Washington Post Decides Supporting Trump On Iran Protests Is A Good Idea

By William Teach January 2, 2018 – 6:51 am

The NY Times’ Philip Gordon argued the other day that Trump should stay out of the Iran protests. Obama luminaries such as John Kerry, Ben Rhodes, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power have taken shots at Trump and/or said to stay out. The Washington Post’s Michael Singh recommends support for the protesters from Washington. And then there’s the Editorial Board: can you guess why they support Trump and what they want him to do? Let’s check in

The West should support the protesters in Iran

FIVE DAYS of street protests in cities across Iran have underlined the fundamental weakness of a regime sometimes portrayed in Washington as a regional juggernaut. Despite the lifting of most Western economic sanctions after 2015, the Islamic republic has been unable to satisfy the expectations of everyday Iranians, who see the country’s resources squandered on corruption and foreign military adventures by clerics who deny basic freedoms. Protests that began in one city over rising food prices quickly mushroomed into a nationwide uprising directed squarely at the rule of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Wait, so the regime isn’t using all that cash they got from Obama and from the ending of many sanctions, especially those from European countries? I wonder what they could be using the money for.

The popular demand for change is justified and deserves international support. President Trump has been right to tweet his backing for the demonstrators; European leaders, who have been far more cautious, should speak up. At the same time, it’s important to mind the lessons of history, which suggest that the odds that the protesters will trigger a revolution are long. The Khamenei regime has proved ruthlessly adept at putting down previous opposition movements, most recently in 2009, and still has abundant repressive resources at its disposal.

Previously, the Iranian dictators knew that support wasn’t coming from the U.S., and Europe followed Obama’s hands-off policy. But, it’s good to see the WP taking a cue from Trump, and wanting to push Europe to support the protesters. And here we go

At the same time, Mr. Trump should avoid acts that would undercut the protests and empower the regime’s hard-liners. Foremost among these would be a renunciation of the 2015 nuclear accord. That would divide the United States from European governments when they should be coordinating their response to the uprising, and it would give the regime an external threat against which to rally. Reform of the nuclear accord can wait. Now is the time for Mr. Trump to focus on supporting the people of Iran.

Anything to support Obama’s terrible no-good Iran deal, eh? One which will allow Iran to restart their nuclear weapons program in less than 10 years.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post Decides Supporting Trump On Iran Protests Is A Good Idea »

Posted in Donald Trump, Iran | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Climate Movies Flopped In 2017

By William Teach January 1, 2018 – 3:49 pm

Which, for the most part, has happened in most years, but, they really pimped it this year

Hollywood tries to save the Earth, but moviegoers aren’t buying eco-messages anymore

Climate change got its close-up in 2017. A gaggle of films either name-checked Al Gore’s biggest fear or built their narratives around it.

The timing, in theory, couldn’t be better for Hollywood bean counters: Three major hurricanes. Massive fires in the West. Record-setting chills. Media reports routinely connected the disasters with a warming planet.

Yet audiences stayed away from films influenced by eco-concerns. Far, far away.

Think “Blade Runner 2049,” “Geostorm,” “Downsizing,” “An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power” and “mother!” They all flopped, some in spectacular fashion.

Of them all, Blade Runner 2049 did the best, but still under-performed. I actually saw this yesterday, and, it was meh. Started out strong, but, the ending was lame. It tried to recapture what happened at the end of the original, but, couldn’t pull it off, and the story line as to what was being looked for was weak. Despite what the weenies who made it were saying, it didn’t really yammer about ‘climate change.” The rest? Bombs. mother! was so bad that Jennifer Lawrence decided to take a break from movies.

Justin Haskins, executive editor at the right-leaning, free-market Heartland Institute, said Hollywood insiders remain fixated on saving the planet.

“They believe climate change will bring people to the movies,” Mr. Haskins said. “That’s wildly out of touch with how moviegoers feel about the issue.”

A Pew Research survey this year found that “the environment” does not rank among the top 10 public policy concerns of most Americans, trailing behind “terrorism,” “the economy,” “education” and “jobs,” among others.

And most people don’t care to be lectured to when they’ve spent $20+ per person dollars on a ticket, popcorn, and a drink for an afternoon showing. They want to be entertained.

Read: Surprise: Climate Movies Flopped In 2017 »

Posted in Film, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 1, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a treeline receding from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day Adrienne’s Corner, with a post on New Year’s 2018.

It was tempting to do something with cold weather, by, let’s think warm thoughts and girls in denim.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Trump May Possibly Maybe Start Deporting “Dreamers” In 2018!

By William Teach January 1, 2018 – 11:36 am

Newsweek is quickly becoming a clickbait hive of insanity, along the lines of Slate and Salon. Or the Democratic Underground. And they’re totally not above a bit of fear-mongering

WILL TRUMP START DEPORTING DREAMERS IF NO DEAL IS REACHED IN 2018?

Per orders from President Donald Trump, the Deferred Action and Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA, will expire on March 5 barring Congressional action. The program gave 800,000 immigrants—colloquially known as ‘Dreamers’—the chance to apply for two-year school and work permits that allowed them to live in the country without fear of deportation.

But as the deadline draws nearer, many immigration advocates worry that mass deportations of Dreamers will begin shortly after March 5, considering Trump has given federal immigration agencies the green light to arrest anyone, anywhere, including a 10-year-old girl with cerebral palsy straight out of emergency surgery.

Trump quelled some of those fears earlier this week by saying he’s willing to reinstate DACA protections for Dreamers—if Democrats are willing to support his border wall. But immigrant rights advocates and many of their allies in the Democratic Party have signaled that they won’t’ concede further “militarizing” the border in exchange for DACA protections.

OK, fine, if the Democrats do not want to deal, if they think they can demand some sort of permanent legal status for these illegal alien Dreamers (which would also include legal status for parents and relatives) with nothing given back in the bargain, then start deporting them.

As reported by the Arizona Daily Sun, Democrat Rep. Raul Grijalva, a staunch immigrant rights advocate, called Trump’s negotiation posture “extortion,” adding that Democrats should ignore the rhetoric and work toward a permanent solution like the DREAM Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for the Dreamers.

So far, there have been reports that immigration forces have already detained Dreamers with expired DACA permits and are possibly slated to be deported soon.

If they let their permit expire, which many do because they do not take the time and most are not educated or in the work force and can’t afford the permit, so be it. Bye! Go back to your own country and take the rest of your illegal alien family with you. If you like it here, apply for citizenship under the law.

Read: Trump May Possibly Maybe Start Deporting “Dreamers” In 2018! »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

To Save Us From An Over-heated Planet, California Mostly Bans Incandescent Light Bulbs

By William Teach January 1, 2018 – 8:08 am

It’s the same argument as when the federal law was passed in 2007: it’s not an actual ban, but, by putting in place such strong requirements, the law effectively banned incandescent light bulbs. California is two years ahead of the federal law

Goodbye to the incandescent light. Climate change means you have to go, but you’ll be missed

This week marks not just the start of a new year, but a bright new day for energy conservation. Or maybe it’s the tragic end of an era, with a beloved product now wiped out of existence by a government forcing its environmental agenda on the rest of us. Which view you take depends on how strongly you feel about interior lighting.

The catalyst for this change was the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, a law signed by President George W. Bush with the worthy goal of reducing energy usage and weaning the U.S. off foreign oil. Among other things, the sweeping law set phased-in efficiency standards for most light bulbs, starting in 2012.

In California, those standards culminate this year in a requirement that bulbs must use about 65% less energy to cast the same amount of light, a standard too high for incandescent technology to reach. It’s too bad, because other than the fact that they burn way too much electricity, incandescent bulbs are the perfect light source. They make everyone one look good; they dim smoothly and have done so for more than 130 years. Incandescents have had an incredible run, but, regrettably, there’s no room for such energy-sucking lamps in the modern world.

Alas, there is room, since both the federal law and California law have exceptions. Such as so many of the high powered lights used on television sets and movie sets. Halogens would also be effectively banned.

Stores may sell the incandescent bulbs they have in stock but are not allowed to replace them. Online stores aren’t supposed to ship them to California addresses, though there’s no law to stop anyone from driving across state lines and filling the trunk with 60-watt multi-packs. At least, they can do so until 2020, when the standards kick in for the rest of the country.

But, they can probably sell marijuana, which is now legal in California. But not light bulbs. Probably go to jail for that.

An expert at UC Davis said that 70% to 90% of Californians still rely on incandescent bulbs to light their homes.

So, wait, all these ‘climate change’ believers, and they can’t even take a minor step to replace them? Heck, the only bulbs I have inside that aren’t CFL or LED (I have Philips Hue* lights in some lamps) are those in a ceiling fan and a chandelier. I’ve long used CFLs for the money savings, and I only buy good ones

Perhaps it is not terribly surprising that so many people have clung to the warm, comforting glow they are used to. The cheap, spiral fluorescent bulbs that conservationists and utilities have pushed on consumers in recent years as money-saving replacements are shoddy imitations that cast a sick glow on faces and homes, and they sometimes flicker or hum. Given that, it’s entirely understandable that people might now fear that the new efficiency standards will doom us to a future of harsh glare and eye strain caused by mercury-filled bulbs that are deemed so toxic you can’t even toss them in the regular trash. What’s the point of saving a few bucks on your electric bill or cutting your energy usage when you’ve lost the will to live?

So, wait, now they tell us CFLs are not the best, and so many are completely shoddy?

The Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that the upcoming light bulb switch will reduce carbon emissions by tens of millions of tons every year.

Apparently, the only way to do this is to force Warmists to practice what they preach. And once you write “carbon emission” you are no longer talking science, but a political cult.

*BTW, if you haven’t checked out Philips Hue, do so. It’s awesome. I have the white ambiance lights, which can mimic daylight. I have them linked to the Amazon Echo Dot, and turn on and off with voice. I can turn them on and off from work. I have one outside set on a timer, so I do not need to leave on all day.

Read: To Save Us From An Over-heated Planet, California Mostly Bans Incandescent Light Bulbs »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

High Tax Democrat States Looking For Ways To Blunt Tax Law Or Something

By William Teach January 1, 2018 – 7:43 am

Democrats have lots of ideas: none of them really seem to revolve around lowering the tax rate for their citizens, nor anything else that has caused these Blue states, like NJ and NY, to lose residents, leading to a loss of federal Representatives

Democrats in High-Tax States Plot to Blunt Impact of New Tax Law

Democrats in high-cost, high-tax states are plotting ways to do what their states’ representatives in Congress could not: blunt the impact of the newly passed Republican tax overhaul.

Governors and legislative leaders in New York, California and other states are considering legal challenges to elements of the law that they say unfairly single out parts of the country. They are looking at ways of raising revenue that aren’t penalized by the new law. And they are considering changing their state tax codes to allow residents to take advantage of other federal tax breaks — in effect, restoring deductions that the tax law scaled back.

One proposal would replace state income taxes, which are no longer fully deductible under the new law, with payroll taxes on employers, which are deductible. Another idea would be to allow residents to replace their state income tax payments with tax-deductible charitable contributions to their state governments.

That last one is a doozy … and discussed way more in the article … since Democrats have been informed time ad nauseum that they are able to write checks to the IRS, since they love high taxes so much, yet, they don’t. So, that “charitable contribution” would be mandatory.

State leaders are still figuring out their response to the new law, and few have yet endorsed specific proposals. But they are moving quickly. Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York, a Democrat, recently said he expected to provide a more detailed plan when he presented his state budget in mid-January.

“They want to target us for certain provisions?” Mr. Cuomo asked at a recent news conference. “Well, let’s see if we can redesign our tax code to get out of the federal trap that they set.”

Suddenly, Democrats realize that perhaps Washington having so much darned power is not a good thing. Suddenly, they realize that Los Federales picking winners and losers is not a good thing. But, what they do not seem to realize is that they can, get this, lower their state tax rates. They can do things to reduce the tax burden on citizens, and do things which can reduce the overall cost of living. Lowering the tax rate isn’t even considered in this article. Surprise?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: High Tax Democrat States Looking For Ways To Blunt Tax Law Or Something »

Posted in Democrats, Taxation | 26 Comments | Trackback URL

Niagra Falls Freezes Over: Guess What’s To Blame?

By William Teach December 31, 2017 – 4:51 pm

It’s not the first time Niagra Falls has frozen over: in fact, there’s a picture going all the way back to 1890. And, in all fairness, those who are claiming there hasn’t been any global warming are incorrect. It’s the question of causation. Regardless, this is the garbage we get from the Cult of Climastrology

https://twitter.com/SonnyinScotland/status/947386533723738112

Read More »

Read: Niagra Falls Freezes Over: Guess What’s To Blame? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | Comments Off on Niagra Falls Freezes Over: Guess What’s To Blame? | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach December 31, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a world covered in water from Other People using hair dryers, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The H2, with a post on a Happy New Year meme.

Doubleshot below the fold, with a second blog of the day, Proof Positive, with a post on 2018 predictions.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach December 31, 2017 – 8:58 am

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America. The sun is shining, the geese are honking, and you’d best bundle up for the New Year. This pinup is by Gil Elvgren with a wee bit of help. A bit more risque then normal, but, then, we’re all adults here.

What’s happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. The Deplorable Climate Science Blog laughs at Bill Nye proclaiming Blue climate Believer states will put economic sanctions on Red states
  2. 357 Magnum notes that bad guys have learned that Texans are still armed
  3. Bunkerville discusses the classified emails found on Carlos Danger’s laptop
  4. Chicks On The Right covers a crazy HuffPo resolution
  5. Creeping Sharia notes Germany having safe zones to protect women from refugee rapists
  6. Gay Patriot sums up 2017 in one image
  7. GeeeZ covers stories the major media forgot to cover
  8. The Geller Report notes yet another refugee gang rape in Sweden
  9. Moonbattery covers 10 examples of extreme moonbattery in 2017
  10. Neo-neocon notes the gifts that keep on giving: puppies and kittens
  11. Pacific Pundit notes the NY Times changing headlines to be more pro-Iranian regime
  12. Patterico, who knows something about swatting, discusses someone finally being killed by it
  13. Political Clown Parade notes CNN’s cray cray on the White Box Truck
  14. Powerline has the Covfefe year in pictures
  15. And last, but not least, Raised On Hoecakes has the year’s best news bloopers

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

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

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times: Trump Shouldn’t Stand Up For The Iranian Protesters

By William Teach December 31, 2017 – 7:38 am

Leave it to the NY Times, as written by Philip Gordon, to recommend that Trump keep quiet on the latest Iranian protests, because 1) the Times has Trump Derangement Syndrome, and 2) because Obama was a complete failure during the Iranian Green Uprising and the Arab Spring, and they don’t want Trump to make Obama look bad.

How Can Trump Help Iran’s Protesters?  Be Quiet.

As anti-government rallies gather momentum across Iran — taking outside analysts and the Iranian government alike by surprise — President Trump and his foreign policy advisers are likely asking what they can do to support the protesters.

Mr. Trump, after all, has said Iran is responsible for nearly all the problems of the Middle East, and accuses the country of spreading “death destruction and chaos all around the globe.” The president would no doubt love to announce that his tough approach has delivered results by undermining the repressive Iranian government, and that his predecessor’s more conciliatory approach failed.

Um, they have been a nation for Bad Things in the Middle East. Roadside bombs traced to Iran. A stated policy of wiping Israel off the map. Backing numerous terrorist groups. Fomenting problems in nations across the ME. Looking to build nuclear weapons, which Obama’s Iran deal will allow in less than a decade. Creating long range missiles to carry those nuclear weapons. The list goes on and on. Oh, and let’s not remember how the Islamist government gets everyone to chant “death to America”.

I, too, want to see the government in Tehran weakened, moderated or even removed. So let me offer Mr. Trump some unsolicited advice: Keep quiet and do nothing.

On Friday night and again on Saturday, Mr. Trump sent out tweets calling on the Iranian government to “respect their people’s rights” and warning that “The world is watching!” That’s more than enough. At this stage, we have little idea what these protests are really about or where they will lead. But we can be fairly certain that high-profile public support from the United States government will do more harm than good.

Obviously, Mr. Gordon keeps going on in this vein, including an attempt to protect Obama’s horrible not good Iran deal, so, let’s switch tracks a bit

(Daily Caller) While his predecessor was hesitant and perhaps overly cautious, President Donald Trump was quick to offer his support to Iranian protesters that are critical of the country’s leadership. (snip)

The ongoing protests are the largest public anti-government outcry in Iran since the 2009 Green Revolution, a response to a prevailing belief that former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had stolen the election. As violence erupted in the streets and authorities cracked down on Iranian citizens, the Obama administration was initially silent on the acts of a hostile Islamic regime. For the first two days, the president failed to respond.

Obama finally chimed in on the 3rd day, giving a tepid, mealy mouthed response

“I think it would be wrong for me to be silent about what we’ve seen on the television over the last few days,” he said, adding, “I would say to those people who put so much hope and energy and optimism into the political process, I would say to them that the world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was. And they should know that the world is watching.”

It is “up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran’s leaders will be,” Obama explained.

The former president was, however, careful to avoid stepping on the toes on the Iranian government. “We respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran.”

And it continued to be a tepid response, even as some protesters were asking from Obama and the U.S. to back them. Why? Because Obama wanted his negotiations, with no preconditions, with Iran.

(Weekly Standard) At this point, the evidence is irrefutable: The Obama administration got Iran wrong. So did the international foreign-policy establishment. So did the New York Times and nearly every major center-left media outlet in the United States and Europe.

In 2009, hundreds of thousands of Iranians protested a rigged election and the regime dispatched its thugs to crush the protest by assaulting, imprisoning, and in many cases murdering the protesters. The new president had campaigned on the need to “dialogue” with the regime and wanted to prove his foreign-policy prowess by securing a nuclear deal; so he responded with weak rhetorical criticisms and nothing more. A movement that might have blossomed into a democratic and peaceable Iran was instead crushed for the sake of an agreement—the 2015 nuclear deal—the Iranian government immediately began flouting.

Again, let’s not forget that Team Obama pretty much ignored the Arab Spring which followed the Green Uprising, until Egypt started having problems, and then Team Obama started backing the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists in Egypt. Team O had no problem throwing an ally under the bus (though Mubarak wasn’t exactly a great person, let’s be clear), but, took a soft stance against the hardcore Iranian leaders.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times: Trump Shouldn’t Stand Up For The Iranian Protesters »

Posted in Barry Obama, Donald Trump, Iran, Wonky Media | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove