Surprise: Democratic Socialist Darling Refuses To Debate

By William Teach August 10, 2018 – 8:03 am

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that she would debate anyone, and, when an offer was made, she made it about sexism

(Fox News) Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro challenged democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to a debate, offering to donate $10,000 to her campaign if she accepted — but it triggered a sparring match online.

Shapiro initially tweeted a video on Wednesday in which he mocked Democratic National Committee chairperson Tom Perez for calling Ocasio-Cortez, a New York congressional candidate, the “future of the Democratic Party,” before issuing his challenge.

“Miss Ocasio-Cortez, I’m really excited that you’ve been elevated to that position and I would love to have a real conversation with you about the issues. You’ve noted that you think Republicans are afraid to debate you or talk to you or discuss the issues with you,” Shapiro said.

“Not only am I eager to discuss the issues with you, I’m willing to offer $10,000 to your campaign, today, for you to come on our Sunday special,” he continued. “We can have an hour long conversation about all the topics under the sun, really probe your belief system.”

Here’s how she responded

To which Shapiro responded

Discussion and debate are not “bad intentions.” Slandering someone as a sexist catcaller without reason or evidence does demonstrate cowardice and bad intent, however.

We shouldn’t be surprised that AOC would refuse to debate her beliefs, nor go down the sexism route, because, really, even her discussions with friendly media have turned into dumpster fires they’re so bad.

Read: Surprise: Democratic Socialist Darling Refuses To Debate »

Posted in Democrats | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

Democrat Anti-ICE Talk Leads Man To Offer $500 To Kill A Federal Immigration Officer

By William Teach August 10, 2018 – 7:51 am

Now, just imagine that some sort of push by a Republican led to a Trump supporter offering money to anyone who would, say, kill a Planned Parenthood abortion doctor. Would this be splashed all over the news? Instead of mostly being a small story?

(CBS Miami) A man who offered on social media to pay $500 to anyone who would kill a federal immigration officer was arrested on Thursday, prosecutors said.

Law enforcement officials said they hope the arrest of Brandon Ziobrowski sends the message that they will not tolerate a rise in threats against immigration officers and others amid increasingly heated political debates.

“The agents and officers out there enforcing federal laws are doing their job, plain and simple,” U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling said. “Those who disagree with their mission are of course free to say so. But there is a difference between public debate and intentionally putting others in fear of their lives.”

Ziobrowski, of Cambridge, is charged with using interstate and foreign commerce to transmit a threat to injure another person. He was arrested in New York, where he was visiting a friend.

His Twitter account was finally suspended, but not before someone in the government grabbed a screenshot

And he’s also not a big fan of the police

Ziobrowski also tweeted about his desire to kill Arizona U.S. Sen. John McCain and said guns “should only be legal for shooting the police like the second amendment intended,” prosecutors say.

Perhaps some reporter could ask Democrats like Kirsten Gillibrand about their abolish ICE push.

Read: Democrat Anti-ICE Talk Leads Man To Offer $500 To Kill A Federal Immigration Officer »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Are Hail And East Coast Tornadoes Signs Of ‘Climate Change’ Doom?

By William Teach August 9, 2018 – 3:24 pm

We used to just call this “weather.” Now, every time a storm happens the “news” media has to wonder whether these are signs of doom due to newspapers delivering their tree killing editions in fossil fueled vehicles. First up, the NYC paper with a virulent racist on its editorial board

Tornadoes on the East Coast May Be a Sign of Things to Come

A tornado, albeit a weak one, touched down in New York City last Thursday, in the College Point neighborhood of Queens. A few days earlier, a stronger tornado was spotted near the town of Douglas, in central Massachusetts. And a few days later a whirlwind ripped through nearby Webster, displacing dozens of people from their damaged homes.

The storms were far from the region in the middle of the country known as Tornado Alley, where the bulk of the nation’s tornadoes occur. In a summer already marked by simmering heat that researchers have linked to global warming, is climate change also making tornadoes more common in places where they once were infrequent?

Though individual weather events are distinct from the more broadly changing climate, global warming does influence weather patterns. Still, any link between climate change and the frequency of tornadoes is far from straightforward, according to researchers.

First, the point was made that this is out of the ordinary, despite the fact that summer is typically a time when tornadic activity tends to move to the east coast. Tornado Alley is more of a spring and fall thing. Did writer Kendra Pierre-Louis know this or do any research, or did she just impart what she thought was Science because she heard the phrase “Tornado Alley” and ran with it? Regardless, the point here is to fear monger early on before people moved on to other stories while tweeting about how east coast tornadoes are signs of climate change doom, thinking they never ever happened prior.

In fact, if you read the rest of the article, you’ll find out that scientists really have no clue, though you have a few that attempt to impart opinion without actual scientific fact.

And then

Does climate change contribute to severe hailstorms in Colorado?

Monday’s hailstorm and two earlier this summer in Colorado Springs and southern El Paso County were part of what atmospheric scientists are calling an “active” but not unusual year for hail events.

“This is a more active year than normal, but convective storms in July and August are not totally out of the ordinary,” said Katja Friedrich, an associate professor in the Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences Department at the University of Colorado at Boulder. “It is still an unfortunate event with repercussions, though, because of the damage at places like the zoo.”

In fact, despite some squishy writing, the answer is somewhere between “probably not and we have not a clue.” Good for writer Liz Forster for starting out with an attempt to tell all those who freaked out about the round of hail and blamed ‘climate change’ that they need to just calm down and take a chill pill. Because people did freak. Hail, and tornadoes, have always been around.

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/1026969898566737920

And, even if there is an uptick during a warm period (and what happens during cool periods?), there is no proof that this is mostly/solely caused by Mankind.

Read: Say, Are Hail And East Coast Tornadoes Signs Of ‘Climate Change’ Doom? »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 9, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on wealth shaming Betsy De Vos.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

We’re Totally At A New Tipping Point, But We Can Do Something About It

By William Teach August 9, 2018 – 10:30 am

This has been huge among the Cult of Climastrology members over the past few days

Scientists warn of ‘hothouse’ tipping point

An international team of scientists released a new study this week warning that even if governments around the world meet the carbon emission reductions called for in the Paris Agreement, there is a risk of ‘no return’ towards climate change as Earth hits what they called a “hothouse” tipping point. The authors warn that the transition towards an emission-free world economy has to be accelerated before parts of the planet become inhabitable due to changes in climate and (the most pressing issue for the Cayman Islands) sea-level rise.

“Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene“, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, warns of a domino effect as natural phenomena currently storing greenhouse gases emit those gases in a warmer world.

So, essentially the same old doom and gloom, predicting tipping points that always fail to materialize, assigning causation to mankind while mostly ignoring nature, except, of course, when they say that mankind is simply making natural processes worse, and why are you questioning them, you darned deniers!!!!! Which leads us to Mother Jones on the same subject

Stop Despairing and Do Something About Climate Change

In all fairness, even writer Eric Holthaus notices the unhinged, breathless coverage of the scary prognostication from the media

Well, the authors say, it will be existentially difficult to adapt to a world with runaway permafrost melt, global forest die-offs, rapid sea level rise, and supercharged extreme weather. These aren’t just tipping points. The authors call them tipping cascades. That kind of world will make the current version of Earth look like paradise.

But the bottom line is, we have no choice but to press on through this fear. This is our actual planet we’re talking about, the only place in the entire universe capable of supporting life as we know it.

The next decade will almost surely decide our fate. That should empower us. It means every act has meaning; we have the chance to save the world as we know it every single day. In this scenario we now find ourselves in, radical, disruptive climate action is the only course of action that makes sense.

What, what acts are they?

Liverman and the other authors anticipated a defeatist response and published a multi-page document of possible solutions which, when combined with other research on the most important actions people can take, gives a blueprint for hope, not despair.

Well, that’s pretty much it. Stop despairing and do something which I won’t really tell you about.

Read: We’re Totally At A New Tipping Point, But We Can Do Something About It »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on We’re Totally At A New Tipping Point, But We Can Do Something About It | Trackback URL

Judge Hears Texas’ Arguments To End DACA

By William Teach August 9, 2018 – 8:58 am

On one hand, you have some judges supporting this unconstitutional and extra-legal program which was only supposed to be temporary but is really meant to give these illegals permanent standing. On the other, you have people who say “hey, we have laws”

(Texas Tribune) The state of Texas will continue to incur irreparable financial harm if an Obama-era immigration program isn’t halted immediately, attorneys for the state argued in Houston on Wednesday.

But lawyers representing nearly two dozen recipients of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program countered by saying Texas sat back for six years and did nothing, and its attorneys have yet to prove the harm the state claims it has faced since the program was implemented in 2012.

Those were just two of the arguments presented to U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen on Wednesday after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the Trump Administration in May to end the 2012 program, which protects immigrants brought into the U.S. as children from deportation and allows them to obtain a two-year work permit.

Hanen in 2015 halted a more far-reaching immigration program, Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA, after he agreed with Texas and 25 other states that the initiative was too broad for the president to create on his own and that federal procedures were violated when it was implemented.

Assistant Texas Attorney General Todd Disher said Hanen’s prior decision should be applied to this current case because both programs were implemented by similar methods.

Regarding that prior decision

Hanen’s 2015 ruling, which was upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court, was also cited as a reason that the 2012 program was a unilateral overreach of executive authority.

“The Fifth Circuit correctly held the [Immigration and Nationality Act] does not permit the reclassification of millions of illegal aliens.”

Essentially, what DACA did was offer “temporary” relief from being deported, yet, when does that end? The idea was that Congress would suddenly rush to legalize these “kids” who were “brought” here illegally. Yet, that did not happen. Because there are enough people in Congress who realize that coming illegally is against federal law and we should not be rewarding bad behavior that would entice others to come illegally. The DACA kids just expected to be given citizenship. They didn’t want to earn it, nor pay for it, as so many others do who go through the normal method.

Over at the USA Today, Texas AG Ken Paxton writes

“I am president, I am not king. I can’t do these things just by myself.”

“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case.”

Despite these statements, President Obama nevertheless proceeded with his notorious DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program. DACA unilaterally granted legal status to a whole class of illegal aliens without congressional approval. It therefore represents a dangerous exercise of executive power, which, if left unchecked, allows the President to set aside any duly enacted law. On Wednesday, as the attorney general of Texas, my office argued DACA’s unconstitutionality to a federal court.

Back in June 2017, I wrote a letter to President Trump urging him to follow through on his campaign promise to rescind DACA. True to his word, the President promised to cancel DACA by March5, 2018 if Congress did not amend federal law. When Congress failed to act and the president rescinded the original executive action, federal judges blocked him, issuing the logically inconsistent holdings that President Trump cannot unilaterally undo an executive action his predecessor had unilaterally undertaken in the first place.

Read the rest.

Read: Judge Hears Texas’ Arguments To End DACA »

Posted in Constitution, Current Affairs, Illegal Immigration | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Paper Who Hired Racist: Values Over Rules Will Totally Save Twitter

By William Teach August 9, 2018 – 8:40 am

Over at the NY Times, the same paper which hired virulent racist Sarah Jeong to sit on their editorial board, tech writer Kara Swisher thinks she knows what Twitter really needs

Rules Won’t Save Twitter. Values Will.

This week, Alex Jones, the persistently mendacious conspiracy-theory spouter — yeah, that’s a real job in 2018 — finally became the ultimate swipe left of the social media age.

Apple, Facebook, YouTube, Pinterest, Spotify and most other major internet distributors banished Mr. Jones, either permanently or for some unspecified star-chamber-determined amount of time, for hate speech and other violations.

But not Twitter. Instead, Jack Dorsey, the chief executive, founder and tweet inventor himself, took to his own platform to explain in the high-minded tone that one takes with small children that Mr. Jones wasn’t suspended from Twitter because he “hasn’t violated our rules.” (snip)

While principles and rules will help in an open platform, it is values that Mr. Dorsey should really be talking about. By values, I mean a code that requires making hard choices — curating your offerings, which was something Apple got made fun of for doing, back when it launched the App Store, by the open-is-best crowd.

Let me say that I have nothing but admiration for the long-suffering trust and safety team at Twitter, which has been tasked with the Sisyphean job of controlling humanity and scaling civility, armed only with some easily gamed and capriciously enforced rules. How are these people supposed to do that when the company has provided them with no firm set of values?

Values would require that Twitter make tough calls on high-profile and obviously malevolent figures, including tossing them off as a signal of its intent to keep it civil.

Who says people want to keep it civil? Who says people are against the wide open Twitter? Who says they can’t decide for themselves who they want to follow, who they want to interact with, and whom they want to block? If you want to read Alex Jones, that’s on you. Don’t like what he’s writing? Don’t follow. Is he tweeting nasties at you? Block him. We’re adults.

But, it can be a very slippery slope when we start using “values” based on whims. Whose values? Those of the far left?

Of course she jumps into what Trump does on Twitter, because Trump pretty much resided rent free in the heads of all Democrats, before moving to

All this is not to say that fixing Twitter will be easy; in fact, I think at this point it is nearly impossible. Add to that the fact that this is a global issue, making it hard to have any consistent rules that address the complexity of the world and, really, its deep and abiding ugliness.

But will Mr. Dorsey ever stand up to the uglies to protect the rest of us?

I’m an adult: I don’t need Jack Dorsey to protect me proactively. I’ll decide myself.

Interestingly, at the same time Bret Stephens has an opinion piece up defending racist Sarah Jeong

See, when we talk of “values”, again, whose? On one hand, they want to take down Alex Jones. On the other, they’re fine with protecting Jeong. We should also be wondering why a member of the Credentialed Media is advocating private sector censorship.

Read: Paper Who Hired Racist: Values Over Rules Will Totally Save Twitter »

Posted in Unhinged Tools, Wonky Media | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

CoC: The Best Time To Talk About Climate Doom Is During The Summer

By William Teach August 8, 2018 – 3:00 pm

One thing I notice during the warm months is an uptick in stories that mention global warming

From the screed

 “Domino-effect of climate events could move Earth into a ‘hothouse’ state” is how the Guardian described the findings of a study published this week Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The BBC went with “Climate change: ‘Hothouse Earth’ risks even if CO2 emissions slashed”

If you’ve followed the story of the changing environment at all in recent years, you’re likely not surprised by these headlines. The risks of climate change have been clear to us since at least the 1980s, and the predictions of environmental destruction to hit Earth have mostly gotten worse.

That said, there’s still a sizeable population on the planet that doesn’t care about climate change or, worse, denies it’s real. To turn those people around, some of the world’s most preeminent scientists have figured out it makes sense to publish global-warming studies when it’s hot outside.

It was the trick Jim Hansen, one of the world’s leading lights on climate change, used when he gave his now-famous testimony to the US Congress on a blistering hot day in June 1988. In a recent story for the New York Times, Nathaniel Rich shared how the testimony was timed:

In other words, they have to attempt to trick you to get you to believe their “science.”

Read: CoC: The Best Time To Talk About Climate Doom Is During The Summer »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming, Uncategorized | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 8, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible sea flooding because Other People use air conditioning, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on an actress testing the value of the market.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Surprise: Warmists Admit Carbon Taxes Are Jobs Killers

By William Teach August 8, 2018 – 10:30 am

This won’t get any airplay here in the U.S., nor most other countries, because it’s inconvenient

https://twitter.com/Blazingcatfur/status/1026989378743062528

The Blazing Cat Fur post leads to this piece in the Toronto Sun (for those not familiar, that’s Canadian PM Justin Trudeau to the left, Climahysteric Minister Cathering Mckenna (liberals were very upset that someone set up a parody account, and got it yanked. There is a new one. She’s also called Climate Barbie)

The Liberals have now admitted the carbon tax is a job-killer

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna admitted an inconvenient truth last week: the Liberal carbon tax would drive jobs out of Canada. The admission came in the form of a partial flip-flop on the issue.

The government quietly posted a document online indicating that 80%-90% of greenhouse gas emissions of large industrial corporations would be exempt from the tax. The reason? The government wants to avoid high costs that push industrial production out of Canada to places without carbon taxes.

But wait; McKenna has told us all along that the carbon tax would actually help our economy. Now she accepts it could simply move business, jobs and emissions out of Canada to more polluting countries where the emissions would ironically be higher. (snip)

So, if the Liberals really cared about the earth, they wouldn’t impose a damaging carbon tax on the world’s cleanest industries. Instead, they would admit the world needs more Canada, and keep industry and jobs here.

It is not clear if the Liberals have accepted this common-sense argument or if McKenna climbed down to avoid having the carbon tax lead to mass layoffs in the middle of the coming election year.

Whatever the reason, it’s problematic that the Liberals are not making similar exemptions for consumers who will pay the tax on 100% of their heat, gas and other fuels. If the Liberals cared as much about hard-working Canadians as they do about large industrial players, Minister McKenna would have offered them a break too. After all, we have to heat our homes. But, unlike industry, we don’t have the option of moving if we can’t afford Justin Trudeau’s carbon tax. So, industrial corporations get a break, but working families pay more. And the government won’t even come clean about how much more.

They don’t care about the average citizen, who would pay $1,000 a year (Canadian money) or more, because those people are stuck. Meanwhile, the same people who push this run around in fossil fueled vehicles and take fossil fueled flights all over, including to climate change conferences which complain about Other People using fossil fuels.

Read: Surprise: Warmists Admit Carbon Taxes Are Jobs Killers »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | Comments Off on Surprise: Warmists Admit Carbon Taxes Are Jobs Killers | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove