NY Times Seems A Bit Upset Over Texas “Bathroom” Bill

By William Teach January 8, 2017 – 8:09 am

The NY Times Editorial Board, which has so far refused to divulge its own policy for the use of bathrooms, showers, and changing rooms, along with hiring and HR policies, for the gender confused, is a bit upset

Texas’ Transgender Bill Idiocy

Given North Carolina’s self-defeating legislative efforts to restrict where transgender people can use public bathrooms, it’s mind-boggling that politicians in other states would be tempted to go down a similar path. Yet, Texas Republicans opened a new front in the nation’s debate about transgender rights on Thursday, when Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick announced a bill that would require transgender people to use public restrooms in schools, government buildings and public universities that align with their “biological sex.”

Oh, the horror! There are no actual penalties within the legislation, the actual idea here is limit Government from imposing requirements on both government and private entities that would force allowing TG people to use whichever bathroom, changing room, and shower (BCSR) they want. Which invades the privacy of citizens. Liberals always worry about women, well, what of when they are being exposed to penis in their historical safe spaces when they don’t want to be, because Government deems it?

Texas is not alone. Lawmakers in several states, including Alabama, South Carolina and Washington, have signaled their intention to introduce similar bills this year. Officials peddling these odious initiatives clearly don’t care that the measures are not only unconstitutional but unenforceable: Laws barring transgender people from using public restrooms that align with their gender identity could be enforced only if restroom users were subjected to intrusive inspections.

Do you know what’s odious? Forcing underage girls to have to share the BCSR with gender confused males, who shake their money makers and record them. Repeatedly. Let’s be honest, most will will respectful and just want to get on with their lives, causing no problems. It still doesn’t mean women should be forced to accept someone else’s life decision. Nor having to compete against men who are deluded to thinking they’re female, and doing better at sports than women.

Oh, and isn’t Washington a Democratic Party run state?

The Texas Association of Business last year commissioned a study about the impact a state law that discriminates against gay, bisexual and transgender people would have. Using the backlash from private industry set off by North Carolina’s law, known as HB2, as a gauge, the group concluded that Texas could lose as many as 185,000 jobs. A discriminatory law would also result in billions of dollars in lost tourism, canceled business investment and an almost certain decline in the state’s vibrant conventions business.

For all the caterwauling, how many businesses are willing to implement their own policies at their offices? To allow the gender confused in whatever bathroom they want? To spend the money to turn some bathrooms into multi-sex bathrooms? That’s the part of the debate that has been missing. There are plenty of smaller businesses here in NC which have their own policies. Many of them have single stall bathrooms which anyone can use. What of the big businesses? Is the NY Times Editorial Board good with men pretending they’re women so they can do things like attend women only classes at gyms and such? It’s easy to look at that “big picture”, not so easy when you look at the actual details.

When push comes to shove, people like their privacy. They do not want Social Justice Warriors forcing their wacky beliefs on them. Republicans do not want to have to pass these types of bills. If Leftists would stop pushing so hard, it wouldn’t even be an issue.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Seems A Bit Upset Over Texas “Bathroom” Bill »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Liberal World | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Chicago Torture Victim Keeps Asking Why His Friend Would Do This To Him

By William Teach January 7, 2017 – 3:35 pm

If you thought the Chicago torture story wasn’t bad enough, add this heartbreaker

(UK Daily Mail) The aunt of a special needs teenager who was tortured for hours by four friends has told DailyMail.com that he was unable to speak about the attack – other than to repeatedly ask why a friend he idolized had done this to him.

Janet Grant said her 18-year-old nephew, would be mentally scarred by the six-hour ordeal where he was bound, beaten, cut, burned and forced to drink from a toilet.

Brittany Covington, 18; her sister Tanisha Covington, 24; Tesfaye Cooper, 18; and Jordan Hill, 18, have been charged with aggravated kidnapping, aggravated unlawful restraint, aggravated battery and a hate crime. Hill attended school with [the victim] for several years.

Speaking on Friday morning Grant said: ‘[The victim] just keeps saying, ‘Why, why? Jordan was my friend. He’s been my friend for a couple of years.’

She continued: ‘They went to school together, they both had problems. He adores Jordan. I don’t know Jordan but [the victim] really liked him. It’s one thing if they didn’t know each other but [the victim] idolized him.’ (snip)

‘He’s got enough problems already. They put cigarette butts out on his head, cut a hole in his scalp. Once they took him to Chicago, he had no meds for four days. He couldn’t even fight back.

‘Physically he’ll heal but mentally…he’ll always be looking over his shoulder. Probably won’t trust anybody. ‘

Stick the animals in jail for a long, long time, away from civilized society.

Read: Chicago Torture Victim Keeps Asking Why His Friend Would Do This To Him »

Posted in Current Affairs | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 7, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle polluting the climate paradise of California, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on a moonbat marrying herself.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Hot Take: Climate Quirk Protecting US From Landfalling Hurricanes

By William Teach January 7, 2017 – 11:26 am

If it wasn’t for this “quirk”, we’d be totes doomed from all the hurricanes created due to you driving a fossil fueled vehicle and daring to use electricity for Internet

QUIRK MAY SHIELD US COAST DURING BUSY HURRICANE SEASONS

A climatic quirk seems to be slightly shielding the U.S. coast during busy hurricane seasons, often weakening major storms just as they approach America’s beaches, a new study finds.

That could help explain why it’s been more than 11 years since a major hurricane with winds of more than 110 mph has hit the United States mainland.

Oh, and it seems we are “privileged”, too, while other nations get crushed!

“It’s a lucky byproduct for the United States coast,” Kossin said. “It’s really unfortunate that we’re the only ones that seem to be benefiting from this situation.”

Surprisingly, uber-Warmist Seth Borenstein, the article writer, fails to mention ‘climate change.’ But, you know this is a Narrative setter, meant to lead to more Excusemaking for the dearth of hurricanes making landfall on the US coast despite all the prognostications of doom from the Cult of Climastrology. The American Interest notes what the NY Times has to say about this study

When climatic conditions favor a lot of hurricane activity, they also create a buffer zone that weakens the storms as they approach the coastal United States.

Narrative.

https://twitter.com/RogerPielkeJr/status/817054560007192578

Read: Hot Take: Climate Quirk Protecting US From Landfalling Hurricanes »

Posted in Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Uh Oh: When It Comes To Climate Doom, Nice Weather May Play Tricks On Your Mind

By William Teach January 7, 2017 – 7:52 am

Carbon pollution is very sneaky, you guys!

Nice Weather May Be Playing Tricks On Your Mind About Climate Change

“It is very tempting to rely on what you are experiencing.”

Most likely, you don’t write down the number of days each year when the temperature in your town reaches a record high or record low. But, in fact, you do keep track — subconsciously — and this practice could influence your attitude about climate change.

Subliminal awareness of local climate change can push people into either accepting or doubting climate change, depending on local climate patterns, according to new research published recently in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

“Even when you know the facts, understand the science, and have seen the maps of global trends, it is very tempting to rely on what you are experiencing,’’ said Michael Mann, co-author of the PNAS study and an associate professor of geography at George Washington University (and not the climate scientist of the same name). (snip)

The research is believed to be the first to study the effects of local climate change on people’s attitudes. “This study points out that we need to be aware of our bias towards experiential learning and over-emphasizing recent events,” Mann said.

I’m seeing sleet instead of the doomy snow outside my window: should this make me concerned that the planet is doomed in 2050 or doomed in 2100?

“Despite our whole-hearted desire to confirm or deny climate change with a single weather event, we need to remember that a climate is described by averages over a 25- to 30-year period,’’ he said. “In the end, we would do much better talking to our grandparents about their experiences, than relying on our own.’’

Over that period of time, there has not been statistically significant warming. What warming occurred disagrees with 95% of the computer models. We’ve seen long stretches of reductions in tropical storms, wildfires, and tornadoes. Interestingly, 3 of the 5 biggest snow accumulations in Raleigh have occurred since the Cult of Climastrology started their incessant bleating.

That leaves the question of how do scientists and communicators use what people are experiencing in their everyday lives to reinforce the facts of climate change.

The scientists suggest that Americans could better grasp climate change if agencies and news outlets focused more on record high temperatures and low temperatures throughout the year because people are already tracking that information, even if subconsciously. “We think it’s a more effective way to communicate what’s happening with climate,” Kaufman said. “How many record high temperature days did we set compared to how many record low days?’’

So, it’s all about rephrasing. Huh. Not about showing their science, sharing their methodology, sharing their raw data, oh, and practicing what they preach in making their own lives carbon neutral, nope, rephrasing. And then they wonder why ‘climate change’ typically comes in last or next to last on lists of things people care about.

Read: Uh Oh: When It Comes To Climate Doom, Nice Weather May Play Tricks On Your Mind »

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

Surprise: NY Times Uses Ft. Lauderdale Shooting To Bash Trump, Gun Owners

By William Teach January 7, 2017 – 7:33 am

The NY Times’ Gail Collins does what liberals do best: politicize a tragedy for their far left politics. She is, of course, not the only one. Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun group Everytown and Excitable Shannon Watts both did their best to politicize the shooting before the facts are in. Loony Tariq Nasheed referred to the shooter, Esteban Santiago, as a “white Hispanic.” He had the gun packed away in his checked baggage, he had expressed views which made him seem a bit nuts, told the FBI he felt ISIS was controlling his mind, so

Arms and the Trump

When a man at a Florida airport retrieves his luggage, takes out a gun and kills five people, the only part people are surprised about is that it happened at an airport.

In the grand sweep of American gunfire in the 21st century, all we can say about Friday’s Fort Lauderdale tragedy was that it’s the worst mass shooting so far in 2017. But there have already been six incidents with more than three dead or wounded victims. On Wednesday, three family members in Fontana, Calif., were killed in their home and another critically wounded. A 73-year-old relative was charged. Never even entered the national conversation.

Strangely, the rise of murders in Democrat run cities, mostly with Blacks shooting Blacks, isn’t in the national conversation, at least as how the national news covers it. In the brief periods it’s mentioned, the thrust is typically about making it harder for law abiding citizens to obtain a firearm to protect themselves from the rising tide of violence in Democrat run cities.

Meanwhile, many people in non-gun places wondered why airline passengers were allowed to have firearms in their luggage.

It’s hard to have a rational gun conversation in a country with such a cultural chasm. It’s the job of our national officials to bridge the gap. And it ought to be possible, since there are some important issues on which almost everybody agrees. One is that gun purchases should be run through background checks to make sure the buyer doesn’t have a record of lawbreaking or serious mental problems.

First, virtually every purchase requires a background check. This is typical scaremongering and, yes, lying, from the anti-2nd Amendment people (say, does the NY Times still have armed security in the lobby, Gail?). Second, you can see she wants to ban people from flying with their weapons, despite this being just about the first time this has happened. Funny how she doesn’t get as worked up when it’s an Islamist doing the shooting.

Anyway, here we go

This is the moment where I tell you that our president-elect does not believe in sensible regulation of gun sales.

Donald Trump’s position on gun laws has gone through a rather familiar evolution. Back in the day he was a sort of indifferent moderate. Then came the campaign and a love affair with the National Rifle Association, which dumped about $30 million into the effort to get Trump elected president.

But about the background checks: The N.R.A. lobbyists hate them. And Trump has promised that as soon as he’s sworn in, he’ll “unsign” Barack Obama’s executive order closing a big loophole involving online sales and gun shows.

Trump could make a really good start this month by just — not doing anything divisive. Give the country a hint that the guy who terrified so many Americans during the campaign will be more measured in office. Leave the background checks alone. We’ve been through a lot.

In fact, the NRA supports background checks. Their supporters and members support background checks. They have no problem with the BCs, because these people will pass one. What they do know is that a) people like Gail Collins, Shannon Watts, and Michael Bloomberg, among others, want to use background checks to deny law abiding people their Constitution right on the way to taking all guns out of private hands, and b) background checks aren’t particularly effective in keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. If the hardcore, restrictive gun regulations, including background check, that the gun haters espouse work so well, then why do shootings, including mass shootings, tend to occur more in areas with these hardcore, restrictive gun regulations?

But, hey, nothing says responsible, non-partisan journalism like linking Trump and the NRA to the shooting, eh?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: NY Times Uses Ft. Lauderdale Shooting To Bash Trump, Gun Owners »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Unhinged Tools | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Because You Drove A Fossil Fueled Vehicle The Next Ice Age Is Coming

By William Teach January 6, 2017 – 5:23 pm

I mentioned the return of the “the oceans ate my warming which will soon stop the ocean circulation” meme the other day, now we get

Not by fire but by ice? The frigid scenario where global warming triggers an ice age gets a second look

The conventional understanding of global warming is that the planet will simply become hotter until all the ice melts, the sea level rises and forests turn into deserts and deserts into forbidden wastelands where nothing at all can survive. It’s a frightening prospect that has many wondering why people don’t take it more seriously.

Global warming will be catastrophic, but it will not necessarily render the planet uninhabitable. And some regions will find global warming a boon, while others will find it disastrous. But the problem remains that nobody knows for certain what’s going to happen.

Under the most accurate models for global warming, some places become cooler,

and weather becomes more chaotic, less predictable. Beyond this, it is impossible to say precisely what will happen. There is widespread agreement that polar ice will melt and contribute to sea level rise, a phenomenon that is already being observed.

But what happens when all that ice melts? Does the planet just keep getting hotter? According to one model, the opposite may occur, the northern hemisphere might freeze.

Essential to this transfer of heat is the salt water. However, a massive melting of freshwater ice has the potential to drown out and collapse this flow of salt water. If the current collapses, then the heat transfer from the tropics to the North Atlantic will halt, with disastrous consequences for Europe.

Even since the idea was proposed, climate change scientists have dismissed it. The idea was used as the premise for the move “The Day After Tomorrow,” which itself was filled with scientific inaccuracies and absurdities. Of course, that was a Hollywood blockbuster and not a documentary. But the idea has received little attention. After all, it sounds bizarre that a warming climate could suddenly turn into an ice age.

It’s not necessarily that they’re wrong. This is something that has been known for decades and decades as a possibility of big changes to the AMO. The problem here is mentioning a freaking movie, and blaming this all on Mankind. Yet, these same hysterics refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels and go carbon neutral.

Read: Because You Drove A Fossil Fueled Vehicle The Next Ice Age Is Coming »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach January 6, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle causing desertification, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post noting the media trying to make the Chicago torture story about Trump.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Haters Paint “F*** You White American” In Raleigh

By William Teach January 6, 2017 – 10:52 am

Can’t you just feel the tolerance oozing from Liberals?

From the article by AP Dillon

Citizens woke up this morning to find obscenities spray painted outside the Bedford community in North Raleigh.

The photo above was shared with American Lens by Jeff Morse, President of Morse Brands, a spirits brand broker.

It gets better

Morse tells American Lens that only ABC 11 responded and when he asked if they were going to run a story on it, the response was that, “they are everywhere up there.” Apparently, the reporter was aware of the situation and multiple photos from different locations had been sent to ABC 11.

There was one on a bridge near I-540 and Falls Of Neuse Rd (photo at link), and, apparently, many, many more.

Here’s the thing: while it is probable that this was done by Blacks, White liberals have been going bat guano insane in blaming White people and saying and writing similar things. They’re all nuts, but, hey, if they want to create racial animosity, they’re doing a great job.

Read: Haters Paint “F*** You White American” In Raleigh »

Posted in Current Affairs, NC News, Unhinged Tools | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post: Say, Let’s Rebrand Obamacare To Trumpcare!

By William Teach January 6, 2017 – 7:05 am

As someone in the comments at the Washington Post notes “How can you make something “great again” that wasn’t great in the first place?” Catherine Rampell gives it a shot

Make Obamacare great again — call it Trumpcare

Believe it or not, Americans like Obamacare. They just don’t know they like Obamacare.

That is, the law known as “Obamacare” and “the Affordable Care Act” is relativelyunpopular. But most of the things that this disreputable law does are incredibly popular.

Consider the prohibition on denying insurance coverage due to preexisting conditions. Seven in 10 Americans, including 6 in 10 Republicans, support this provision, according to a recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll.

What about allowing young adults to stay on parents’ plans until age 26; eliminating out-of-pocket costs for preventive care; providing subsidies to low- and moderate-income Americans to help them purchase coverage; and helping states expand Medicaid to cover more uninsured low-income adults?

At least 80 percent of Americans are fans of every one of these provisions. Among Republicans only, at least two-thirds are, too.

Let’s not forget, those were thrown in to make Ocare popular, to go with all the things, like the taxes/fees/fines, higher premiums and deductibles, lower levels of care, government involvement, etc, that aren’t.

The only major component that a majority of Americans don’t like is the individual mandate — that is, the requirement that nearly all Americans sign up for insurance or pay a fine.

But as is often pointed out, you need this unpopular provision to preserve the popular one about preexisting conditions. Without a mandate, only increasingly sick people will buy coverage, sending insurance markets into a death spiral.

Except, that’s who is buying a goodly chunk of the Ocare plans via the government run markets.

All of which is to say that Obamacare does not have a policy problem. It has a branding problem.

Quite a bit of the problem is the rule making. The slapping on taxes for things like medical devices and device development and tanning salons, the contraception mandate (which, once again, is not even mentioned anywhere in the bill, nor is sterilization nor abortifacients), setting the work hours and which companies get nailed, the exemptions for lawmakers and some unions, etc.

Americans don’t even recognize Obamacare’s one inarguable accomplishment: the precipitous decline in the uninsured rate.

Which could have been done without the giant tentacles of government insinuating into our lives to this degree. Of course, the point of Ocare was not to succeed, but to fail requiring the creation of a public option, leading to Single Payer.

Trump may have little interest in policy, experts, numbers, details. But he is undoubtedly a marketing genius. One possible outcome of the current repeal-and-replace free-for-all is that congressional Republicans decide to keep essentially the existing system in place, with some reforms, improvements and hole-plugging, and Trump slaps a shiny new name on the whole thing.

Welcome to the revolutionary, gold-plated “Trumpcare.” Has a nice ring to it, don’t you think?

Nice wish. Won’t happen. What will most likely happen is that all the things mentioned at the beginning are retained, while all the bad parts, all the parts that increase the power of the federal government, are toasted. There are entirely too many things to just fix. Toast the law, you toast all the rule making. For instance, people would be able to save as much as they want for their Health Savings Accounts, which are limited per Ocare. There are just too many problems.

What they really want is the preservation of the Exchanges (which are utterly failing at this time), so, as they collapse, they can continue to push for the public option then Single Payer. They’re thinking long term. What if Trump utterly fails, and loses in 2020? He could easily take the Congress with him, putting Democrats back in position to attempt their government solutions to a greater degree. They’re playing the long game.

Read: Washington Post: Say, Let’s Rebrand Obamacare To Trumpcare! »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Healthcare | 9 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove