If All You See…

By William Teach November 27, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible carbon pollution created heat snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Bookworm Room, with a post on The Atlantic lying in regards to claims that Trump supporters are raaaaacists.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Oh Noes: Latest Poll Shows More Americans Are Concerned About Global Warming

By William Teach November 27, 2017 – 11:30 am

Obviously, this totally upholds what the Cult of Climastrology are pushing

(Clean Technica) Opinions are like noses — everyone has one. While opinions aren’t really worth much — I am of the opinion that I am one of the world’s best writers, for instance, but few share that view — they are important indicators of how people may vote in upcoming elections. In a poll conducted by the Yale Program On Climate Change Communication and the Center for Climate Change Communications at George Mason University entitled “Climate Change In The American Mind, October 2017,” respondents indicated a heightened awareness of climate change issues and an elevated level of concern for the future. The Executive Summary reproduced below tells the story in detail.

The big takaway?

Seven in ten Americans (71%) think global warming is happening, an increase of eight percentage points since March 2015. Only about one in eight Americans (13%) think global warming is not happening. Americans who think global warming is happening outnumber those who think it is not by more than 5 to 1.

Here’s the problem: the question asked makes no reference to causation. From page 29 of the poll we see

Recently, you may have noticed that global warming has been getting some attention in the news. Global warming refers to the idea that the world’s average temperature has been increasing over the past 150 years, may be increasing more in the future, and that the world’s climate may change as a result.

What do you think: Do you think that global warming is happening?

By not defining this as anthropogenic, natural, or some mix, they intentionally set up a situation where they get an answer they want, and then can use that as PROOF that they are right, and we need to Do Something (usually involving taxes, fees, and restricted liberty and freedom). However, most Skeptics would answer “yes”. I would. Because we have had global warming. Even if Warmist scientists have over-estimated the actual warming, there has been warming. Because this is what happens. You have periods of warmth and periods of cool. We’ve seen this throughout the Holocene.

We do learn that 54% in this survey believe it is mostly caused by Humans. Again, though, how much? 51%? 100%? What they do not ask is what Believers are willing to do in their own lives to help stop it.

We also learn that idiots actually believe it has made extreme weather worse, which is scientifically false. And

Large majorities of Americans think of global warming as an environmental (78%), scientific (71%), agricultural (66%), severe weather (65%), health (62%), economic (60%), or political issue (60%). Fewer think it is a moral (41%), national security (29%), poverty (28%), social justice (26%), or religious issue (9%).

More and more are understand that this is a political issue. Back to Clean Technica

Will these opinions have an impact on American politics? The next Congressional elections are now less than a year away. If Americans continue to support climate change deniers when they vote, opinion polls like this one will be relevant only to those who make their living designing, conducting, and interpreting polls. If the news media won’t tell Americans about climate science, it becomes incumbent on each of us individually to spread the word and sound the alarm.

Typically, when Warmists push these issues, and even pass them, they lose at the polls. Because, remember the old saying “everyone talks about the weather but no one does anything about it”? Well, all these Warmists talk about ‘climate change’, but few of them ever do anything in their own lives about it. And few are willing to pay more than a few bucks to Do Something about it. They’re fine with Someone Else paying the piper. Never themselves.

Read: Oh Noes: Latest Poll Shows More Americans Are Concerned About Global Warming »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Arresting Illegal Aliens At Courthouses Undermines Democracy Or Something

By William Teach November 27, 2017 – 7:19 am

The New York Times gives César Cuauhtémoc García Hernández, a tenured associate professor of law at the University of Denver, who is big into protecting people who are unlawfully present in the United States, a platform to fear-monger. He thinks that

ICE’s Courthouse Arrests Undercut Democracy

At the door of the Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse in Denver one Friday in April, federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents tackled a man to the ground. A chilling video shows the man — who, according to his lawyer, was there to deal with a traffic ticket — yelling “No!” “My hand!” and “Why?” in Spanish. Sheriff’s deputies order passers-by to stand back, and the violent arrest continues.

Except, the video does not actually show anything but the illegal alien on the ground being arrested. It does not show him being tackled. However, he was certainly taken to the ground, which usually occurs when the arrestee resists.

This type of arrest is on the rise. Lawyers and judges in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Texas and Washington all reported in the first year of the Trump administration that immigration officials were breaking with tradition to descend upon their courthouses. Such arrests in New York have increased by 900 percent in 2017, according to the Immigration Defense Project.

This is a deeply worrisome trend because arrests at courthouses don’t just derail the lives of the unsuspecting people who are detained, they threaten the very operation of our judicial system. Such arrests scare people away from the courts, keeping them, for example, from testifying at trials or seeking orders of protection. By using this tactic, the nation’s lead immigration law enforcement agency is undermining a pillar of our democracy.

By “scare people”, he’s referring to illegal aliens. As for “unsuspecting people”, well, every single illegal should have a clue that they could be detained by law enforcement at any time for being unlawfully present. Personally, I’m more concerned with safeguarding our law enforcement folks over the feelings of illegal aliens. There is a much lower chance that an illegal will be armed at a courthouse, versus getting them out in the streets, their homes, where they work, etc.

Courthouse arrests by ICE deter not only undocumented immigrants but also people who are here legally but are nervous that they might have somehow compromised their status (or that an officer will think they have). That’s a nuance that is next to impossible for the average person to discern, and those complicated legal questions are exactly what immigration judges spend a lot of energy trying to answer.

Really? People who are here legally should know if their status is compromised.

In El Paso, ICE arrested a woman moments after she requested a court’s help keeping away an abusive partner. Fear and uncertainty caused by this type of courthouse arrest are already keeping people away from the halls of justice.

Hernandez forgets to mention that she was a previously deported illegal. Six times. After arrests for crimes including possession of stolen mail, false imprisonment, domestic assault, and assault.

Regardless Hernandez goes on and on, but, never actually makes a case that detaining illegals at courthouses undercuts democracy. Just that he’s upset that ICE would arrest illegal aliens.

The harm this causes is bigger than the people whom ICE arrests. United States citizens are not immune to the impact of ICE activity in courthouses. All of us — including those of us who could easily prove our immigration status — depend on courts to do their job, and all of us suffer if the fear of ICE keeps people away.

The last time I was in a courthouse was about 8 years ago, for jury duty. Beyond that, for a speeding ticket (that was thrown out) almost 20 years ago. The notion that ICE would be there to arrest illegal aliens wouldn’t deter me in the least. How about you?

Read: Arresting Illegal Aliens At Courthouses Undermines Democracy Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Silly Person Sues President Trump To Block Interim Appointment To Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

By William Teach November 27, 2017 – 6:54 am

Someone had a major snit fit, and is going to look silly at the end

(Fox News) A federal official filed a lawsuit on Sunday challenging President Trump’s decision to appoint his budget director as interim director of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, claiming Trump has no authority to make the appointment.

Leandra English, the official who was named the successor to the top position at the agency by its outgoing director, is asking for a declaratory judgment and a temporary restraining order to block White House budget director Mick Mulvaney from taking over the bureau.

The federal official argues that the Dodd-Frank Act, a law championed by Democrats that created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, prohibits the White House from naming the director for the agency.

English, who is the deputy director of the bureau, said she became the acting director of the bureau under the law after Richard Cordray, the now-former director, resigned last Friday.

If that was the case, it would be amazing. We talk about unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats, but this would take the cake, where the POTUS would have no power to fill the top vacancy in an Executive office agency. It would perpetuate a complete insider agency, with zero accountability. And, wouldn’t this mean that the appointment of Richard Cordray by Obama was illegal? Well, no

The White House argued in an opinion issued Saturday by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel that it is within the president’s right to appoint an acting director. Steven A. Engel, newly confirmed head of the office, wrote that while the deputy director could serve as acting director under the statute, the president has the power to make appointments under the Vacancies Reform Act.

In fact, the Consumer Finance Monitor wrote in July

The Vacancies Act provides that its three ways are “the exclusive means” for filing a vacancy unless Congress has expressly provided by statute who should “perform the functions and duties of a specified office temporarily in an acting capacity” when a vacancy occurs or the President fills the vacancy through a recess appointment.  In general, the Vacancies Act permits a temporary appointment to continue for up to 210 days after the vacancy is created, with the time suspended when a nomination has been submitted to the Senate and confirmation is pending.

The Dodd-Frank Act provides that the CFPB “shall be considered an Executive agency, as defined in section 105 of title 5, United States Code.”….

It appears Congress did not expressly provide in Dodd-Frank for how a vacancy should be filled if the CFPB Director were to resign…

The Vacancies Act authorizes the POTUS to be able to appoint an interim director. That person must meet certain qualifications (as laid out in the Consumer Finance Monitor), for which White House budget director Mulvany fills the bill. Even the CFPB’s top lawyer agrees that President Trump is within legalities to appoint Mulvany as interim director.

This suit will certainly not help English in the future. Heck, Trump may have been thinking to interview her for the top job. You can bet that’s off the table.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Silly Person Sues President Trump To Block Interim Appointment To Consumer Financial Protection Bureau »

Posted in Current Affairs, Donald Trump | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Two Canadian Areas Could Soon Be Under Water Or Something

By William Teach November 26, 2017 – 4:56 pm

The latest in Doooooooom

Two Canadian places that could be under water in 100 years — or sooner

It’s easy to ignore, until suddenly it’s not.

As the earth warms, Arctic and Antarctic ice sheets melt and sea levels rise steadily – just a third of a centimetre a year or so, but it adds up, and it isn’t slowing down.

What will our shorelines look like by the year 2100? Well, it depends – on how much the climate warms, whether air pollution goes on unchecked or reduces, on whether the West Antarctic ice sheet has begun an unstoppable collapse (the maps below assume it hasn’t).

But even under the most cautious scenarios, the shapes of coastal cities will change. (snip)

But some communities on both of Canada’s salt-water coasts will start to feel the effects of rising sea levels, maps produced by Climate Central, a scientific non-profit based in New Jersey, predict.

No, no, nothing like using a hyper-partisan, scaremongering outfit like Climate Central. Let’s go right to those two Canadian places (click the above link to see the graphics)

1. Richmond and Delta, B.C.

Even the most conservative flood maps show Richmond, Delta and parts of rural Abbotsford and Coquitlam permanently underwater by 2100. (snip)

A gradual sea level rise of 3.5 millimetres a year is easy to ignore, he says. The crisis would build slowly but express itself in a a violent storm, driving the now-raised water levels.

The actual measured rate is .37mm per year for Vancouver. Victoria is .63mm. Tolfino is -1.70mm. Even looking at the highest, that is equivalent to a change of 0.12 feet in 100 years.

The other place is on Canada’s east coast, the Tantramar Marsh in New Brunswick. If we look at the data for Halifax and Saint John’s, the closest stations, we do see a 3.12 and 2.75 rise, respectively, but, no acceleration, just the norm for long periods of time. And this is the problem: you have hyper-partisan hysterics looking into crystal balls and predicting that doom will occur unless we Do Something. There’s no way to actually prove that Doing Something (usually some sort of carbon tax, along with fees and Big Government restrictions on individuals and private entities) will solve the problem that is created out of thin air (and computer models.) We just have to take their word for it. Even though their prognostications are contradicted by actual data.

They say “but, bad things will happen unless we do “X”. We know it. That’s why this is not science, it’s politics.

Read: Bummer: Two Canadian Areas Could Soon Be Under Water Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on Bummer: Two Canadian Areas Could Soon Be Under Water Or Something | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 26, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible heat created snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Creeping Sharia, with a post on a Christmas add with a burqa clad snowman.

It’s winter week on IAYS.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach November 26, 2017 – 9:07 am

Happy Sunday! It’s a beautiful day in America. The sun is shining, the squirrels are yapping, the turkey from Thursday is still settling in our stomachs. This pinup is by Peter Dribben, obviously, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Independent Sentinel covers #PieGate
  2. Vox Popoli says to never go full SJW
  3. This ain’t Hell… has your morning feel good stories
  4. The Lid discusses a feminist saying it’s OK to destroy innocent men
  5. The Last Tradition covers yet another unhinged liberal, who attempted to cut into Trump’s motorcade
  6. The Last Refuge notes what a European holiday looks like with the Islamist threat
  7. Powerline discusses Trump’s immigration enforcement policy in action
  8. Pacific Pundit notes yet another elected Democrat accused of sexual harassment
  9. Moonbattery covers Matthew Dowd, sexual harassment, and the “common good”
  10. Legal Insurrection discusses the tolerance of net neutrality supporters
  11. Jihad Watch notes yet another riot by Muslim refugees
  12. Gay Patriot covers the NY Times sexualizing children
  13. Creeping Sharia notes what Islamist Britain’s Christmas markets look like
  14. Chicks On The Right brings us “beardaments”
  15. And last, but not least, Blazing Cat Fur covers a Green defending eco-terrorism

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

Washington Post Blamestorms Trump For Rising Hate Crimes In 2015 And 2016

By William Teach November 26, 2017 – 7:35 am

Remember the days when it was all about Barack Obama inheriting problems from President George W. Bush? Those days went all the way through his first term, and a little bit into his second. Of course, Donald Trump is president now, so, everything must be blamed/linked to him

Hate in America is on the rise

A NEW FBI report on hate crimes tells a sobering story. For the second year in a row, police departments across the country reported a rise in the number of crimes motivated by bias.

In 2016, the FBI counted 6,121 reported incidents nationwide — an increase of 4.6 percent from 2015, during which 5,850 cases were reported. That number, in turn, marked a 6.8 percent increase in reported hate crimes over 2014. Roughly 58 percent of such attacks last year were motivated by racial bias, of which about half targeted African Americans. Of the 21 percent of crimes fueled by animosity toward the victim’s religion, more than half the attacks were aimed at Jews, a quarter at Muslims.

Meanwhile, crimes against Latinos and against white people rose 15 percent and 17 percent, respectively, from 2015. Crimes against transgender people went up 44 percent.

Who was president in 2015 and 2016? Who had been president since 2009, and oversaw all these supposed rises in hate crimes? The Washington Post editorial board can’t remember

The FBI’s report doesn’t draw conclusions as to what might be behind this disturbing rise in hate. But it’s noteworthy that many of the groups against whom crimes rose by double digits were the focus of inflammatory rhetoric by Donald Trump over the course of his presidential campaign. Likewise, the FBI data shows a sharp rise in bias-motivated incidents in the months around the 2016 election — confirming reports by the Anti-Defamation League and others of a surge of attacks on Muslims and Jews in the wake of Mr. Trump’s election.

Except, he wasn’t railing against Jews, white people, or African Americans as groups. Notice that hate crimes against Jews constituted half the reports, only 25% against Muslims. Guess who is loathed by Progressives? That’s right, Jews.

Regardless, it’s very easy and typical of the #Resist media to attempt to blamestorm Trump on everything, to scapegoat him, because they are deranged.

Police departments should work to provide the federal government with more complete data. But taking this rise in hate seriously also requires that law enforcement officials cultivate trust with the communities they serve. Victims need to know they will be treated with respect if they come forward — especially in the current political environment, where many may be particularly fearful.

They should provide the complete data. Especially when so many end up being hoaxes.

What they also do not mention is that, in a country of 300+ million people, as well as all the people here on visas, there were only 6,121 incidents. Or that the worst states are Democratic Party run states, like California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Washington. Again, the stats don’t matter to the WPEB, because they have a narrative known as Trump Derangement Syndrome. Much like the NY Times Editorial Board tries to scapegoat Trump on how long it’s taking for Puerto Rico to recover. Which it is. Because everything was damaged/destroyed. It takes a while when all the roads were destroyed. And takes awhile for the roads to be made passable. Half are. Perhaps they should visit the FEMA website, or actually go to PR and help out.

Oh, BTW, how many of the hate crimes were committed by Leftists who were losing their minds in 2016?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post Blamestorms Trump For Rising Hate Crimes In 2015 And 2016 »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Journalistic Malpractice | 28 Comments | Trackback URL

D.C. Residents Want To “Decarbonize” To Save The Economy Or Something

By William Teach November 25, 2017 – 4:18 pm

What’s most interesting is that the same people pushing carbon taxes and fees on fossil fuels companies refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels. They want Everyone Else to pay the price for their beliefs. In this case, we have Khalid Pitts, co-owner of Cork Wine Bar & Market, along with Roger Horowitz, co-founder of Pleasant Pops, pushing a carbon fee. Both companies surely use lots of fossil fuels to deliver their products, particularly in the case of a wine bar, where wines would come from around the world

A climate-change policy that grows the economy and benefits D.C. residents

…

So we wonder: How can D.C. businesses and residents do our part to address our climate crisis? The answer: We need to get off carbon-based fossil fuels, the main source of climate change, as fast as possible. But we need to “decarbonize” our city’s economy in a way that supports business growth without burdening our residents, especially the low- and moderate-income residents who are many of our neighbors.

Which is why we support a novel policy under consideration by the D.C. Council called the Climate and Community Reinvestment Act. It would require fossil-fuel companies doing business in the District to pay a fee for every ton of carbon dioxide they put into the atmosphere. The policy would then rebate the overwhelming share of the collected revenue — hundreds of millions of dollars — to D.C. households and small businesses such as ours. A recent economic study shows that this “fee-and-rebate” policy would cut carbon emissions nearly 23 percent in the city while expanding the District’s economy, creating more jobs and raising the incomes of most Washington residents, especially the poor and middle class.

First, they are silently admitting that this policy would jack up the cost of living for D.C. residents, which is already pretty darned high. The government caused COL increase would only be partially offset by refunding money back to residents. In the real world, good luck with that. They’ll find plenty of uses for that money and plenty of excuses why those uses are better than a refund.  Said refund is supposed to be at least 80%, but, 20% “would be invested directly into a “green bank” or other programs to help residents and businesses finance solar panels or efficiency upgrades.” Good luck with this.

They’re kinda silent on exactly how increasing costs on citizens and businesses will create more jobs and raise incomes. The Bunch Of Mule Fritters Climate Scam Act Climate and Community Reinvestment Act is rather vague, as well.

The pollution reductions are achieved by simply making dirty-energy suppliers pay their fair share. D.C. restaurants are not allowed to dump their trash into the street each night. But oil and gas and coal companies can dump carbon pollution into our atmosphere for free. Charging a fee of $20 per ton of pollution starting in 2019 (rising to $150 by 2032) will ensure that those fuels are gradually priced out of the D.C. market. Wind and solar and energy efficiency will prevail.

What will happen is that people will simply go outside of D.C. to purchase fuel. Which will harm gas station owners, which, remember, nowadays tend to be convenience stores, selling a huge range of products. These stores will close, putting people out of work. Only so many can relocate, due to a saturated market. Residents of D.C., though, will have a tougher time getting fuel. Their power bills will skyrocket. But, hey, if D.C. residents want to damage their economy and increase their COL, that’s on them.

These same leaders joined Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) in pledging that the city would defy President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement by achieving Districtwide greenhouse gas reductions that match the Paris goals. A local carbon fee-and-rebate policy is the single best way to honor that pledge.

Of course there had to be some #Resist. They really want to harm their lives for this. Let them.

Read: D.C. Residents Want To “Decarbonize” To Save The Economy Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach November 25, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle used to travel to Thanksgiving meals, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jihad Watch, with a post on joggers getting armed police protection in a Swedish town due to Muslim crime.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove