Biden invokes wartime powers to fund electric heaters as he cracks down on gas appliances

You are probably right about that. Did you know that there is a federal program to replace double pane windows with triple pane windows? Everyone in WA seems to be getting their windows replaced.

We do have a small problem with humidity in our day light basement. We use the same simple dehumidifiers that people use in boats and RVs. We had two of them in the rec room last year and they were both completely full of water by spring. No musty odor, though.

If anyone doesnt think this is about providing and suspending power to the citizenry at will nationwide…….

Overwhelm the system.

Cloward Piven.

Yeah, I know. But never understood the logic behind it. Why would anyone incompetent enough to break the System be trusted with fixing it?

However, I also (sadly) recognize that logic no longer applies when it comes to modern politics.

And all the extra power needed from the grid will come from where??? Not wind and solar.

Thank you for referencing that article Navy Patriot.

"Biden invokes wartime powers [??? emphasis added] to fund electric heaters as he cracks down on gas appliances"

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

Regardless that drafters of the Constitution gave the power to declare war uniquely to Congress, the corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties that have pirated control of the federal government are once again looking the other way while the likewise corrupt Biden Administration seemingly creates confusion by unconstitutionally (imo) unilaterally declaring some kind of war situation to justify unconstitutional actions imo.

"Article I, Section 8, Clause 11: To declare War [emphasis added], grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;"

But in stark contrast to constitutional drafters giving the power to declare war uniquely to Congress, consider that activist President Woodrow Wilson signed the unconstitutional (imo) wartime (WWI) bill that gives the POTUS the power to unilaterally declare national emergencies.

More specifically, after Congress unconstitutionally (imo) expanded the federal government's powers by giving POTUS the power to unilaterally declare national emergencies, power that the states never expressly constitutionally gave to the peacetime feds, Wilson made a proclamation based on an otherwise unconstitutional (imo) interpolation of wartime powers and the Commerce Clause to keep US-made navigable vessels from being sold to foreigners.

Proclamation 1354—Emergency in Water Transportation of the United States (non-FR)
“3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction [spin] and no excuse for interpolation or addition [emphases added].” —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.

And here is a list of subsequent national emergencies, several possibly inspired by Wilson's unconstitutional unilateral power (imo) to declare such emergencies.

List of national emergencies in the United States

Note that declaring national emergencies to unconstitutionally expand the federal government's powers on politically correct issues, global warming for example, was foreshadowed as early as 1803, respected legal expert St. George Tucker observing that English common law was being used as a back door to unconstitutionally expand the federal government's powers.

"If it were, in fact, an unconstitutional exercise of power in congress to pass a law establishing the bank, nothing can manifest the impropriety of over-stepping the limits of the constitution, more than the act which we have just noticed. It shows that the most unauthorised acts of government may be drawn into precedents to justify other unwarrantable usurpations [emphasis added]." —Article 1, Section 8, Clause 6, St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries 1:App. 262--64, 1803.
”The system of the General Government is to seize all doubtful ground. We must join in the scramble, or get nothing. Where first occupancy is to give right, he who lies still loses all.” —Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1797.

Consider the following politically correct rewrite of the Constitution's Article V (constitutional amendment process) to give an idea of Tucker's lament about constitutional law v. common law.

"Article V: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, [or justified by previous unconstitutional actions of the federal government that it has gotten away with,] as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate."

Think of common law as the corrupt federal government getting away with using unconstitutional "case precedents" to bypass the will of the Article V state supermajority.

Congress has been usurped by a senile clown

First question. Maybe I missed it, but have we declared war on someone. I thought their all just conflicts.

First question. Maybe I missed it, but have we declared war on someone. I thought their all just conflicts.

It is certain that the the American Left believes they are the only arbiter of the English Language, and any English word means ONLY what they say it means.

Probably any one of a number of the negative Acts Of Congress on the Legacy American People is a Declaration Of War on Legacy American People, in the American Left's Definition of the meaning of the English Words in those Congressional Acts.

War-time powers to push electric heaters, powered by electric plants that burn coal. Environ-mental-ism.