Hot Take: Dodgeball Is A Tool Of Oppression For Dehumanization Or Something

By William Teach June 8, 2019 – 10:45 am

The researchers are probably the people picked last in school and the ones always getting pelted with the balls

(Washington Post) One of gym classes’ most common games is being used as a tool of “oppression,” according to a team of Canadian researchers.

Dodgeball in phys-ed classes teaches students to dehumanize and harm their peers, professors from three Canadian universities said in a presentation this week at the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences in Vancouver. A paper on the subject is set to appear in the journal European Physical Education Review.

“When you’re setting up the environment for students to learn, and you introduce the idea that it’s okay to slam the ball at whomever you like, even if it’s with a soft ball, the intention is there,” Joy Butler, a professor who studies pedagogy and curriculum development at University of British Columbia, said in a phone interview.

“When students think it’s okay because they’re being told it’s okay to do that, what do they learn? People say [dodgeball] is being used as an outlet for aggression or catharsis. I suspect that this is where they’re learning that.

Researchers observed the more athletic and authoritative students in the class established rules and practices without input from other students, including creating their own teams, which allowed them to gang up on other students.

ZOMG, they’re learning real life? The Horror!

Gym classes are largely centered around games, she said, which is can be great, but can also exclude students with different strengths.

“If one thing were to come out of this it would be for P.E. teachers to look at their curriculums and look for balance,” she said. “And that could mean dropping games and including other activities: outdoor education, fitness, gymnastics, aquatics.”

That’s at the end, and something I can agree with. Really, dodgeball is a game, and a violent one, that most kids like playing, but, does it really help with physical education and getting more fit? Not really. Which is why it was rarely played. It’s something that the gym teacher trots out once in a blue moon. Do they really need dodgeball? Nope. But, really, the point of the article is basically Barking Moonbat Category 5.

Read: Hot Take: Dodgeball Is A Tool Of Oppression For Dehumanization Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

Excitable Jay Inslee Says Trump’s Stance On ‘Climate Change’ Is Treason

By William Teach June 8, 2019 – 7:18 am

Poor Jay Inslee, still trying to get noticed as he bases his whole campaign on his ‘climate change’ beliefs and policies, despite failing to get the citizens of the state where he was governor to pass those policies

AOC referred to Warmists who refuse to implement ‘climate change’ policies as “climate delayers”, saying they were as bad as people who do not believe in anthropogenic climate change. I’d say that climahypocrites are delayers, right? From the article

In a Wednesday interview at the Council on Foreign Relations, Washington governor and longshot 2020 Democrat candidate Jay Inslee told NBC News correspondent Cynthia McFadden that President Trump’s stance on global warming is “treason.”

A partial transcript is as follows: 

CYNTHIA MCFADDEN: Last night President Trump was interviewed by Piers Morgan and he said he was just shocked, amazed that Prince Charles cared so much about climate change. After all, he was a prince and he didn’t need to worry about the future like that. So it’s a serious question. There are those, including the president of this country, who are climate change deniers. Is it worth having the debate with them, the scientific debate with them? Or do you just skip over them and go to the people who believe?

GOV JAY INSLEE: First off, a lot more people, despite the constant lies—and, by the way, we ought to be aggrieved morally by this. I was thinking—I was shaving this morning thinking about what we were going to talk about today. The fact that we have the elected leader of the United States of America who willfully lied to us about something that is an existential threat ought to be something that we are outraged about. We should not become inured to this or passive about this. If we had a president of the United States who told us that the communist threat was just a hoax perpetrated by the Council of Foreign Relations—you know, that would have been if not treasonous, at least something that—a moral abomination. And we cannot allow ourselves to become accustomed to this.

Interesting, because so many Democrats were telling us that the communist threat was over-blown. They were and are also saying that the threat from Islamic extremists is over-blown and “Islamophobia.” We actually had and have facts on those two situations. All we have is that the climate has warmed, but not rock-sold scientific facts assigning blame beyond that this is normal for earth. Anyhow, if you’re running around the country using tons of fossil fuels to complain about climate change from fossil fuels, aren’t you, in fact, saying that this is all a hoax?

This is a moral outrage. It is a gross failure of the commander in chief. And I don’t use the word treason very often, but when someone lies to the American people, when the entire intelligence community is telling the president of the United States that this is a national security threat of the first dimension and he is willing to lie to the American people, I don’t think we should take this lying down. I don’t think it should go without comment. And I think people should raise their voices about it, as I am here. And if you want to know why some people still deny climate change, well, the president of the United States is telling them to deny climate change. It’s really not really their fault. And so I think that we need to be a little more vocal about this, number one.

What’s the morality of using tons of world killing Bad Weather causing fossil fuels to tell us that we’re doomed?

Number two, he is failing. He’s failing in many ways. He’s failing on trade policy. He’s failing to unite the country. But he’s failing to fool people, because in the last twelve months the number of Americans who believe climate change deserves a commonsense response has gone up twelve percent, despite his lies and his tweets. And the reason this is happening is you just can’t ignore seeing a town of twenty-five thousand in Paradise, California, burn to the ground. I went there at night and drove around at night with Jerry Brown’s security forces. And it felt like a post-apocalypse Hollywood movie.

Who’s lying now? That fire was caused by Mankind, yes, in the form of malfeasance by the utility company, Pacific Gas and Electricity. In an area that typically gets very dry because of geography, made worse due to environmental policies on clearing brush and old growth. Nothing to do with climate change, natural, man-caused, or any combination.

But, hey, Jay needs someone to notice him, so he does his Goracle podium thumping schtick.

Read: Excitable Jay Inslee Says Trump’s Stance On ‘Climate Change’ Is Treason »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Democrats, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Announces Deal With Mexico To Avoid Tariffs

By William Teach June 8, 2019 – 6:59 am

Who’s hit worse, the #Resistance or the #NeverTrumpers? I’ve seen more #NeverTrumpers losing their minds on Twitter, in comments, and on their blogs than #Resistance over the threat of tariffs. Maybe you’ve seen the other way. They just don’t get that Trump does things differently, but, they are all infused with TDS

US makes deal with Mexico on tariffs, immigration, Trump announces

The U.S. has reached an agreement with Mexico that heads off the start of tariffs on Monday.

The deal, announced by President Trump via tweet on Friday night, is said to include plans to return migrants seeking asylum to Mexico, where they will remain until their claims can be processed.

“I am pleased to inform you that The United States of America has reached a signed agreement with Mexico. The Tariffs scheduled to be implemented by the U.S. on Monday, against Mexico, are hereby indefinitely suspended,” he said. “Mexico, in turn, has agreed to take strong measures to….stem the tide of Migration through Mexico, and to our Southern Border. This is being done to greatly reduce, or eliminate, Illegal Immigration coming from Mexico and into the United States. Details of the agreement will be released shortly by the State Department. Thank you!”

Mexico promises to deploy its National Guard throughout Mexico, particularly at the border, increase actions to dismantle human trafficking operations to smuggle individuals across the border, and take extra steps to coordinate with the American government to share information and “better protect and secure our common border,” according to a statement from the State Department.

Trump thinks of things along a business related line, not a typical diplomacy related line, which can take forever to get done. He is rather the bull in the china shop. It doesn’t always work, but, neither does diplomacy.

Some Democrats responded with ire even in the wake of the new deal. One was 2020 presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke, who tweeted: “The damage of Trump’s reckless trade policies and tariffs has already been done. What we see is yet another example of him trying to be both the arsonist who created this problem in the first place and the firefighter who wants credit for addressing it.”

Poor Beto, still trying to get noticed. Regardless, if Mexico sticks to the agreement, you can bet Trump will try and hook them up on some deal, offering the carrot.

PS: The minute I flipped over to Twitter after posting this, I ran across multiple #NeverTrumpers finding a way to make this negative. Sigh.

Read: Trump Announces Deal With Mexico To Avoid Tariffs »

Posted in Donald Trump, Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Warmist Upset That Democratic Party Is Trying To Downplay ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach June 7, 2019 – 3:00 pm

Warmist Justin Gillis rears his head, and, strangely, I somewhat agree with him

The Democratic Party Is Trying to Downplay Climate Change. Don’t Let It.

Now we know. The Democratic Party establishment in Washington really believes it is going to get away with running another round of presidential primaries in which the climate crisis is basically hidden in the attic.

The proof came this week, when the Democratic National Committee informed one of the candidates, Jay Inslee, that it had turned down his call to hold a candidate debate specifically about climate change.

People are roasting alive in California towns hit by the deadliest wildfires in the state’s history. Midwestern cities are reeling from deluge upon deluge. Coastal communities are starting to drown from a relentlessly rising sea.

None of that is enough, apparently, for the Democratic Party to choose to put this issue front-and-center in the primary campaign. Not only did the D.N.C. turn Mr. Inslee down; according to him, the party informed him that he would be banned from party-sponsored debates if he took part in any unofficial candidate debate on climate change.

In a statement, the party declared it would not schedule any single-issue debates, so that voters would “have the ability to hear from candidates on dozens of issues of importance.” That might make sense if the D.N.C. were only planning two or three debates. It is planning 12; surely the party can afford to devote a twelfth of its debate time to the issue that threatens to throw human civilization into crisis.

I wonder why they’re trying to stay away from this in televised debates?

In fairness to the Democrats, turning the climate issue to their advantage in a general election is certainly going to be tricky. Only a decade ago, Republicans like John McCain took the problem seriously, but now the Republican Party can be counted on for relentless demagogy about any solutions proposed by the Democrats. The Bolsheviks are coming! (big snip)

So I have a proposal for the Democratic candidates: All of you care about the climate crisis, and many of you have already put a lot of work into showing the voters that you do. I suggest that you simply refuse to accept the D.N.C. edict. If the party will not host a climate debate, agree among yourselves that you are going to have one. Ask one of the cable channels to put it on the air.

Which is why I agree with Justin: they should hold at least one debate on ‘climate change’, and make it a bigger part of all the others. That way, the People will know exactly how the Dems policies will harm their lives and money and freedom.

Read: NY Times Warmist Upset That Democratic Party Is Trying To Downplay ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 7, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is an area flooded from extreme weather from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on prayers now being a political weapon.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Strange: Mexico Seems To Be Doing Things To Avoid Trump’s Tariffs

By William Teach June 7, 2019 – 10:40 am

Democrats, a few squishy Republicans, and a whole bunch of #NeverTrumpers were freaking out over Trump’s threatened tariffs on Mexico (thought, let’s face it, they freak out over everything Trump says and does). They said they would never work. Huh

Mexico deploys military to curb migration, reportedly offers major concessions as Trump tariffs loom

With just days to go until the Trump administration is set to impose punishing tariffs on Mexico unless the country halts the unprecedented flow of illegal immigrants across the southern border, numerous signs that Mexico would capitulate emerged Thursday — but it remained unclear Friday morning whether their efforts would satisfy the White House.

Reports in the evening indicated that Mexico’s negotiators with Washington have offered to immediately deploy 6,000 National Guard troops to the border with Guatemala. Additionally, Mexico has reportedly agreed to a major overhaul of reasonable asylum protocols, which would require asylum applicants to seek permanent refuge in the first country they arrive in after fleeing their home countries.

For virtually all Central American migrants, that country would not be the United States. The Trump administration has already begun requiring asylum applicants to wait in Mexico while their claims are processed, saying too many applicants were using the system fraudulently to escape into the country. Last month, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a request to stop that practice temporarily.

However, two administration officials tell Fox News that while talks have been going well with Mexico, and that Mexico is making some fresh proposals, there is not yet a deal that U.S. officials are sure to imminently accept.

Democrats may hate the United States, and many other nations might denigrate us, but, at the end of the day, the U.S. has a lot of power, and nations need the U.S. What if Trump puts in a measure that would keep Americans from going to Mexico for vacations? Think that would do some damage to Mexico financially?

People keep forgetting that Trump is not a politician, but a businessman, and he’s not going to do the long, boring diplomacy thing. He’s going to use a different set of tools. Expect him to throw out some carrots to Mexico shortly.

Read: Strange: Mexico Seems To Be Doing Things To Avoid Trump’s Tariffs »

Posted in Donald Trump, Illegal Immigration | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Has A Sad That None Of The Democrats Are Pushing A Carbon Tax

By William Teach June 7, 2019 – 6:59 am

Writing in the opinion section, Catherine Rampell is rather bummed that the 2020 Democratic candidates, all 453 of them, are forgetting to put forth a carbon tax. She should be careful what she wishes for, because what do you think will happen to a company that relies on the use of lots and lots of fossil fuels to gather then news and lots and lots of trees turned into paper?

Why do none of the Democrats’ climate plans include the most important tool?

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has a big, bold, multitrillion-dollar plan for addressing climate change. So does her rival Joe Biden. Likewiseformer Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke. And, of course, Gov. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), whose entire campaign is structured around the climate crisis.

These candidates, to their credit, have offered thoughtful solutions for addressing the most pressing policy challenge of our time. Their proposals are highly detailed and thorough, often running to dozens of pages in length.

And it’s precisely because they’re so detailed and thorough that it’s so bizarre none of them explicitly mentions the obvious, no-brainer tool for curbing carbon emissions: putting a price on carbon.

A carbon tax (or its cousin, a cap-and-trade system) is almost universally embraced by economists on both the left and the right. With good reason, too. Taxing carbon means pricing in, upfront, the implicit costs that come from using fossil fuels — especially, though not exclusively, the cost of warming our planet.

She is right that none of them are offering up a carbon tax, even uber-Warmist Jay Inslee. Instead, later in the piece, Rampell notes

The plans devote a lot of verbiage to talking about the magical properties of government procurement — that is, using the deep pockets of the government to purchase more energy-efficient products. Warren, for instance, analogizes her own plan, which includes a $1.5 trillion federal procurement commitment, to the industrial policy America previously undertook for the space race and our mobilization against Nazi aggression.

The plans really are all about making government massive and controlling, involving pretty much all aspects of life, much like the nutty Green New Deal. They’re basically left-wing pipe dreams wrapped under the banner of ‘climate change’.

The first is that it immediately nudges consumers and businesses away from purchasing carbon-intensive products, because (duh) those products get more expensive.

Actually, it causes just about everything to get more expensive, and causes “unanticipated consequences”, such as people using lots more wood for things like heating and cooking, just as we see in places like Germany and France, which are importing tongs of woods pellets from America.

The second is that, over the longer run, it motivates entrepreneurs and investors to develop new green technologies, because they know they can make money as customers seek out cheaper, lower-carbon-footprint alternatives. Capital organically moves to wherever scientists and investors actually believe the most promising technologies lie, which might be ones that haven’t even been invented yet.

If this is the case, why aren’t we seeing this from places that currently have carbon taxes? California mostly seems to be just exporting Crazy. European nations do not seem to be developing much in the way of “green technologies” despite long established carbon taxes.

Just because the public sector buys more energy-efficient lightbulbs, electric cars or solar panels doesn’t mean the (much larger) private sector will, absent price incentives. Especially if we add conditions to the production of those green goods that actually increase their costs to consumers, as some of these plans do.

Of course, changing our behavior by force is not what our government was established for (excepting criminal behavior, of course). It’s not there to force us to buy certain products and such. Those who want to do this are, what’s that political system again?

Read: Washington Post Has A Sad That None Of The Democrats Are Pushing A Carbon Tax »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Democrats, Global Warming | 13 Comments | Trackback URL

Dyke March Returns To D.C., Bans Jewish And Israeli Symbols

By William Teach June 7, 2019 – 6:41 am

They’re claiming that that they aren’t anti-Jew and anti-Israel, though

DC gay pride parade faces backlash after banning Jewish pride flag

Participants at an upcoming gay pride parade in D.C. will be able to wave the Palestinian flag, but not the Israeli flag or the Jewish pride flag.

The D.C. Dyke March will not allow participants to display Israeli or “nationalist” symbols, according to Forward.

“This includes Israeli flags, as well as flags that resemble Israeli flags, such as a pride flag with a Star of David in the middle,” march organizer Rae Gaines said. Gaines also said American flags would not be welcome at the event, but a Palestinian flag would.

“The issue [with the Jewish Pride flag] is where the Star of David is positioned in a way that looks like an Israeli flag, it creates an unsafe space,” Gaines said.

A joint statement from Jewish, feminist, and LGBT groups condemned the move. They pointed out “rising anti-Semitism on the far right and far left.”

That rising Jew hatred is really from the far, far, far right and from the mainstream Left (which, on the political spectrum, is actually far right, being linked to Fascism and Authoritarian models). It’s nice that they throw in the blocking of the American flag. They should try go be gay in places like Palestine, see how that works out. The laws and rules and such are not as bad in Palestinian territory as it is in other Muslim nations, but, certainly not even close to as good as in the U.S. Or as in Israel, which is rather progressive.

The Anti-Defamation League also called out the move in a Thursday statement.

“Banning the Star of David in their parade is anti-Semitic, plain and simple,” CEO Jonathan Greenblat said. “We call on the organizers to immediately reverse this policy.”

The Dyke march put out a statement attempting to show that they totally aren’t anti-Jew, they’re just anti-Zionist, and pretty much affirmed that they’re anti-Jew.

Read: Dyke March Returns To D.C., Bans Jewish And Israeli Symbols »

Posted in Democrats, Israel, Liberal World | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Cost Of AOC’s Green New Deal? At Least $10 Trillion

By William Teach June 6, 2019 – 3:43 pm

But, we all know, if she’s saying it will cost $10 trillion, it will probably be around $50 trillion. But, hey, she thinks dumping taxpayer money into the economy while implementing rules and regs that cause massive problems in the economy will stimulate the economy

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says her Green New Deal climate plan would cost at least $10 trillion

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Wednesday that her ambitious plan to fight climate change, expand the social safety net, and stimulate the economy would cost at least $10 trillion.

Ocasio-Cortez introduced her Green New Deal resolution with Sen. Ed Markey in February, but did not release a price tag estimate at the time.

“I think we really need to get to $10 trillion to have a shot,” the freshman lawmaker told The Hill on Wednesday, adding, “I know it’s a ton. I don’t think anyone wants to spend that amount of money, it’s not a fun number to say, I’m not excited to say we need to spend $10 trillion on climate, but … it’s just the fact of the scenario.”

The Bronx native acknowledged that proposing $10 trillion in government spending will be unpopular among many Americans.

“It’s not politically popular, people are going to call it unrealistic, and I just don’t think people understand how bad the problem is,” she said.

So, her idea is to force people to comply, right? But, remember, for all her yammering about the GND and the liberal media squeeing over it, the Democrat controlled House won’t vote on it, AOC won’t demand a vote on it, Democrats in the Senate voted “present” on it, and AOC had a hissy fit over the Senate vote.

I dare them to vote on it. Debate it in the House. Let the People know what it will do.

Read: Cost Of AOC’s Green New Deal? At Least $10 Trillion »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 6, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is champagne which will soon disappear due to Other People’s carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Brass Pills, with a post on Youtube demonitizing Steven Crowder.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove