Sore Losers: People Who Demanded FBI Investigation Call It A Sham And A Cover Up

By William Teach October 6, 2018 – 7:04 am

Democrats demanded an FBI investigation despite being told that the six previous background investigations showed nothing, and the chances that this one would produce something different, especially as Dr. Ford had zero corroborating evidence, were pretty darned slim. So, when it produced nothing?

LIBERALS BEG FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION, AND THEN ARE UNHAPPY WITH THE RESULTS

….

The FBI’s weeklong investigation did not find any information that substantiated Ford’s or Ramirez’s claims. Despite that, both Democratic Senators and liberal commentators denounced the investigation as a “sham.”

Worth watching the buildup on calls for an investigation till we get to the sham talk about halfway through

And (not worth watching her screed)

And it was rigged!

And somehow CNN let their derangement go so far as to all this bit of nutbaggery from Frida Ghitis to be published

Kavanaugh FBI probe was a cover-up

The FBI probe apparently did not find any corroborating evidence into allegations of sexual assault against Judge Brett Kavanaugh because it was never meant to do that. It was not a search for the truth. It was a charade meant to appear as a real investigation, with the purpose of giving Republicans a fig leaf to confirm Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court without paying a political price. The final outcome of the vote is uncertain, but given the Friday morning results on a procedural vote, the odds seem to favor confirmation.

The investigation and much of what has gone along with it amount to a cover-up. No serious observer would mistake it for an effort to ascertain what really happened on those occasions when Kavanaugh, according to his accusers, was drunk, aggressive and assaulted them. He has repeatedly denied all the allegations.

It’s all designed to attempt to smear and create doubt on any future Kavanaugh votes on the Supreme Court, because he will be confirmed today. As Mr. Obama stated “elections have consequences.” Perhaps Democrats should have nominated someone other than Hillary, who was despised, ran a poor campaign, and passed out on 9/11 for all to see.

Read: Sore Losers: People Who Demanded FBI Investigation Call It A Sham And A Cover Up »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Good Grief: More Men Are Wearing Stilettos

By William Teach October 5, 2018 – 6:11 pm

This is so Peak 2018 metrosexual pajamaboy gamma male (we’re beyond beta male territory)

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/1048194177383714816

Had to include the tweet to show the accompany photo from the article

Han grew up to be a graphic designer, along the way running the femme footwear line Syro with business partner Henry Bae. The Brooklyn-based company sells heels and boots in men’s sizes 5-14. The styles are chic and trendy—plaid, patent, over-the-knee—but not gaudy à la Kinky Boots.

Whether a customer is male, trans, or non-binary, the mission of Syro is to promote femininity and encourage a fluid sense of style.

“We get emails where kids are saying how grateful they are to discover us, which is really heartwarming,” Han said. “They tell us that they’re wearing them to prom, or to a wedding. Those spaces are so gender-confirming so it’s nice to provide them a way to express themselves and challenge norms.”

The article doesn’t get any better after this, in fact, it goes way downhill. Thanks, Progressives. And it’s long, ending with

“People are uncomfortable and unhappily politically, and it makes sense that they want to feed grounded,” Graper mused. “When you’re sky-high in a stiletto, you’re not grounded.”

There are many kinds of heels, but none come close to communicating drama quite like a stiletto can. It’s what’s kept the look in vogue for more than 60 years. Sure, they’re comfortable, but kitten heels will never be as stylish as their taller cousins.

In Graper’s words, “I don’t love when people go for a shorter because it will be easier to walk in. It’s like, shit or get off the pot.”

Read: Good Grief: More Men Are Wearing Stilettos »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 5, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible horrible concrete causing drought and flood, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post wishing Kavanaugh had been as flawless as Obama.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | Comments Off on If All You See… | Trackback URL

Climate Change Apathy Is The Biggest Threat To Planet Or Something

By William Teach October 5, 2018 – 10:30 am

Because closing all those coal power plants which provided reliable, dependable, low cost energy hasn’t worked, it’s time for people to be forced to Do Things that satisfy the bigwigs in the Cult of Climastrology (which they themselves rarely do)

Climate change apathy, not denial, is the biggest threat to our planet

Three years after world leaders signed the Paris climate agreement, we’re about to better understand what that deal means for how we live our lives. On Monday, a major report from the UN’s climate science panel will set out what it will take to limit global warming to 1.5C, the key Paris target.

There are reasons to think the world is, finally, getting to grips with climate change. Carbon emissions are still rising but more slowly than before, and in many countries they’re falling. The UK has slashed its emissions to 19th-century levels, and we’re not alone – plenty of other countries, including the US, are making progress as well. Crucially, that’s happened without many people noticing, suggesting the world might be able to deal with the problem without having to persuade the public to change their polluting lifestyles.

But this is wishful thinking. The UK’s recent emissions cuts have mostly come from shutting coal power stations, which had few friends, and there aren’t many left to close. And that only happened after years of campaigning, but it was still much easier than what is to come. Cutting emissions further to stop dangerous warming will depend on people changing how they live: flying less and eating less meat and dairy, for example. There’s no way this can be done as quietly as what’s been achieved so far.

Huh. Many nations like the UK have done away with that energy, have nothing worthwhile to replace it with, they still haven’t gotten to where the Warmists want to be, so, time to “change your minds on how you live”

Persuading people to cut down on things they enjoy for the sake of the climate might seem impossible. In most European countries, about three-quarters of the public say they’re worried about climate change, yet less than a third would accept higher taxes on fossil fuels to cut emissions.

But this climate apathy can be overcome if it’s tackled in the right way. The first step is to understand the psychology behind apathy. Climate change is exactly the kind of threat our minds aren’t equipped to worry about. It seems distant, happening mostly in the future and to other people. The widespread tendency to think “I’ll be OK”, known as optimism bias, makes it easier for people to assume such distant problems won’t affect them.

So, basically tricking people. Brainwashing them. Lots of dictatorial/authoritarian nations did this as well

Yet, daunting though these barriers are, they can be beaten with political leadership and honesty. To start with, the international community has to admit its plans aren’t enough. Commitments to cut emissions, such as the Paris Agreement and the UK’s Climate Change Act, give the impression the problem is under control. It isn’t. The UK is set to miss its targets from the mid-2020s, while global plans are so weak they would, even if achieved, leave us on course for dangerous warming.

Honesty and political leadership aren’t two things that go together that often. And, since this whole movement is based on lies, misdirection, ginned up computer models, bad data, missing data, and manufactured data, honesty was never a part of this.

Read: Climate Change Apathy Is The Biggest Threat To Planet Or Something »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Could Possibly Maybe We Feel Reduce Scallop Production

By William Teach October 5, 2018 – 7:04 am

If you’d only agree to pay lots of taxes and give up your freedom to Government we could stop this

New Study Shows Climate Change Could Reduce Scallop Population

Researchers in Massachusetts say under the worst case scenario, climate change could reduce the scallop population by more than 50 percent in just a few decades, which could be bad news for New Bedford’s lucrative fishing port.

In 2016, commercial fishermen landed more than $300 million worth of fish at the Port of New Bedford, and 85 percent of that value came from scallops.

A new study from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution shows as carbon emissions in the atmosphere increase, so does the acidity in the ocean.

Jennie Rheuban, lead author of the report, said that could affect how well scallops can grow.

“Adults may actually be growing slower and calcifying less quickly under these acidified conditions because it’s more difficult for them to lay down calcium carbonate as a shell,” Rheuban said.

May, could, super scientific words, all based on attempting to scare people. One has to wonder how scallops developed in the first place when the oceans were warmer and higher? These people are shameless.

“They aren’t able to swim quite as well when they’re experiencing acidified conditions, and so we hypothesize that under acidification, scallops may be more susceptible to predation,” she said.

So, they don’t actually know? Huh.

Read: Your Fault: ‘Climate Change’ Could Possibly Maybe We Feel Reduce Scallop Production »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

NY Times: Kavanaugh Wouldn’t Represent The Will Of The Majority Or Something

By William Teach October 5, 2018 – 6:55 am

There are plenty of other hot takes at the NY Times alone, such as the editorial board finding that Kavanaugh should not be voted to the Court because he got mad and upset during the hearings where he defended himself from scurrilous, false allegations. This is the same editorial board which hired a confirmed racist in Sarah Jeong, and went forward when the allegations were proven. Then you have Michelle Goldberg claiming a cover up in the FBI report which Democrats demanded.

But the one by Michael Tromsky, who is a very far left Progressive/Socialist, takes the cake

The Supreme Court’s Legitimacy Crisis
It’s not about Kavanaugh’s alleged behavior. It’s about justices who do not represent the will of the majority.

Test your Supreme Court knowledge: In the entire history of the court, exactly one justice has been

a) nominated by a president who didn’t win the popular vote and

b) confirmed by a majority of senators who collectively won fewer votes in their last election than did the senators who voted against that justice’s confirmation.

Who was it?

If you’re like me, your mind started leapfrogging back to the 19th century. After all, this sounds like one of those oddities that was far more likely to have happened when our democracy was still in formation. (snip)

No — it turns out you don’t have to go back very far at all. The answer is Neil Gorsuch.

Donald Trump won just under 46 percent of the popular vote and 2.8 million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton. And Mr. Gorsuch was confirmed by a vote of 54-45. According to Kevin McMahon of Trinity College, who wrote all this up this year in his paper “Will the Supreme Court Still ‘Seldom Stray Very Far’?: Regime Politics in a Polarized America,” the 54 senators who voted to elevate Mr. Gorsuch had received around 54 million votes, and the 45 senators who opposed him got more than 73 million. That’s 58 percent to 42 percent.

And if the Senate confirms Brett Kavanaugh soon, the vote is likely to fall along similar lines, meaning that we will soon have two Supreme Court justices who deserve to be called “minority-majority”: justices who are part of a five-vote majority on the bench but who were nominated and confirmed, respectively, by a president and a Senate who represent the will of a minority of the American people.

And he goes on and on and on and on regarding this line of thought feelings. Which misses the point that Supreme Court is not there to represent the will of the majority, but to determine Constitutionality and rules of law. Equal justice for all. Not be mouthpieces for who got the most votes.

Further, Trump did receive the most votes per the way the Constitution lays out the election of the president. The Senators who voted for Gorsuch received the majority of individual votes in their state races to win their seats. It doesn’t matter how many Dianne Feinstein may have received in California vs how many Richard Burr received in North Carolina.

And, we should never forget that there are ways and means to protect the minority in Congress, the legislative branch, up to a point. We do not live in a majority rules nation.

These illogical, illiberal, anti-Constitution, Trump Derangement Syndrome (would be the same if Rubio, Jeb!, Cruz, or some other Republican won the presidency, though, perhaps the derangement would have been a 9/10 instead of a 13/10) infused Democrats should be pissed at Hillary for her campaign season failures, and, just suck it up. Trump’s president. Get over it.

Read: NY Times: Kavanaugh Wouldn’t Represent The Will Of The Majority Or Something »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

CNN Forgets Pertinent Information ON Guy Who Doxxed Republican Senators

By William Teach October 4, 2018 – 4:53 pm

I bet CNN’s Sophie Turner, who wrote the story, wonders why Republicans call them fake news

Capitol Police arrest man suspected of ‘doxing’ lawmakers during Kavanaugh testimony

The US Capitol Police announced Wednesday that they had arrested a suspect for allegedly “doxing” — a form of publishing private identifying information online — lawmakers during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week.

“Earlier today, the United States Capitol Police (USCP) arrested the Suspect who allegedly posted private, identifying information (doxing) about one or more United States Senators to the internet,” said Eva Malecki, communications director for Capitol Police, in a statement.

According to the statement, the Capitol Police arrested 27-year-old Jackson Cosko of Washington on Wednesday.

Cosko has been charged with making restricted personal information public, making threats in interstate commerce, unauthorized access of a government computer, identity theft and obstruction of justice/witness tampering, according to the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. He’s also facing charges of second-degree burglary and unlawful entry for incidents in Washington.

There’s only 4 more short paragraphs in the story, two of which are composed of one line each, none of which note

U.S. Capitol Police arrested Wednesday a former Democratic staffer suspected of posting the personal information of at least one United States senator to the internet. (snip)

Cosko has most recently worked as an intern for Texas Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee. He has also worked under Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire and former California Sen. Barbara Boxer, according to Fox News.

Jackson Lee’s Chief of Staff Glenn Rushing told Politico that Cosko has been fired.

Cosko is a “Democratic Political Professional & Cybersecurity Graduate Student,” according to his LinkedIn page, which states that his job duties in the U.S. Senate included assisting senior staff “with issues before the Commerce Committee including technology, telecommunications, transportation; as well as with cybersecurity matters before the Homeland Security Committee.”

Strange that such relevant information is missing from the CNN article, eh? In fact, it’s the only article on Cosko, so, it’s not like CNN is mentioning this anywhere else. Nor is it even front page. Imagine had a Republican intern done this: the treatment would have be completely different.

Read: CNN Forgets Pertinent Information ON Guy Who Doxxed Republican Senators »

Posted in Journalistic Malpractice | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 4, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrendous fossil fueled vehicle killing everyone, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jo Nova, who’s blog is ten years old today! Congratulations! Also, go read about Conservatives not being fooled like liberals on “extreme weather.”

Read: If All You See… »

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

Surprise: ‘Climate Change’ Is Barely An Issue For Midterms

By William Teach October 4, 2018 – 10:30 am

For all the caterwauling about the Doooooooom coming from anthropogenic climate change, it is almost always a tiny issue during actual election seasons. This one isn’t any different

DEMOCRATS SHELVE CLIMATE CHANGE RHETORIC AS ELECTION NEARS

Democratic messaging on climate change has been stunted throughout the midterm election cycle, and most candidates are turning to other issues to connect with voters, The New York Times reports.

Health care and the economy consistently top polls of key issues and social security, immigration and guns usually perform well too. Climate change, energy and the environment are almost always counted among the least important issues to voters deciding who to support.

Of 161 potentially competitive congressional races, just a “handful” of Democrats have released campaign ads, either on television or the internet, that talk prominently of climate change and energy issues, Climate Nexus’s in-house database shows, according to TheNYT.

“Until voters in the U.S. perceive this as a quite imminent threat, it’s liable to remain mired in the middle of all the other issues,” Climate Nexus executive director Jeff Nesbit, whose group is dedicated to communicating climate change threat, told TheNYT.

The article points out that people like Tom Steyer and Al Gore have donated millions and millions on the subject, and, just like in previous elections, that money has been wasted.

Highly publicized environmental activism and data has not translated into widespread concern for broader issues of climate change, energy or the environment as far as elections go. The top issues of registered voters are immigration and health care, according to a June poll by The Pew Research Center. Immigration most interested 19 percent of registered voters and health care is the key issue for 13 percent.

In a survey in which one of seven broad topics voters were most interested in for the 2018 midterms, energy issues never performed better than 5 percent by any metric and was often the least supported key issue, other than issues that fall into the obscure eighth category of “other,” according to an April survey by Morning Consult.

So, pretty much no one cares. Not even Democrats. As Anthony Watts notes

In close races, speaking on climate change might motivate conservative voters to turn out against Democratic candidates rather than encouraging Democratic voters to cast their ballots, according to The New York Times.

About the only election I can think of where ‘climate change’ was bigly on the ballot was the 2012 Queensland, Australia election, where the ruling party who was passing ‘climate change’ laws and rules and such lost so badly that they didn’t have enough seats left to be considered a recognized political party afterwards. Pushing taxes/fees, measures that will raise people’s cost of living, and measures that limit people’s liberty aren’t winning issues.

Read: Surprise: ‘Climate Change’ Is Barely An Issue For Midterms »

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

Huh: Canadian Party Which Wants To Limit Immigration Wins In Landslide In Quebec

By William Teach October 4, 2018 – 7:53 am

It seems that people in other countries are also tired of government bringing in people who share little to nothing in common with the host country, especially when those people end up on the public dole and refuse to assimilate. Heck, many demand that the host country change to accommodate them

Canadian anti-immigrant party thrives with landslide victory in Québec

The populist movements sweeping across Europe and that led to President Donald Trump’s 2016 victory is cascading through Québec, the mainly French-speaking province in eastern Canada, where a right-leaning candidate and his young party dominated this week’s elections.

François Legault, leader of the right-of-center Coalition Avenir Québec and the province’s new premier-elect, won a landslide victory, taking 74 of the legislature’s 125 seats — even though recent polls had predicted a far narrower win. The CAQ was founded only seven years ago.

Legault had promised during the campaign to cut Québec’s annual immigration quota from 50,000 newcomers per year to 40,000, while also requiring those wishing to settle in Québec to take a test on their proficiency in French and on “Québec values” within three years or face expulsion.

Late in the campaign, Legault was forced to apologize after assuring a supporter he would protect Québec culture from being “erased” by immigrants, but his anti-immigrant message did not deter voters.

Experts predict he may not be able follow through on his most controversial proposals, but his and CAQ’s landslide victory offered strong evidence that the populist, nationalist movement is thriving within one of Canada’s largest provinces. Québec is home to more than 8 million people or about 23 percent of the country’s more than 35 million people.

Got that? It’s anti-immigrant to want to reduce immigration by one-fifth, and require immigrants to learn the language and the culture.

Following Monday’s election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told reporters that he would work with Legault on numerous issues, including immigration. “There’s a lot of conversations to be had, and I’m sure we will have disagreements from time to time, but we will do so in a constructive way that serves the citizens that have entrusted us with responsibilities,” he said.

Trudeau may be seeing some internal data regarding what Canadians are thinking on the unfettered importation of legal immigrants that supports the CAQ position, as well as on allowing all the illegal aliens into Canada. The actual opinions of citizens is often very different than what one reads in the news.

And this should concern Democrats here in the U.S., who have staked their mid-term chances on things like protecting illegal aliens and bringing in immigrants who would go on the public dole, as well restricting citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights, Trump Derangement Syndrome, blocking Judge Kavanaugh, abortion, and other crazy stuff.

Read: Huh: Canadian Party Which Wants To Limit Immigration Wins In Landslide In Quebec »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove