Majority Of Americans Support 1st Amendment, Are Against Prosecuting Climate Skeptics

By William Teach August 10, 2016 – 9:00 am

This also gives us a good idea as to what percent approve of using the government to prosecute Wrongthink

(Rasmussen) Attorneys general in 15 states are attempting to prosecute corporations and individuals that they believe are misleading the public about global warming. Their action which critics claim is a violation of freedom of speech has prompted a congressional investigation. Most voters continue to believe the scientific debate about global warming is not over and oppose government action against those who question it.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 69% of Likely U.S. Voters oppose the government investigating and prosecuting scientists and others including major corporations who question global warming. Just 15% favor such investigations, while just as many (16%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

So, 15% want to explicitly violate the 1st Amendment. I’m 100% confident that we know which political ideology they represent. Another 16% are mushy headed about this whole Freedom of Speech thing.

Meanwhile, we’re learning a bit more about the targeting scheme of Democrat Party attorney generals

(Washington Times) When New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman invited other Democrats to join his effort to pursue climate change skeptics, he was interested in more than bringing lawbreakers to justice.

A letter obtained by E&E Legal Institute and released Tuesday indicates Mr. Schneiderman was also interested in advancing the Obama administration’s climate-change agenda, including the Clean Power Plan and the Paris climate accord.

“The commitments of the United States and other nations at last year’s Paris climate change conference are very significant steps forward, but states must still play a critical role in ensuring that the promises made in Paris become reality,” Mr. Schneiderman said in a March 7 letter.

The letter offers fresh evidence that the Democratic-led coalition of 17 attorneys general was aimed at burnishing President Obama’s climate legacy as opposed to ferreting out wrongdoing in the form of climate change “fraud,” according to the institute.

“It is unprecedented to have the top state law enforcement officers waging a political war on behalf of the president at the cost of the First Amendment protections they are charged with upholding,” E&E senior legal fellow Chris Horner said in a statement.

“This letter lays bare that the purpose of their investigations was to launch a political campaign to silence critics of the Administration,” Mr. Horner said.

What Democrats are counting on is that Republicans would never retaliate in the same manner. And, they’re correct: most Republicans have ethics, morals, and an adherence to the Constitution, and would never do this. If any did, the Credentialed Media would be in full blown apoplexy, with claims of fascism and totalitarianism abounding.

Read: Majority Of Americans Support 1st Amendment, Are Against Prosecuting Climate Skeptics »

Posted in Global Warming | 20 Comments | Trackback URL

Liberals Apoplectic Over Donald Trump 2nd Amendment Comment

By William Teach August 10, 2016 – 8:31 am

So, Donald Trump, surprisingly, said something very inarticulately. I know, you’re shocked that someone off teleprompter could say something poorly. Funny, the media never made a big deal out of some guy saying “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun”, in which the full quote is even more violence laden

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

Anyhow, stories abound. Liberals are vexed. Here’s the NY Times Editorial Board, to go along with several other stories at the Times, including another opinion piece by Thomas Freidman (Oh, and Joe Scarborough just went with “dog whistle” twice in 20 seconds, his guest went with Orwellian. And Joe says it’s a suggestion of fascism and revolt. And crossed a Rubicon. I should probably stop listening while typing)

Further Into the Muck With Mr. Trump

Three months from the presidential election, and one day after his running mate promised “specific policy proposals for how we rebuild this country at home and abroad,” Americans find themselves asking whether Donald Trump has called for the assassination of Hillary Clinton.

On Tuesday at a rally in North Carolina, Mr. Trump falsely charged, as he has before, that “Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment.” Then he added: “If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know.”

Directly behind him, a supporter’s jaw dropped. Afterward, Mr. Trump’s campaign issued an utterly mystifying statement about the “power of unification,” suggesting that Mr. Trump was referring to the political power of Second Amendment supporters, and was not advocating violence. The National Rifle Association, which has endorsed Mr. Trump, concurred with his statement on Supreme Court justices and did not specifically address the rest of his remarks.

Let’s be clear: if Hillary or another Democrat made this statement, the press would be in full cover mode, explaining this away, much as they’ve done for Hillary’s email server, her coughing, pretty much everything.

Was it a threat? Mr. Trump’s campaign has been marked by extraordinarily combative rhetoric. At another rally, he said he would like to punch a protester in the face and see him leave “on a stretcher.” His supporters have shouted “kill her” when he mentions Mrs. Clinton. The Republican convention heard cries of “lock her up.” A New Hampshire delegate, Al Baldasaro, called for Mrs. Clinton to “be put in the firing line and shot for treason.”

Um, there were plenty of cries for “lock her up” at the DNC, as well.

Seldom, if ever, have Americans been exposed to a candidate so willing to descend to the depths of bigotry and intolerance as Mr. Trump. That he would make Tuesday’s comment amid sinking poll numbers and a wave of Republican defections suggests that when bathed in the adulation of a crowd, Mr. Trump is unable to control himself.

Because no Democrat would ever do something like sick his followers on someone. No Democrat would use the power of the State to violate the rights of opposition groups. No Democrat would speak out against private citizens and groups, such as the Koch brothers, the NRA, Rush Limbaugh, for engaging in their 1st Amendment Rights. The list of abuses, bigotry and intolerance, is long.

What Trump said was stupid, and most non-unhinged people would understand that he didn’t say that Hillary should be assassinated. He was speaking in Typical Buffoon. It’s what he does.

Meanwhile, Hillary’s non-sanctioned, insecure email server potentially led to the death of an Iranian nuclear scientist, for which the media went into full cover mode.

Regardless, I’m awaiting the media to finally make a big deal out of Obama’s extreme violence laden “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun” quote.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Liberals Apoplectic Over Donald Trump 2nd Amendment Comment »

Posted in Donald Trump, Journalistic Malpractice | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

Woman With Massive Carbon Footprint Worried About Florida’s ‘Climate Change’ Policies

By William Teach August 9, 2016 – 5:18 pm

Hillary Clinton has long had a massive carbon footprint, using vast amounts of fossil fuels to travel around while a Senator, Secretary of State, and as a private citizen. Now she’s using vast amounts to run for president. She takes vast amounts of money from the fossil fuels industry. Hey, just ask Greenpeace. Her foundation takes vast amounts of money from countries whose primary source of income is fossil fuels. So, this takes some cajones

(The Hill) Hillary Clinton knocked the climate policies of Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R), a high-powered ally of Republican nominee Donald Trump, on Monday.

Speaking in Florida, Clinton highlighted the heavy impact climate change is expected to have on the state. She said Scott should work to invest in green energy jobs, rather than pursue a ban on discussions of climate change there.

The Florida Center for Investigative Reporting last year reported that Scott’s administration had barred employees of the sate Department of Environmental Protection from using the term “climate change” in official communications. Scott denied that report, but it still drew scorn from Democrats, including the White House.

No one can provide actual proof to that allegation. In fact, the Miami Herald article (see the “reported” link) could offer nothing, just allegations. There are no official policies.

“You have a governor who actually put out an edict — I mean, this is hard to believe, a governor who put out an edict directing state employees never to say or write the words ‘climate change.’ ” she said.

Says the woman who refuses to hold press conferences, and has a giant carbon footprint. And shut down women who credibly accused her husband of sexual assault. Perhaps she could actually provide proof of her assertion that Scott banned the term? No?

“That sounds absurd, which of course it is, but it’s also missing a great economic opportunity. Florida could be the center of solar energy in the entire country.”

Sure, let’s cover up the Everglades with solar panels. That’d go over well with the environmentals.

Read: Woman With Massive Carbon Footprint Worried About Florida’s ‘Climate Change’ Policies »

Posted in Global Warming, Hillary Clinton | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 9, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible evil meat, which should be banned for Everyone Else, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on vegans killing the environment.

Read: If All You See… »

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

UK Guardian: It’s Just Plain Silly Asking For Empirical Evidence On ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach August 9, 2016 – 10:30 am

The UK Guardian, long a bastion of belief in anthropogenic climate change, is a bit vexed over the election of skeptic Malcolm Roberts in Australia, and very much exposes why I call them the Cult of Climastrology

Why Malcolm Roberts’ demand for ’empirical evidence’ on climate change is misleading

…..

So how did Roberts respond to his newfound fame? Well, he didn’t disappoint, telling every mainstream audience there was “no empirical evidence to show that carbon dioxide affects the climate in any way”.

Personally, I wouldn’t say there is no evidence, but that scientific evidence shows that it is not as strong as Warmists say, the doubling effect is minimal, natural processes release more than Mankind, and CO2 increases tend to follow temperature increases, not precede them.

Here’s where it gets really fun

So what does Roberts mean by “empirical evidence”? According to him, decisions should be based on “observations in the real world … it’s measured, real world data” and nothing else counts.

There are two very obvious problems with Roberts’ argument.

The “real world data” is sending a clear message that the Earth is gaining heat at a rapid rate and that this is a long-term trend. Whether you look at global air temperatures measured in the real world by thermometers or derived from satellites, or the temperature of the oceans at multiple depths, or the increasing frequency of extreme temperatures, or the rising sea levels, the melting ice sheets, the disappearing Arctic sea ice, the increasing risk of bushfires … we could go on and on with a parade of “empirical evidence”.

At the same time, humans are adding CO2 to the atmosphere and oceans at a rate that groups like the Geological Society say are unprecedented “even in comparison with the massive injections of carbon to the atmosphere at the Palaeocene-Eocene boundary, which led to a major thermal event 55m years ago”.

Yes, Earth has gotten hotter. That’s not the argument Roberts, nor Skeptics, are disagreeing with. It’s that CO2, or, as the Cult likes to say unscientifically, “carbon pollution”, is mostly/solely the cause. The Guardian goes on to give us their usual, the assumption that CO2 from Mankind is the cause. This is where they would need that pesky “empirical evidence.” Since that’s rather difficult for them to provide, we get

Roberts’ argument that science is only about “empirical evidence” might sound all sciencey to his interviewees and the lay audience. But it’s bunk.

If all you rely on is “empirical evidence”, and reject modelling and analysis that uses that data, then you basically throw out large swathes of modern scientific endeavours.

See? That data from real world observations is meaningless. We need to listen to the (failed and/or massaged) computer models and hysterics! That’s science, you know!

Read: UK Guardian: It’s Just Plain Silly Asking For Empirical Evidence On ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 21 Comments | Trackback URL

Good Grief: Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Want To Stop Calling Kids Boys And Girls

By William Teach August 9, 2016 – 8:21 am

Why can’t hardcore nutjob moonbat liberals just let kids be kids? Why do they have to push their crazy ideas on kids? Why can’t they just mind their own business and, oh, say, teach them subjects which will allow them to be functional members of society?

(WSOC) A CMS presentation to principals and counselors recommends kids are not referred to as boys and girls, but instead as scholars and students.

DOCUMENT: CMS transgender student presentation

Eliminating boy and girl references is one of several policies included in the CMS bully prevention regulations.

Apparently, they didn’t want to go with their usual #1 choice, “comrades”.

One policy allows students to participate in extracurricular activities and overnight field trips based on their gender identity. A student who identifies as a girl would be allowed to participate in an “all-girl” overnight trip.

So, good news, when your actual biological girl goes on a trip, they can be accompanied by someone with mushy headed leftist parents who filled their brain with gender confusion. People have been wondering if the Left’s push to allow males with penis to participate in female activities: here’s one of the first steps. The document does seem to suggest that biological males that are gender confused be allowed to participate in all female extracurricular programs, which includes sports.

They say this is about “bullying”, but, the entire policy is about Supporting Transgender students. It’s right there in the headline of the document. One interesting part of the document is that “A student’s transgender status is confidential.” Yet, these leftists are attempting to make the issue fully public, and all the interest groups, and sometimes the student themselves, make it all public in attempting to force schools to allow them into the opposite biological gender bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms.

The document also says that boys and girls should be able to dress according to their “gender identity.” Because a little boy wearing a dress won’t get picked on. Kids are brutal, as we all know. They have little in the way of action or mouth filters.

The North Carolina Values Coalition calls the rules radical and a violation of privacy.

“School is no longer about reading, writing and arithmetic. It is now about gender fluidity,” Tami Fitzgerald of the NC Values Coalition said.

And we all seem shocked that more and more kids are coming out of the educational system with an inability to cope and operate in the Adult World.

Especially when we get nutty things like a Gender Unicorn

Read: Good Grief: Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Want To Stop Calling Kids Boys And Girls »

Posted in Unhinged Tools | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Two Benghazi Parents Sue Hillary

By William Teach August 9, 2016 – 7:46 am

Here’s yet another issue in which the Credentialed Media will look to provide shelter for Hillary

(Fox News) The parents of two of the four Americans who died in the Benghazi attack in 2012 filed a lawsuit Monday against Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, alleging her “reckless handling” of classified information contributed to their deaths.

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch USA on behalf of Patricia Smith, the mother of Sean Smith, and Charles Woods, the father of Tyrone Woods, for allegedly wrongfully causing the death of their sons as well as for defamation and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

The lawsuit suggests that Clinton’s use of a private email server contributed to the deaths of Smith and Woods, adding that terrorists were able to “obtain the whereabouts of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and thus the U.S. State Department and covert and other government operations in Benghazi, Libya and subsequently orchestrate, plan, and execute the now infamous September 11, 2012 attack.”

The emails flowing through her non-sanctioned, insecure email server exposed the whereabouts of Ambassador Stevens.

In addition to the wrongful death and negligence charges named in the suit, the parents also claim that Clinton defamed them in statements to the media, according to court documents.

“During her campaign for President, Defendant Clinton has negligently, recklessly, and/or maliciously defamed Plaintiffs by either directly calling them liars, or by strongly implying that they are liars, in order to protect and enhance her public image and intimidate and emotionally harm and silence them to not speak up about the Benghazi attack on at least four separate occasions,” Klayman wrote in his complaint.

I’d be interested to see how Hillary responds to this, but, I’d be incredibly surprised if any reporter asks her about the suit.

Can the plaintiffs win? It might be tough getting a jury to believe, but, then, juries often find big shot rich people and companies liable. Team Hillary will surely keep this tied up in court for years, looking to run the clock out.

The intent here is most likely to expose Hillary’s reckless foreign policy and conduct, but, again, good luck getting the media to focus on anything that makes Her Precious look bad.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Two Benghazi Parents Sue Hillary »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

ECU To Offer Special Snowflakes Help With “Adulting”

By William Teach August 8, 2016 – 5:15 pm

Yeah, this is a real thing

(WTVD) East Carolina University is starting an “adulting” counseling program to help students deal with failure and other pitfalls of growing up.

The school was prompted to begin the program after noticing an increase in counseling appointments – 9,000 appointments were quested last school year, an increase of 1,800 appointments in just two years, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Virginia Hardy said.

“Students don’t have an opportunity as much these days to manage failure, they don’t experience it in certain ways as much so they don’t know how to manage it when it happens,” Hardy told The Daily Reflector of Greenville reports (http://bit.ly/2b3kbsM ).

They’ll be offered relaxation techniques and ways of changing unproductive negative thoughts. I’d think they could go a bit further in showing Special Snowflakes that they aren’t special and the world is scary, and how to adapt to the Real World.

The goal is to teach students there will be setbacks in life and responding to them properly is key to their development. Counselors also want to prevent students from turning to drugs and alcohol to deal with stress, Hardy said.

“What is the self-talk you’re having with yourself? Are you beating yourself up because you got a C?” Hardy said. “If you change the self-talk, you can then change the behavior that’s exhibited.”

Now, I’m not going to discount positive motivational techniques. Some are very useful, such as the Pacific Institute, which is fantastic, having been to it myself, and lots of big companies and government agencies, such as the DOD, use it. But, without any acknowledgement that the world will not coddle today’s brand of Special Snowflakeness, this is doomed to fail.

That all said, teaching college kids a bit about how the real world works would be worthwhile. Certainly, parents play a part, and working summer jobs and jobs while at college are helpful. I think that most of you, if not all, who attended college would agree with me that even 10-20 years ago college was still almost another world. It’s even more divorced from the real world today. Sure, lots of kids will make the adjustment, as they aren’t Special Snowflakes, but it can be a bit tough even for them.

One does have to wonder, though, how many of those 9,000 were the same snowflakes showing up again and again and again? Let’s end with this

East Carolina officials will also reach out to elementary, middle and high schools to see if they can teach coping skills and resiliency at a younger age.

Try and nip Special Snowflake Syndrome in the butt earlier.

Read: ECU To Offer Special Snowflakes Help With “Adulting” »

Posted in Special Snowflake Syndrome | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 8, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…are some awful climate killing canines, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is the big dog, Instapundit, with a post on Hillary’s emails possibly leading to the execution of an Iranian nuclear scientist.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

‘Climate Change’ Is Most Existential Risk Or Something

By William Teach August 8, 2016 – 10:30 am

More doomsaying from the same people who refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral

Op-ed: Climate Change Is the Most Urgent Existential Risk

Climate change and biodiversity loss may pose the most immediate and important threat to human survival given their indirect effects on other risk scenarios.

Humanity faces a number of formidable challenges this century. Threats to our collective survival stem from asteroids and comets, supervolcanoes, global pandemics, climate change, biodiversity loss, nuclear weapons, biotechnology, synthetic biology, nanotechnology, and artificial superintelligence.

With such threats in mind, an informal survey conducted by the Future of Humanity Institute placed the probability of human extinction this century at 19%. To put this in perspective, it means that the average American is more than a thousand times more likely to die in a human extinction event than a plane crash.*

This is all the same old same old complaints of future doom if we don’t Do Something. Interestingly, that we’re doomed survey was from 2008, and had nothing to do with Hotcoldwetdry. There is one itty bitty mention in regards to a couple folks bringing it up, but, that is it. Of course, in Warmist World, anthropogenic climate change factors heavily into everything. Not enough to change their own behaviors, mind you.

Speaking of repetitive complaints, this New York Times editorial does the same in trotting out silly crap and saying we 1st Worlders need to pay for what is happening to tiny nations. Strangely, the NYT editorial writers won’t say they are leading by example and ponying up their own money or that of the NY Times.

Read: ‘Climate Change’ Is Most Existential Risk Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove