Can You Guess Why Congress Won’t Pass Universal Background Checks?

By William Teach April 14, 2018 – 7:39 am

This one is a doozy, which is more in the category of “Unhinged Tools”, or at least “Barking Moonbats”, rather than under the “Constitution” and “2nd Amendment” categories. Here’s Rep. John Delaney, Democrat of Maryland’s 6th district

Congressman: 97% of Americans Want One Kind of Gun Control. Here’s Why Congress Hasn’t Acted

As the nation has mourned the 14 students and three staff members killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida and marched on their behalf, a remarkable national consensus formed around the need for gun safety legislation. In a recent poll conducted by Quinnipiac University, an astonishing 97% of those surveyed said that they support requiring background checks for all gun buyers. More broadly, a Politico/Morning Consult poll found that 68% support stricter gun laws.

I’ll write it again: I have no problem with requiring a background check for every gun purchase, including private ones, and including transfers. Want to give your adult son or daughter a gun? How about getting a gun for the wife? Yeah, there needs to be a background check. Just bought one last week? Background check. Have a concealed carry permit? Background check for new firearm. Things can change. Someone who had been legally allowed could have something show up in their record. Heck, I’ll go a step further, in that there should be a permit system for purchasing ammunition. Once a year you need to renew it, much like a fishing license. This would greatly reduce the number of people legally purchasing ammo to use with their illegally possessed, possibly stolen, firearm. It would have to be very tightly written legislation, to avoid the impulses of gun grabbers to deny people who shouldn’t be denied.

Despite such broad support and public mobilization, it looks like Congress and the President will do nothing to address the issue. There is no indication Republican leadership in the House of Representatives will even bring legislation that creates universal background checks forward for a vote, let alone consider other commonsense measures that are also widely supported. Across the country, people are rightly asking how this is possible. In addition to being the right thing to do, wouldn’t it make good political sense to implement policies that nearly everyone wants?

Well, really, the problem is that if you give the gun grabbers something, they will want more and more and more. And might even take advantage of legislation that most of us agree with and use it to deny law abiding citizens their 2nd Amendment Rights. It really is that simple. Give Democrats an inch, they’ll want lots and lots more inches. Pass universal background checks, and they’ll say “this is a great starting point” and demand more.

That’s not Delaney’s idea, though. Are you ready? Put the beverage down

One of the defining characteristics of American democracy in the last decade has been the loss of the House of Representatives as a responsible legislative body that reflects the will of the people. This has happened because of gerrymandering. And that’s a big part of why my colleagues and I can’t get anything done.

Read: Can You Guess Why Congress Won’t Pass Universal Background Checks? »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Barking Moonbats, Constitution, Unhinged Tools | 19 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Offers Mostly Reasonable Editorial Supporting Trump’s Syria Strikes

By William Teach April 14, 2018 – 7:12 am

By this time, you surely know of the airstrikes on Syria. I shan’t regurgitate them. I’ll direct you to this link for the full 411 if you want it. As for opinion, the NY Times Editorial Board mostly drops their Trump Derangement Syndrome for a few minutes, though you have to wonder how it would have gone had France and England not been involved

A Coordinated Attack On Syria

President Trump has sometimes seemed to view military action as a game and foreign policy as something set by online taunts. He seemed to think that as commander in chief he could simply follow his whims.

The funny part is, this has mostly worked.

So it was reassuring that his military response to a suspected chemical attack that killed dozens of people in the rebel-held Damascus suburb of Douma on April 7 was coordinated with Britain and France. In his address to the nation Friday night, he said that preventing the use of chemical weapons was in the “vital national security interest of the United States.”

Earlier this week we got his usual bluster. “Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and ‘smart,’” the president said on Twitter on Wednesday, in his best movie tough-guy impersonation, after a Russian diplomat warned that his nation’s forces would shoot down any missile fired at their ally Syria. On Friday night his message to the Syrian regime’s two main defenders, Russia and Iran, was more measured. “What kind of a nation wants to be associated with the mass murder of innocent men, women and children?” he asked. “The nations of the world can be judged by the friends they keep.”

That’s Trump. This is who he is. He’s not a politician. He also doesn’t set red lines and then blatantly ignore the crossing of red lines.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said that while this was a “one-off” attack, like the airstrike against Syria a year ago, the targets were involved in the production and storage of chemical agents, not just an airfield. He warned of further attacks if Syria used chemical weapons again.

The attack in Douma was an outrage. Photos showed children foaming from their mouths and nostrils. The World Health Organization reported that 500 people in Douma had symptoms of exposure to chemical weapons, and many of those who died had signs of “highly toxic chemicals.”

The thing is, you know that Democrats, and some Never Trump Republicans, are foaming at the mouth in outrage that Trump would do something like this, because they are deranged. They forget that Obama did the same thing (eventually), or excuse it. The Times does not. They do point out that this strike violates the UN charter and the Constitution, sort of.

Since then, President Barack Obama and now Mr. Trump have used those same authorizations at least 37 times to justify attacks on the Islamic State and other militant groups in 14 countries, including Yemen, the Philippines, Kenya, Eritrea and Niger, according to Dan Grazier of the Project on Government Oversight. This has allowed the Republican-led Congress to avoid public debate — and any responsibility for sending American men and women into battle.

This interpretation of the law gives a free hand to the volatile and thoughtless Mr. Trump, which could prove even more dangerous if he were to decide to attack North Korea or Iran.

First, we do need a new authorization, as the post September 11th one and the Iraq operations one do not really cover this, and, in all fairness, the NY Times had a problem with Obama ordering military strikes without a new one, though, also in all fairness, the barbs were aimed at the GOP controlled congress, not Obama. Supposedly, Senator Tim Kaine is going to offer up a new one.

It’s funny, though, that they call Trump volatile and thoughtless. They still just do not get Trump. They do not get why he won the election. And there’s no reason to explain it, because Liberals will never get it.

Anyhow, for a measured response, let’s go to CNN

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/984973525873299456

Their TDS has led them to take the side of North Korea, and they forget that the NKs have been developing nuclear weapons for decades, and set some off during Obama’s terms.

Read: NY Times Offers Mostly Reasonable Editorial Supporting Trump’s Syria Strikes »

Posted in Current Affairs, Donald Trump | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Oh, Noes, The Ocean’s Circulation Hasn’t Been This Sluggish In 1000 Years!!!!!!!!

By William Teach April 13, 2018 – 2:16 pm

I’ve mostly been ignoring this idiotic bit of scaremongering, but this one takes the cake

There’s one simple point: do they have the actual scientific data to prove the assertion? Measurements from over the entirety of the last 1000 years, of which the majority was during a Holocene warm period? What about comparisons to the time during Holocene warm periods?

But, don’t totally blame Greenpeace (which uses vast amounts of fossil fuels to pull all sorts of stunts to fund-raise): the link goes to the Washington Post, where an editor either allowed hyper-Warmist Chris Mooney to write the alarmist, unscientific headline, or did it him/herself. And includes this

The two studies have their differences: The second suggests the slowdown probably began for natural reasons around the time of the Industrial Revolution in 1850, rather than being spurred by human-caused climate change, which fully kicked in later.

But like the first study, the second finds that the circulation has remained weak, or even weakened further, through the present era of warming.

So, it started naturally, but, then they just Assume that it is now all man-caused. They have no actual proof using data that can stand up to the Scientific Method. You just have to take their word for it.

Watts Up With That? also points to a 2010 NASA study that the circulation was not slowing down. Warmists might proclaim “but, that was 8 years ago!!!!!” Yes, but the ocean circulation doom study proclaims that it has been slowing down for well over 100 years. The NASA study used actual data, rather than computer models.

Anyhow, even if it is slowing, there’s no proof of anthropogenic causation.

Read: Oh, Noes, The Ocean’s Circulation Hasn’t Been This Sluggish In 1000 Years!!!!!!!! »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach April 13, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful low carbon method of transportation which Everyone Else should be required to use instead of fossil fuels, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Diogenes’ Middle Finger, with a post on the FCC chair telling Democrats to go pound sand.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Doom: The 100th Meridian May Possibly Maybe We’re Not Sure Be Moving Due To ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach April 13, 2018 – 10:30 am

Everybody panic! Something might be happening

The 100th Meridian May Be Shifting Because of Climate Change

The 100th meridian, which bisects the Great Plains and separates the arid western states from the moister eastern states, may be shifting as a result of climate change, new studies say.

The imaginary line, metaphorically “drawn in the dirt” by American geologist and explorer John Wesley Powell in 1878, transects Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and the Dakotas in the United States, and continues up into Canada’s Manitoba.

Powell used the line to try to convince Congress to plan water and land-management districts that crossed state lines based on environmental constraints. His suggestions were met with backlash because legislators feared interstate districts would limit growth. Considering the water issues facing western states today, perhaps legislators should have taken Powell’s theories under consideration.

So he used it to advocate for increased governmental power over land, which means power over people. Huh.

In a second study published in March in the AMS journal, the researchers concluded that the line appears to be moving east, which could have big impacts on farming and other pursuits.

“Adjustment to changing environmental conditions would cause farm size and rangeland area to increase across the plains and percent of cropland under corn to decrease in the northern Plains as the century advances,” the study says.

Appears. May. Is it moving or is it not?

Regardless, it’s always amusing how people who treat Darwin and his hypothesis as a holy figure and holy script, respectively, seem shocked that nature shifts. That things do not stay the same.

Read: Doom: The 100th Meridian May Possibly Maybe We’re Not Sure Be Moving Due To ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Gun Grabber Groups Mailing Voting Registration Forms To 18 Year Olds

By William Teach April 13, 2018 – 7:11 am

Let me ask, did a certain thought just pop in your head, especially after the previous post? Anyway, let’s let people who eat Tide pods and escape to their safe spaces over Words decide the Second Amendment

Gun Control Groups Mailing Birthday Voting Forms to 18-Year-Olds

A coalition of gun control and progressive millennial outreach groups will be mailing teenagers a present for their 18th birthday: a voter registration form.

The coalition is targeting vulnerable pro-gun Republicans in 10 states with the Our Lives, Our Vote drive and hopes to register 50,000 18- and 19-year-olds through the initiative ahead of the 2018 midterm elections.

States where teens can expect a birthday voting package include Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

“America’s children took to the streets and led marches with a unified message that rang out across the country: we need a Congress that will protect us,” former Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords said in a statement Thursday.

Giffords and her husband, Mark Kelly, a retired Navy captain and former astronaut, co-founded a lobbying group and PAC in Giffords’ name that supports candidates and policies promoting more gun control. Giffords was shot and nearly killed in 2011 at a constituent event in Arizona.

She is joined in the effort by Everytown for Gun Safety, a partnership of more than 1,000 current and former mayors in the U.S., and NextGen America, a liberal group funded by billionaire hedge fund manager Tom Steyer that is focused on turning out millennials in 2018.

Here’s the first thought that went through my mind: where’d they get all the data on all these kids who are turning 18? People want to freak out over Facebook, Google, and so forth snagging our data, most of which is simply for advertising, but, here are anti-gun groups who essentially obtained data on minors, citizens who are legally children, in order to mail them a voter registration card for their birthday. If we want to discuss invasion of privacy, this is it. Someone in the government should be asking these groups where they obtained the data.

Anyhow, when will Giffords, Steyer, and Mike Bloomberg (who runs Everytown) give up their own firearms/armed security? The very thing they want to deny to other law abiding citizens.

Read: Gun Grabber Groups Mailing Voting Registration Forms To 18 Year Olds »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

LA Times: The Internet Has Become A Monster And Needs Restrictions Or Something

By William Teach April 13, 2018 – 6:56 am

Opinion writer George Skelton misses the irony in slamming the very platform that allows you to read his screeds

The internet is no longer an infant that needs freedom to innovate — it’s grown into a monster and needs to be restricted

Real estate developer Alastair Mactaggart became alarmed about the internet’s threat to personal privacy while chatting with a Google engineer at a cocktail party.

“I asked, ‘What’s this deal with all the privacy stuff? Is it anything to be worried about?'” Mactaggart recalls. “I expected him to say, ‘No, it’s not a big deal.’

“Instead he said, ‘If people only knew how much we know about them, they’d really freak out.'”

“I was taken aback,” the developer says. “That got me interested.”

Now the big internet companies are freaking out over what Mactaggart is doing. He’s threatening to jeopardize the operations of Google, Facebook and the like with a ballot initiative that regulates profiteering off their users’ private data. (snip)

It’s not just the marketing of political candidates that personal data is used for, of course. It’s also employed to market shoes, TV sets, cars, you name it. Companies glean information about your hobbies, age, children, residence, religion, gender and sexual orientation. And they use it to target ads at specific groups.

Quite frankly, I’m not sure what the big deal is. I’ve read article after article, and ads mean nothing. This happens in real life all the time. When you buy a car, companies are snagging your registration data, and call to say you need a warranty. It has to be explained to customers all the time that their vehicle warranty is just fine, ignore the calls.

The internet is no longer the infant that needed freedom to innovate and grow unregulated, if it ever was. It has grown into a monster and now needs to be restricted — like the railroads at the turn of the last century and financial institutions during the Great Depression.

And the actual recommendation?

Mactaggart’s initiative would affect companies that earn at least $50 million a year and derive half their annual revenue by peddling personal information.

Consumers would have the right to learn what info is collected. They’d need to be told whether it was disseminated and to whom. They could tell the companies to stop selling or sharing it. They couldn’t be charged more for internet service if they opted out. And they could sue if they were ignored.

OK. I guess. What, exactly, is this going to do? Here’s the real concerning part, the last line

Some regulation is needed. The Wild West days of an uncontrolled internet should be history.

The problem here is that if you give Progressives (nice Fascists) and inch, they’re going to want more and more inches immediately, working hard to get that proverbial mile. It’s a never ending cycle of more and more government involvement, interference, and control.

Oh, and it’s interesting that Liberals are suddenly Very Concerned over tech companies that tend to be very big donors to the Democratic Party collecting lots of data on citizens who use their product for advertising, yet are unconcerned that illegal aliens steal the identities of American citizens and essentially ruin their lives.

If someone wants to explain why this data collection is bad enough to require government, please.

Read: LA Times: The Internet Has Become A Monster And Needs Restrictions Or Something »

Posted in Web/Tech | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Increased Snowfall In Antarctica Is Caused By ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach April 12, 2018 – 3:09 pm

With the Cult of Climastrology, everything is caused by global warming/climate change/abrupt climate destruction. Here’s CNN going wonkadoodle. And, they have changed the headline since I popped this on Twitter and now

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/984442289979383810

Story did not change that I can see

Increasing snowfall in Antarctica could reduce sea level rise, but only a bit

Snowfall across the great white continent of Antarctica is increasing, according to a study released this week by an international team led by the British Antarctic Survey.

The team analyzed 79 ice cores from across Antarctica that provide detailed information on how much snow has fallen over hundreds of years, and it found a 10% increase in snowfall over the past two centuries.

This contradicts studies that found that Antarctic snowfall has remained largely constant over the past several decades to centuries. But those studies analyzed only a few ice cores, whereas this comprehensive look at the continent gives a much more thorough view of how weather patterns have changed the polar weather.

Wait for it

“The snowfall increase is driven by changing circulation patterns, drawing warm moist air from the mid-latitudes,” said lead study author Liz Thomas, an ice scientist with the British Antarctic Survey.

As you probably guessed, global warming is behind those changing circulation patterns, heating the air and water and reducing sea ice.

Read: Increased Snowfall In Antarctica Is Caused By ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | Comments Off on Increased Snowfall In Antarctica Is Caused By ‘Climate Change’ Or Something | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 12, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible sea rise from Other People eating burgers, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on yet another fake hate crime.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

New Zealand Warmist Signals By Banning All New Oil Exploration Permits

By William Teach April 12, 2018 – 10:30 am

This is like virtue signaling, but for Warmists

Government aims to strike balance ending offshore oil exploration: PM

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says “transitions have to start somewhere”, after announcing an end to offshore oil exploration.

There are 27 fields in New Zealand currently producing oil and gas. The last of the permits ends in 2030, but if a discovery is made, production could continue for decades. All existing permits will be protected under the Government’s plans.

The industry has warned ending oil exploration will do little to cut emissions in New Zealand or overseas, as the move will not affect demand or supply.

“This is about striking a balance,” Ardern said at a press conference, alongside Energy Minister Megan Woods (Labour), Climate Change Minister James Shaw (Greens), and Economic Development Minister Shane Jones (NZ First).

So, it’s just new permits. They’ll be able to continue to produce lots and lots of fossil fuels from oil for a long, long time. But, hey, if those wells run dry, it just means that New Zealand will have to, get this, import fossil fuels on large fossil fuels powered tanker ships. Huh.

Overall, this does nothing. New Zealand is dependent on fossil fuels for jobs, for all the vehicles, and for all the flights coming in for tourism. If these virtue signalers want to really do something, they’d give up their own fossil fuels usage. They won’t.

Read: New Zealand Warmist Signals By Banning All New Oil Exploration Permits »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Energy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove