; NY, 2; CT, 2296290Bob
1992AugFL, SE5, SW4; LA, 35922145Andrew
1993Aug *NC, 33960100Emily
1995AugFL, NW2, SE1297385Erin
1995OctFL, NW33942100Opal
1996JulNC, 2297490Bertha
1996SepNC, 33954100Fran
1997JulLA, 1; AL, 1198470Danny
1998AugNC, 2296495Bonnie
1998SepFL, NW1198770Earl
1998SepFL, SW2; MS, 2296490Georges
1999AugTX, S33951100Bret
1999SepNC, 2295690Floyd
1999OctFL, SW1198770Irene
2002OctLA, 1196380Lili
2003JulTX, C1197980Claudette
2003SepNC, 2; VA, 1295790Isabel
2004Aug *NC, 1197270Alex
2004AugFL, SW4, SE1, NE1; SC,1; NC,14941130Charley
2004AugSC, 1198565Gaston
2004SepFL, SE2, SW1296090Frances
2004SepAL, 3; FL, NW33946105Ivan
2004SepFL, SE3, SW1, NW13950105Jeanne
  2005  Aug   Cent FL, LA,      3                                    125          Katrina 2005  Oct         FL                 3                                    110          Wilma 2016  Oct         FL                 1                                    75           Matthew 2017  Aug        TX                 4                                   156          Harvey  2017 Sept         FL                4                                                   Irma




Graph showing the number of cyclones per year since 1970

It appears that the continental US is not the only great land mass prone to cyclones and hurricanes that have shown a decline in this activity over the decades. This has also happened to Australia over the last 46 years. Indeed. the bar chart above shows that the total number of cyclones decreased to the mid-1980s and remained nearly stable since - which defies AGW predictions of increasing cyclonic activity.
However, the first decade of the 21st century showed a precipitous decline in severe cyclones over the previous decade dropping from 65 to 37 or 57%. And the first 7 years of our decade vs. the first 7 years of the last is running behind by 4 severe cyclones 30-26 - with 2016 being the first year in the last 47 showing no severe cyclones at all (see).
What is true for the decline of cyclonic activity for the US and Australia in particular is also true generally for the world at large. For researchers have found no worldwide increase in tropical cyclone frequency over the past several decades despite huge increases in greenhouse gas emissions (see and see) .










I'm not a reactionary neo-Confederate freaking fringe nut, or feel any fondness whatsoever for the old Confederate South, or for any of its relics and symbols; with the exception of Robert E. Lee who I greatly respect (see below) I care nothing about its other leaders who I know little about. What I am, however, is a historical purist and opposed to destroying or removing any and all historical statues and monuments from public spaces. I don't care what the monument is or who it may offend, or who rallies around it for whatever cause good or bad; I want all of them to stay put and that goes for Confederate monuments that are currently under attack by left-wing fanatics as part of a cultural, social and economic revolution to transform America into a socialist state - a centralized, totalitarian society with a command and control economy that is many times worse and more oppressive than was the Confederacy. In fact, I'd  rather be a black slave in the Confederate South then live in a one party socialist state like existed in Russia under Lenin, Stalin and Khrushchev, and in Germany under Hitler. But that's a subject for another day.  
Indeed, apart from the overarching socialist agenda of the radical left there are moral, historical and national reasons grounded in common sense to oppose their war of purgation against Confederate monuments; reasons, it appears, that are intuitively understood by the vast majority of Americans as the interesting PBS poll cited above clearly shows.
For when I or any normal American (with no more than a basic education in American history) sees a statue of Jefferson Davis, Stonewall Jackson or Robert E. Lee  what quickly comes to mind is the Civil War, the reasons why it was fought and its great, noble, historic outcome, and lessons for posterity. These venerable, old, beautiful works of stone and metal evoke in normal Americans patriotic pride: positive, uplifting, ennobling thoughts, feelings and memories of this epic conflict - the most horrific war we ever fought; we recall that Union soldiers (young men outraged at southern treachery) sacrificed life and limb by the hundreds and thousands fighting bravely and victoriously against Davis, Jackson and Lee for a moral principle; we recall that good, justice and the Judeo-Christian tradition (the inspiration for the Abolition Movement) triumphed over slavery, treason, division and the perversion of religion; we recall that we were healed, united and made whole again, one nation under a good, just and merciful God, on course to become (by His will) the greatest nation in human history - a force for justice, peace and liberty like no other, that defeated enemies far worse than the Confederacy.
Indeed, when normal Americans see Confederate statues or even flags not only do they see the defeat of slavery and man's inhumanity to man, they also see a powerful warning to other potential traitors and enemies within: NEVER ATTEMPT SECESSION AGAIN. Indeed, Confederate monuments signify completely and compellingly that future treasonous Davises, Jacksons and Lees, who'd want some part of America to secede (like some Democrats today want California) will not be tolerated in the least; and whatever be the cost in lives and treasure they will meet with defeat and total disaster like the Rebel South.
This is what I, one of 62% of Americans (Republicans, Democrats and Independents), feel about Confederate statues, monuments and flags; and why we oppose destroying them or moving them from public squares because few, very few (a mere 27%) are deeply offended and driven into moral insanity by them. 
Indeed, when a sick, abnormal, racially obsessed leftist (who hates America and its industrial-capitalist system) sees the same lifeless Confederate relics we normal citizens see they (losing their minds) feel repulsion, rage and annihilating hate as if their existence were a Nazi-like crime; and that the Confederacy and heritage of slavery are still alive staining our country, national honor and poisoning our minds.
When Liberalism is in trouble it's time to tear down statues.
Indeed, just as these loons believe in a living, breathing Constitution (a lifeless piece of paper), and a Lady Liberty that weeps for illegal immigrants (another senseless statue), so do they imbue the images of Davis, Jackson and Lee with a terrible life as if it were the 1860s and they were Union soldiers fighting Johnny Reb to the death.  It's a morality play they replay over and over again in their heads to make them feel they're on a lofty moral plane and mission of redemption to save America from racism; to bring to an end the unfinished Civil War and Jim Crow once and for all; for as long as Confederate statues are in public places, and buildings, bridges and highways bear the names of rebel leaders, the evil Confederacy, for them, still lives oppressing blacks and robbing them of dignity. For them in a sense the Emancipation Proclamation and Appomattox haven't happened yet. Indeed, until the Confederacy is erased, wiped out, and buried it's as if Lee hasn't surrendered to Grant but is still fighting to save the Confederacy from "Union tyranny." That's how crazy these leftists are.
Reconstruction by akartes
Indeed, these anti-monument loons react anachronistically to these relics with the anger, moral outrage and intolerance of the Radical Republicans of yore: this was a large and influential pitiless faction within the post-war Republican Party that rejected Lincoln's clemency (God's mercy) for the South as too soft, weak and lenient - not doing the work of justice and retribution. Unmoved by the South's economic and social devastation caused by the war the Radicals wanted to worsen it and passed legislation (that was vetoed) requiring the confiscation of former-Confederate property and lands as reparations for former slaves. If these extremists weren't stopped they would have created terrible bitterness, humiliation and resentment in the South making reconciliation and peace impossible. Indeed, just as a second world war followed the first because of France's and England's humiliation of Germany at Versailles, so if the Radical Republicans had their way in punishing the South it could have caused a second Civil War more destructive than the first - as all trust would have been lost. 
Indeed, this is how radical, implacable and unforgiving these anti-monument wingnuts are; if they're not stopped in their tracks they'll carry their mindless jihad against our racist and slave past all the way back to the 18th century targeting statues of Washington, Jefferson and Patrick Henry. For them the sin of slavery is ineradicable that no degree of cleansing, penance and remorse can appease. Even reparations wouldn't work as trillions spent on welfare prove.
Indeed, assurances from these radical fools that they have no grievance with the slave-owning Founders because unlike the Confederates they weren't traitors, is bullcrap. For the reason for their treason was slavery - to keep the evil system alive for all time to come. In other words, NO SLAVERY NO CONFEDERACY, it's that simple. Indeed, for them Washington, Jefferson and the slave-owning Founders were guilty men - setting the stage for the rebellion of the Confederate States - the equals of Davis, Jackson and Lee in racial injustice and moral depravity. And when this PC crusade against the South is won and Confederate statues and relics are purged from the public sphere, the slave-owning Founders (followed by every slave-owning President) will be next; they'll be subject to the same campaign of demonization and delegitimization -  until their monuments are effaced, disgraced and erased. That is a certainty.
But I digress. The grievance of treason is not a good reason for the destruction and removal of Confederate statues. For the crime of treason to keep slavery in place shortened its existence by many decades. For if the Southern States had trusted Lincoln when he promised not to interfere with slavery if they stayed in the Union the system would have endured for many generations -  surviving, possibly, into the early 20th century.
In short, as Jefferson said, "God brings good out of the evil men do;" and from the evil of Confederate treason sprung the greater good of advancing the cause of justice and liberty - of shortening by 40 years the inevitable demise of slavery. And the statues of Davis, Jackson, Lee and other Confederate chiefs are symbolic of this treason that worked out for the best as if by the Hand of Almighty Providence.
In the final analysis, Confederate statues, relics and flags, symbols of oppression and treason crushed and defeated, are as much monuments to God and His plan for this nation as they are to Lincoln and the Union and the sacrifices they made to end an evil institution - and make America a More Perfect Democratic Union.
This is the magnificent Robert E. Lee memorial that President Roosevelt in June 1936 traveled 1300 miles to dedicate, saying:
Franklin D. Roosevelt
72 - Remarks at the Unveiling of the Robert E. Lee Memorial Statue, Dallas, Texas.
June 12, 1936
"I am very happy to take part in this unveiling of the statue of General Robert E. Lee. All over the United States we recognize him as a great leader of men, as a great general. But, also, all over the United States I believe that we recognize him as something much more important than that. We recognize Robert E. Lee as one of our greatest American Christians and one of our greatest American gentlemen."

In other words, as far as FDR was concerned, Robert E. Lee was his equal as a Christian, gentleman and human being. That is to say, he was an exemplary American.

And one of FDR's greatest generals, who was leading the war against the Nazis in World War II, a man who became President, held Lee in the same high esteem. His name was Dwight Eisenhower who as President had a picture of Lee (one of four great Americans) in the Oval Office. The following is a letter from an outraged citizen criticizing Ike for the picture and demanding and explanation why he esteems Lee so highly (see):  

August 1, 1960
Mr. Dwight D. Eisenhower
White House
Washington, D.C. 

Dear Mr. President: 


At the Republication Convention I heard you mention that you have the pictures of four (4) great Americans in your office, and that included in these is a picture of Robert E. Lee. 


I do not understand how any American can include Robert E. Lee as a person to be emulated, and why the President of the United States of America should do so is certainly beyond me. 


The most outstanding thing that Robert E. Lee did, was to devote his best efforts to the destruction of the United States Government, and I am sure that you do not say that a person who tries to destroy our Government is worthy of being held as one of our heroes. 

Will you please tell me just why you hold him in such high esteem? 


Sincerely yours,

Leon W. Scott   


Of the tens and thousands of letters Ike must have received from citizens that went unread this one in particular found its way to his desk. And he felt that defending himself and Robert E. Lee was of such importance that he took the time out to respond writing this:


August 9, 1960 

Dear Dr. Scott: 


Respecting your August 1 inquiry calling attention to my often expressed admiration for General Robert E. Lee, I would say, first, that we need to understand that at the time of the War between the States the issue of secession had remained unresolved for more than 70 years. Men of probity, character, public standing and unquestioned loyalty, both North and South, had disagreed over this issue as a matter of principle from the day our Constitution was adopted. 


General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was a poised and inspiring leader, true to the high trust reposed in him by millions of his fellow citizens; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history. 


From deep conviction, I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s calibre would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the Nation’s wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained. 


Such are the reasons that I proudly display the picture of this great American on my office wall. 



Dwight D. Eisenhower 


 Now because of Ike's high regard for Lee as a military leader and human being would anyone dare accuse him of racism, white supremacism, neo-Confederatism or insensitivity to blacks? Only a fool would do that. For this is the same Dwight Eisenhower that championed and signed into law two civil rights bills in 1957 and again in 1960 protecting the voting and civil rights of blacks. These were the first two pieces of civil rights legislation aimed at black Americans since 1875 five years after Lee died (see and see).  
 Now I like President Eisenhower and FDR honor and esteem Robert E. Lee above all else for surrendering to Grant and ending the war and Confederacy at Appomattox - when he could have escaped into the Appaliacian Mountains where he was greatly loved rebuilt his army and continued the war for perhaps another year. With good reason Grant let Lee keep his sword; for his unnecessary surrender saved tens and thousands of lives.   
Morover, Lee renounced the Confederacy and the institution of slavery as unGodly, unjust and evil. And after the war he worked tirelessly to reintegrate the South into the Union; this makes his statues and monuments symbols of anti-Confederatism and reconcilation. Indeed, if Lee were alive today he'd denounce in the strongest terms neo-Confederates, neo-Nazis and the KKK. Indeed, how can a man who died an anti-Confederate working to unify the nation be a symbol of  divisive, treasonous, Confederate scum? It's prejudice, slander, revisionism and unreasoning hate to say that Lee's statues represent the very evils he renounced and put behind him when he surrendered at Appomattox. 
FDR and Ike were absolutely  right: Lee is to be honored and esteemed as a very good, great, exemplary soldier, leader, American and human being.


Most people don't know that right after the second presidential debate, where "creepy," cruel, sexist, bully Donald Trump was frighteningly "stalking" poor, sick, hyper low energy ILLary on the stage (and "breathing down her neck") she was so shaken up and worn out by the ordeal that afterwards she needed the support of her husband and hand rails to hold her up as she was walking to her van.  

This easily unnerved weakling wanted to be President?  


imageWIS  ApolloSpeaks

BS. And in the actually demonstrably factual world, Drumpf needed a gold cart to move around while every other world leader walked... talk about low stamina.




And in the "actually demonstrably factual world" from early August to October 23rd* the indefatigable Donald Trump did a total of 83 major rallies (sometimes 4 a day); while sick, weak, hyper low energy ILLery (avoiding exerting herself too much) did a meager 34 rallies (see).


I can't recall where I read this but from Oct. 23rd to Nov. 7th Trump put the pedal to the medal and did another 37 rallies; whereas Hillary did another 16. Trump's out campaigning Hillary (not a Comey effect, or Russian-Wiki effect or racism or breathing down Hillary's neck) was key to his winning the election - especially in the rustbelt states where it counted most.


She was sniffing Donnie the incoherent cokehead. 

       ApolloSpeaks Grap3Drink


Was she "sniffing Donnie" when she had a seizure on 9/11 and nearly collapsed? Or was she overcome by the extreme, fatiguing 77 degree heat? LOL!!!






And so it is. Which means there were other Harveys centuries ago before the massive use of beneficial fossil fuels powered and enriched the world; and before there were anti-capitalist-industrial age nuts thinking we were better off before the invention of the combustion engine warning:



If only we had listened to the Unabomber and Al Gore Harvey might not have happened. LOL!!!


on the economy (see) the Orange Menace will have two terms and devastate the Illiberal Media, Democrap Party, world saving climate control and the little that's left of Obama's legacy of ashes and dust. Pray for two more Harveys to hit the Houston area and completely wipe it out killing tens and thousands while driving gas prices into the stratosphere. It's the only way to stop the coming "Trickle Down" ecomomic boom that will supercharge the hurting, declining, forgotten middle class and make Trump a great president again./sarc
Number of Recessions since 1900: ....22 
Number during GOP Presidents: .....16
g-o-p = crash party
ANSWER: Twice that of Republican shutdowns.
If Chuckie, the class warfare clown, were a Democrat leader in the 1960s would he have opposed this rich President's tax cuts for the rich-which made him and his family (and every other 1%er)  wealthier?
BTW, the Kennedy tax cuts sent the economy soaring (preventing a sixth post-war recession) reaching GDP levels of 5%+; and made it impossible for Republicans to take back the White House in 1964 when LBJ crushed Barry Goldwater in a landslide - like Reagan would do to Mondale twenty years later from the economic impact of his  "voodoo economics" tax cuts.


Art courtesy inewsource.  
That single-payer, government-run, universal healthcare failed in radical left coast California (following the debacles in Vermont and Colorado) is old news now. But what isn't generally known is that it was the seventh time in 25 years that it failed in that state; and that this latest effort wasn't serious, but, as you will see, a sham by lying, hypocritical Democrat politicians to placate frustrated progressives that progress after so many years was finally being made in the journey toward healthcare heaven. A brief history of single-payer in the Golden State is instructive of just how false the journey has been and continues to be; and that single-payer has no future there or anywhere else in our country. 
 It all began in 1993 when Nick Petris, an obscure state Senator, introduced a single-payer bill in the legislature - it was ignored and got nowhere. Then two years later in 1994 a modified single-payer universal coverage plan passed both houses, but was vetoed by Governor Pete Wilson because of its costs. Then the following year Proposition 186, a ballot initiative for single-payer, was rejected by voters 73% to 27% (see and see). That was when Californians were still somewhat sane; for such a ballot would be the reverse today.
Then in 1998 bill SB 2123 calling for single-payer was introduced to the Senate where it led to a resolution calling for a study on its financial implications; it quietly died without explanation - but most likely because it was found to be financially unfeasible. Then five years later in 2003 (when Democrat Gray Davis was governor) single-payer reared its head for a fourth time in bill SB 921; after being approved by the Senate 921 like 2123 went down the road for financial analysis to see if it was viable. But after going through a refinement process of six amendments the state Assembly refused to vote on it, and like 2123 it died - sparing governor Davis from vetoing it (see).
But hope springs eternal. In 2005 state Senator Sheila Kuehl introduced bill SB 840 for single-payer which was approved by the Democrat led Assembly and Senate, but vetoed by then Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Why? Because the Governator (as he was called) didn't want a bankrupted California to be his legacy. As he said, "Such a program would cost the state billions and lead to significant new taxes on individuals and businesses, without solving the critical issue of affordability [for health insurance]."  In other words, SB 840 would be ruinous for state finances and the economy; higher across the board individual taxes means less money for consumers to spend on goods and services and the things they care about; and higher corporate taxes means either driving up prices (raising the cost of living), or driving businesses out of the state (seesee and see) greatly adding to the jobless rate. In short, No governor (Republican or Democrat) in their right mind would have signed such a bill.
 But undaunted Senator Kuehl in 2007 reintroduced SB 840 to the legislature where it easily passed again, but only to be vetoed again by Schwarzenegger* for the same reasons cited above. Then in 2009 with Kuehl no longer in the Senate her colleague Senator Mark Leno took up the single-payer cause and reintroduced SB 840 as SB 810  (same bill different number). It passed the Senate but died in the Assembly where it was never put up for a full vote. What a joke.
*Schwarzenegger was falsely accused by progressives of killing the "perfectly fine bill that was going to save Californians billions" because he was "in the pocket of the drug, insurance and healthcare companies." 
Now as it turned out SB 840/810 was such a fiscally and economically irresponsible piece of legislation that when pro-single-payer progressive Jerry Brown succeeded Repub Schwarzenegger   the Democrats made no attempt at resurrecting it a third time and pass it again for Brown's signature. Why? Because it would have suffered the same fate of either being vetoed (this time by Brown and hurting him politically with his progressive base) or dying in the Assembly again. And, as we'll see below, this inaction on 840 was a sign it wasn't a serious piece of single payer legislation to overhaul California's healthcare system; but a partisan political football to appease the single payer crowd and hurt Governor Schwarzenegger with them. 
And now after 25 years of failure with California's voters, lawmakers and governors killing single-payer time after time (because of costs requiring huge unpopular tax hikes and greater spending, borrowing and deficits by the state) a new single-payer bill SB 562 was introduced and passed by the Assembly in June. But this bill (the most insane and reckless of all for its covering illegal aliens) wasn't even put to a vote by the Senate. Indeed, with an unfinanceable start up price tag of $404 billion (more than twice the state budget), $200 billion in annual costs and no mechanism to control costs state Senators wouldn't go near it, or dare pass it (as they did 840 twice under Schwarzenegger) and put Gov. Brown in the embarrassing and politically damaging spot of having to veto it - which he certainly would have done.
Progressive Governor Jerry Brown in Washington protesting the repeal and replacement of Obamacare while rejecting single payer government run healthcare as the solution.
Indeed, in March Governor Brown signaled that he'd veto any single-payer bill that landed on his desk when he asked reporters in a give and take: “Where do you get the extra money [to pay for single-payer]?... This is the whole question. I don’t even get.... how do you do that...You take a problem [millions with poor or no health insurance] and say I'm going to solve it by something [single-payer] that's even a bigger problem (a $404 billion problem see and see)?” Indeed, what Brown said in rejecting single payer as a solution was more or less Schwarzenegger all over again:
Indeed, don't be deceived. SB 562 like SB 840 wasn't serious legislation to fix California's healthcare and coverage problems. If it was, to say the least, it would never have included free insurance for illegal aliens; for such a law would turn California into a massive medical magnet for sick people from Mexico and Latin America who'd come streaming across the border to get free care - and bankrupt the state ten times over. Indeed, like SB 840 562 was an empty shell with no substantive provisions; what it was, was political theater stating ideological principles* designed to appease not only single-payer activists, special interests and mooching free stuff losers, but the open borders crowd who believe in the right of any foreigner to live in this country and receive the benefits of full citizenship.
*After California State Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon shelved SB 562 he gave the following interesting and revealing explanation: "SB 562 didn’t make any sense," he said. "It just didn’t seem like public policy as much as it seemed a STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES (see).”
That's exactly right; SB 562 wasn't a serious bill aimed at single payer healthcare reform; it was an ideological statement of progressive principles to placate (soothe the feelings of) angry leftists pissed that after so long progress wasn't being made toward single payer becoming reality.
SB 562 might be good politics for deceiving gullible west coast    leftists who want to believe that state Dems are making progress toward achieving single-payer heaven; but it fails as serious healthcare legislation. Truth is if single-payer were affordable and practical Brown would have signed SB 840 when he took office in 2011; and California today would be the nation's first single-payer state leading the way toward nationalization. But like other progressive politicians on single-payer Brown only talks the talk when running for election; but is unable to make it a reality when in office because of prohibitive fiscal and economy wrecking costs. In short, SB 562 isn't "dead for this year" as the LA Times headline says. IT'S DEAD, PERIOD!
Though single-payer in California (like in Vermont) is financially and economically unfeasible and dangerous, crazy radical socialist crackpot Bernie Sanders (I-VT) nevertheless demanded that Gov. Brown throw caution to the wind and support 562 come what may. Keep in mind that this is the same Bernie Sanders who wants "Medicare for All" when "Medicare for Some (the elderly)" has $27 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and is going broke (see and see). 
Now If Sanders had his way in Vermont with budget busting, economy wrecking, single-payer Green Mountain Care (costing more than the state budget) he would have impacted the state with the destructive force of a category seven hurricane (see). That's how dangerous this unreasoning fanatic would be if he was Vermont's governor. Imagine him as President and the national catastrophe he'd cause.