If All You See…

…is a world turning to desert from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is the Other McCain, with a post on more wackadoodle feminists.

It’s girls with guns week. Too soon?

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another great day in America. Unless you root root root for the Dolphins and Bears and Lions, oh my. This pinup is by Arnold Armitage, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Not A Lot Of People Know That notes that the California drought is an environmentalist problem
  2. Watts Up With That? covers the Gore Effect for a climate change protest in Germany
  3. 1389 Blog notes that if you accept them, they will keep coming
  4. A View From The Beach covers England voting to freeze in the dark
  5. Alan Colmes has 8 humorous ways to reduce gun violence
  6. Cold Fury discusses the Obama depression
  7. Dakota Voice cover RINO cowardice
  8. Doug Ross notes CNN photoshopping the Oregon shooter to make him whiter
  9. Fire Andrea Mitchell blows up the “all mass shooters are white guys” meme
  10. Flopping Aces has an interesting thought on the #BlackLivesMatter movement
  11. Free North Carolina covers how things are going in the welfare nation of Sweden
  12. Jihad Watch notes ISIS gaining ground
  13. Legal Insurrection has Obama spinning like the wind
  14. neo-neocon discusses electoral votes and illegal aliens
  15. And last, but not least, Plank’s Constant cover Israeli Derangement Syndrome in Iceland

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Anti-gunnites More Overtly Reaching For Ban On Private Gun Ownership

We’re still waiting for a plan from Democrats that will actually reduce gun violence. Let’s start off with Nicholas Kristoff, who thinks he has a new way to tackle gun deaths

What we need is an evidence-based public health approach — the same model we use to reduce deaths from other potentially dangerous things around us, from swimming pools to cigarettes. We’re not going to eliminate guns in America, so we need to figure out how to coexist with them.

Um, OK? He compares them to cars, and making them safer, before diving into

In Great Britain, people used to kill themselves by putting their heads in the oven and asphyxiating themselves with coal gas. This accounted for almost half of British suicides in the late 1950s, but Britain then began switching from coal gas to natural gas, which is much less lethal. Sticking one’s head in the oven was no longer a reliable way to kill oneself — and there was surprisingly little substitution of other methods. Suicide rates dropped, and they stayed at a lower level.

The British didn’t ban ovens, but they made them safer. We need to do the same with guns.

First, it wasn’t the ovens, it was what the ovens used for. Second, how does one make a gun “safer”? Most guns are extremely simple things. Complicate them!

We should also be investing in “smart gun” technology, such as weapons that fire only with a PIN or fingerprint. We should adopt microstamping that allows a bullet casing to be traced back to a particular gun. We can require liability insurance for guns, as we do for cars.

Criminals do not care about microstamping. Those who are killing each other in the streets of major Democratic Party run cities typically did not obtain their guns legally. Smart gun tech has it’s pros and cons. Criminals will not purchase liability insurance. That’s simply something that will harm the legal owners primarily, and you know that the cost will be so exorbitant that people will say “forget it” and not buy the gun. That’s his real point, finding a way to stop people from purchasing.

Let’s move on to something else from the NY Times, an article which explains how 14 killers in mass shootings obtained their guns. In every single instance, they obtained them legally via a federally licensed firearms dealer. Aaron Alexis, the Navy yard shooter, was the only one who was stopped, failing the background check to purchase a rifle, and, instead, legally purchased a shotgun. Two points here. First, for all the caterwauling about the “gun show loophole”, none of these people obtained them from a gun show. In fact, most dealers at gun shows are federally licensed dealers, and must perform background checks. Dana Loesch schooled Senator Cory Booker on the subject.

Second, this seems to be thinly-veiled method of blaming the gun stores, so, of course, this gives people the idea of banning gun stores. Which has worked really, really well in Chicago, right? (six more were shot since Saturday morning)

Let’s remember that Mr. Obama stated

“We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it,” said Obama.

George Soros funded Think Progress goes the same route, in telling us that Australians are disgusted or something

In 1996, a gunman opened fire at a popular tourist destination on the Australian island of Tasmania. Using a semiautomatic rifle, he killed 35 people.

Australia responded by reforming their gun laws. High powered rifles and shotguns were banned and uniform gun licensing requirements were imposed for the guns that remained legal. The country also implemented a buyback program which resulted in the destruction of more than a million firearms.

In the last 19 years, there have been no mass shootings in Australia, defined as five or more people being shot.

In other words, this whole thing, which follows up with stories in Aussie papers that are “disgusted” is about pushing the Aussie solution, namely, banning most private ownership of guns, doing buybacks/government confiscation.

NY Magazine likewise pimps the Aussie solution, and then wonders if it would work

Still, gun-control advocate Rebecca Peters, who campaigned to tighten Australia’s gun laws, argues that the U.S. could take some cues from other countries’ successful efforts to combat gun violence — such as banning assault weapons, expanding background checks, and increasing waiting periods — without implementing gun-control laws as strict as Australia’s. “When you’re talking about reducing motor vehicle accidents, you don’t only rely on seat belts, you don’t only on speed limits, you don’t only rely on highway design, you don’t only rely on motor vehicle standards, but you have a set of them,” Peters told ABC News. “Similarly, they’re a set of measures that together constitute regulation to prevent gun violence.”

Remember, the Navy yard shooter was denied an “assault rifle”, and used a shotgun. For the most part, this only limits legal owners who aren’t hell bent on violence. As for increased waiting periods? Well, if they are good enough for guns, why not for abortions?

Expanded background checks? To what? They are already expanded. Shall we included credit ratings? What, exactly, are we expanding them to cover? That part never gets covered.

Anyhow, many, many outlets are “discussing” the Aussie solution. I dare the anti-gunnites to attempt it. You know you want to. Stop pussyfooting around. Show your true colors.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Anti-gunnites More Overtly Reaching For Ban On Private Gun Ownership »

Good Grief: Joaquin Is Another Word For Climate Change

I knew you wanted another raging, deranged, nutty as a fruitcake missive from the Cult of Climastrology

Hurricane Joaquin: Another Word for Climate Change
In case you hadn’t guessed, a new study shows “superstorms” will be much more frequent in the years ahead.

Except a) it’s not a superstorm, it’s a typical hurricane, and b) we were told that they would start happening immediately. Now we’re told that it’s “in the future”. Oh, and it’s still been well over 9 hurricane seasons since the US was hit by a major hurricane

As Hurricane Joaquin devastates the Bahamas and feints toward the east coast of the United States, and as American communities hunker down for superstorm potential, the connection to climate change is already clear. What’s more, a new study shows there’s a lot more of this sort of thing to come.

Daily Beast writer Michael Shank, PhD, obviously missed that Joaquin is not going to come anywhere near the US coast.

That’s today. The track was shifting further and further east days ago. This article was published today.

What’s all this about? The simple answer is “temperature.”

Hurricanes love warm water and the sea surface temperatures in Joaquin’s path are the warmest ever on record.

Thank humans for that. Last year broke all records for the hottest year and highest emissions in modern history. That’s our doing. Now 2015 is already bound to best last year’s record.

Yet, hurricane activity is down. Landfalls are down. Why are we getting fewer than the big season of 2005, when it wasn’t as warm, according to the CoC?

By now, in the United States, this trend shouldn’t surprise anyone. Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy should’ve sufficiently educated everyone on extreme weather trends.  What people may not have realized, however, is that the “extreme” will be getting more “normal”—that is, more frequent—and that is a terrifying prospect.

A study published this week by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences says that we’ll see superstorms (on a par with Superstorm Sandy) now every 25 years instead of every 500 years.

Know what helped make Sandy so bad? A cold front. But, hey, Warmists have a Narrative, and must Blame humans. Yet, they all refuse to give up fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral. So they’re part of the problem.

Read: Good Grief: Joaquin Is Another Word For Climate Change »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful mass transit train which can reduce extreme rainfall, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Last Refuge, with a post on the curious case of the Oregon shooter.

Read: If All You See… »

A Warming World Could Totally Mean Crocodiles Everywhere Or Something

In a sane world, this type of article would be a pure “jumping the shark” moment. Alas, the number of bat guano crazy articles emanating from the Cult of Climastrology weekly are quite large, and never stop. Here’s today’s from TakePart’s Padma Nagappan

A Warming World Could Be a Crocodile-Infested One

A warming planet is a negative consequence for a lot of creatures. The projected rise in temperatures means a more acidic ocean that hurts marine life, and drier, hotter weather patterns don’t bode well for creatures relying onsnow and ice to survive.

But there is one species that stands to gain fromclimate change: crocodiles.

The heat-loving reptiles could thrive as the Earth gets hotter, growing not just in numbers but also in species variety, say British and U.S researchers in a new study.

Are we ready for crocs cruising the Thames in London and lying on the banks of the Potomac in D.C.? Wait, I almost forgot to add “or something”.

And as pollution drives up the Earth’s temperature, could crocodiles multiply in number and invade the northern hemisphere?

CO2 is not a pollutant. Oh, and crocodiles already live in the northern hemisphere. United States, Mexico, parts of Central America, Cuba, Egypt and Northern Africa, India, Southeast Asia, and northern South America. All north of the equator. Damned Facts!

“It won’t be an army of crocodiles popping up overnight, but we might see crocodiles in places we haven’t seen them before,” Tennant said. “It’s not like the movies where crocodiles take over the Earth, but we now have 23 species. In the future, we could see many different forms, or we might only see one or two new species.”

OK, so, Jon Tennant, the study coauthor, just shot down the whole premise of the headline and early article. Bummer.

The more pressing issue for crocodiles, he said, is loss of habitat due to human encroachment.

“One takeaway from our study is to look at how humans impact the planet, because we’re messing up the environment in an unnatural way,” Tennant said.

Much of the study is about the habitat loss and environmental degradation from mankind, which doesn’t include “climate change”. An actual important issue, which, sadly, is rolled into the idiocy of ‘climate change’.

Read: A Warming World Could Totally Mean Crocodiles Everywhere Or Something »

NY Times Editorial Board Bemoans The Typical Political Ritual After Shootings, Joins In

The NY Times Editorial Board, safely ensconced in their workplace with armed security, is Very Upset over the way people have engaged post-Oregon shooting (but not enough to actually offer condolences)

The Political Ritual After Mass Shootings

The Republican presidential candidates were quick to offer sympathy but little else to the nation, to the grieving families and to the terrified town where the latest in American gun carnage took 10 lives on Thursday at an Oregon community college.

The headline makes it seem as if there’s a problem with the typical politicization of the issue, and the Times joins in as they take shots at Trump and other Republicans, before getting to Obama

The contrast could not be greater between the bromide-driven slate of Republican candidates promising thoughts and prayers after “this senseless tragedy” and President Obama in his understandable fury and near despair over the political cowering to the gun industry and its lobbyists. Mass shootings have become an unsurprising part of American life, with lame public rituals in which politicians express grief and then retreat quickly into denial about this scourge.

One thing the NYTEB fails to do, much like Obama and the other Dems commenting, is offer any solutions

Modern high-powered weapons, adapted from war and unscrupulously marketed on the home front, have unfortunately provided the means for a shooter to act out his anger and despair in a matter of minutes. The state-sponsored citizens report on the gun massacre of 20 schoolchildren and six workers in Newtown, Conn., in 2012 concluded there is “no legitimate place in the civilian population” for fast-firing rifles and large-capacity magazines that were invented for the military but have flooded the American marketplace.

As I wrote in the comments at the Editorial,

So, what policies does the NY Times Editorial Board suggest?

“Fast firing rifles”? They really fire no faster than ones from WWI. One pull of the trigger, one shot. Automatic weapons are illegal.

“Large-capacity magazines”? If there’s no one to stop a shooter, it doesn’t matter if the mag is 7 or 15. It takes seconds to reload.

Easy access? The majority of weapons are purchased at a federally licensed firearms dealer.

Please, tell us what would stop any of these tragedies? Please tell us what will stop the constant shootings and murders in cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, Newark, Camden, St. Louis, etc, which already have massive gun control laws.”

The first semi-automatic rifle was invented in 1885. The first semi-auto pistol in 1892. The vast majority of legal gun owners will never use any of their firearms for a crime. For all the thundering anger, what policies would stop these events? Murder and attempted murder are illegal. Yet, people still do it.

Other than repealing the 2nd Amendment and full confiscation, what policies can the anti-gunnites offer that would stop this from happening?

And why don’t they seem to care about all the Black on Black shootings/murders in liberal cities such as Chicago, Detroit, Camden, Baltimore, St. Louis, etc, which all have strict gun control policies?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Editorial Board Bemoans The Typical Political Ritual After Shootings, Joins In »

Oops: Congress To Investigate RICO Letter Writers

The scientists who wrote a letter to Obama and the Attorney General, suggesting that those who fail to follow the Cult of Climastrology’s official line be prosecuted under RICO statues, are in a peck of a bit of trouble.

(Daily Caller) The 20 climate scientists and academics who sent a letter to President Barack Obama asking him to prosecute global warming skeptics may be in big trouble.

A congressional committee is now looking into the government-backed nonprofit that circulated the letter, demanding they turn over “all e-mail, electronic documents, and data created since January 1, 2009.” The group has one week to respond in writing to the committee’s request.

The Institute of Global Environment and Society (IGES) “appears to be almost fully funded by taxpayer money while simultaneously participating in partisan political activity by requesting a RICO investigation of companies and organizations that disagree with the Obama administration on climate change,” Texas Republican Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House science committee, wrote in a letter to IGES.

And it appears that those involved, particularly Jagadish Shukla, have been feeding at the taxpayer funded trough, hooking up family and friends, and producing almost no work for that roughly $63 million. Anthony Watts says this could be the biggest scientific scandal in US history.

Read: Oops: Congress To Investigate RICO Letter Writers »

If All You See…

…is extreme rain from a hurricane made worse from climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on Statists tackling “real” problems.

Read: If All You See… »

Could Democrats Please Tell Us Their Plans To Reduce Gun Violence?

Moments after yesterday’s horrific shooting at yet another gun free zone, in which a nutjob targeted Christians (from everything I’ve read, he’s not a Democrat or Republican, just a nutjob), Democrats were quick to politicize this tragic event, none more than Mr. Obama, as PJ Media’s Liz Sheld notes

Yesterday, a crazed-lunatic went to a community college in Oregon, killed nine people and wounded at least 20 before he was shot dead.  President Obama hustled to call a press conference, in one of the fastest responses I’ve ever seen from him, to turn this into political spectacle before we had much, if any, information about what happened.

“And what’s become routine, of course, is the response of those who oppose any kind of common-sense gun legislation,” said the President. The President went on to idealize Australia and England, both countries that virtually ban firearm ownership entirely, so I don’t think Obama really wants any kind of actual reform, I think he wants to ban guns.

“We know that other countries, in response to one mass shooting, have been able to craft laws that almost eliminate mass shootings. Friends of ours, allies of ours — Great Britain, Australia, countries like ours. So we know there are ways to prevent it,” said Obama.

Exactly what does he mean by that? We’ll get back to that in a minute. Ms. Sheld notes all the gun laws already on the books, especially in places with draconian laws, such as Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, etc. Places where gun-play regularly occurs. Strange, eh? What new laws, ones that mimic Chicago, for instance, would stop that? Chicago just had a big weekend of shootings. Baltimore has seen record numbers murdered by guns. Let’s shift to Charles C.W. Cook, who “debated” leftist Mark Halprin. Head to the link for the back and forth, watch the video, and remember how it ends

“I don’t think that’s enough. I completely agree with the president,” Halperin said. “People need to find solutions to this and not talk about what won’t work and that it’s so complicated. We can’t be the only country that’s like this.”

Cooke quickly replied, “Alright, well then with respect, what’s your plan?”

Halperin said there are “short-term solutions” like state and federal regulations, but “coming up with ideas” is also important.

“But which ideas, Mark?” Cooke pressed.

“We can talk about specific policy in a second, but just let me finish this second point,” Halperin replied, later criticizing his fellow reporter for his “tone” on the issue.

In other words, liberals really do not want to talk about their plans. They surely know that all the draconian laws do not work. Obama alluded to what they really want

Ideally, someone on that [Democratic] debate stage would emulate President Obama and say America needs something like Australia’s policy of nationwide gun confiscation. I think the Republican nominee would love for the 2016 election to be a referendum on whether private citizens should be permitted to own guns, or whether Americans support a nationwide house-to-house, room-to-room search of every residence in all fifty states.

The major problem with most gun laws proposed/implemented is that they target law abiding citizens, not the criminals who use guns. So, what say, Democrats? Up for pushing to repeal the 2nd Amendment, instituting gun confiscation? Back to Liz Sheld

We have many laws on the books that are related to gun crimes that are violated in the process of actually committing the crime. Murder? Illegal. Stealing guns to use in a crime, like the Sandy Hook shooter did?  Illegal. Do we need more laws on the books that will be ignored by people who, by definition, do not respect the law?

But let’s hear some details about this “common sense” legislation we need that would prevent insane maniacs and criminals from slaughtering people, assuming of course we aren’t really talking about a gun ban.

Yes, let’s hear it.

Someone saying gun play is worse in Red states than Blue states in 3….2…..1….

Read: Could Democrats Please Tell Us Their Plans To Reduce Gun Violence? »

Bad Behavior has blocked 7024 access attempts in the last 7 days.

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE