If All You See…

By William Teach July 14, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a world turning to desert, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Fire Andrea Mitchell, with a post on the ESPYs and BLM.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Warmists Suddenly Very Upset When They’re Hit With Subpoenas

By William Teach July 14, 2016 – 10:30 am

Members of the Cult of Climastrology were enthusiastic over the government sponsored witch hunts aimed by elected Democratic officials at Skeptic groups and individuals, and have long promoted the removal of 1st Amendment rights from those involved in WrongThink. However, when the table is turned, they aren’t particularly happy

(Daily Caller) Two environmental groups backing investigations into ExxonMobil and conservative think tanks by some states attorneys general are furious they’ve been threatened with a subpoena by federal lawmakers.

Greenpeace and 350.org activists were so mad with House Republicans they sent a letter back demanding lawmakers disclose their ties to Exxon, other oil companies and conservtive think tanks. Activists also argued, rather ironically, such requests violate their First Amendment rights.

“As we have explained in detail in our prior letters to the Committee, the Committee’s requests violate basic First Amendment protections, fall outside the proper jurisdiction of the Committee, and are impermissibly vague, overbroad, and burdensome,” Greenpeace and 350.org wrote to Texas Republican Rep. Lamar Smith, the chairman of the House science committee.

Interesting. These same groups were big cheerleaders when the subpoenas were flying the other way. Free speech for me but not thee seems to be their ideal. This leads to

(Daily Caller) A top House Republican issued subpoenas Wednesday to the attorneys general and environmental groups conservatives argue are depriving companies and other organization of free speech rights.

Texas Rep. Lamar Smith issued subpoenas to Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, and eight environmental groups focusing on nonprofit groups for supposedly hiding information related to global warming.

“The attorneys general have appointed themselves to decide what is valid and what is invalid regarding climate change. The attorneys general are pursuing a political agenda at the expense of scientists’ right to free speech,” Smith, who chairs the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, said in a press statement Wednesday.

“Unfortunately, the attorneys general have refused to give the committee the information to which it is entitled. What are they hiding? And why?”

From the press release

Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber (R-Texas): “Since when did it become a crime to express or hold an opinion? The difference of opinions is what makes our country so strong and unique. It’s this freedom without censorship or restraint that helped build our country. However, this posse of attorneys general believe that those whose opinion, or scientific research, conflicts with the alleged consensus view on climate change should be the subject of investigation and prosecution by government officials – talk about a chilling effect on free speech.”

From Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.)

“If the debate on climate change is settled, the environmental activists and state attorneys general should have no problem convincing the American public with their own evidence and arguments. Why go to such great lengths to squash differing opinions and anyone who questions their conclusions? These individuals, scientists, and organizations have the right to conduct research, form their own opinions, and voice those opinions.”

and

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio): “Instead of upholding the constitution, protecting citizens, and putting real criminal behind bars, these attorneys general are using taxpayer dollars to manufacture charges to send a political message. This demonstrates a clear deviation from the legal duties of an attorney general and the possible abuse of discretionary judgement. It is not the job of the attorneys general to decide what science should be conducted, and their actions indicate their intent is to silence certain voices.”

It’s a fight started by those who wish to use the Government to shut down 1st Amendment Rights, something which is specifically forbidden in the Constitution (remember, the original Bill of Rights was more about telling the Government what it cannot do), and now must be joined by those who wish to protect those 1st Amendment protections. And the first group is not real happy when their own tactics are turned back on them.

Read: Warmists Suddenly Very Upset When They’re Hit With Subpoenas »

Posted in 1st Amendment, Global Warming | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

GOP Platform Is Most “Anti-LBGT” In History Or Something

By William Teach July 14, 2016 – 7:28 am

The Republican party has long stood against gay marriage, and now they have added opposition to the gender confused in the bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers of the opposite biological sex. This has caused a bit of a freakout

(WTVD) The country’s largest organization representing LGBT conservatives has slammed the GOP for its draft party platform, which remains opposed to same-sex marriage and bathroom choice for transgender people.

“There’s no way to sugar-coat this: I’m mad as h*** — and I know you are, too,” Gregory T. Angelo, president of the Log Cabin Republicans, wrote in a fundraising email sent Tuesday evening. “Moments ago, the Republican Party passed the most anti-LGBT Platform in the Party’s 162-year history.”

Angelo continued, “Opposition to marriage equality, nonsense about bathrooms, an endorsement of the debunked psychological practice of ‘pray the gay away’ – it’s all in there.”

What did Angelo think was going to happen? That the GOP would suddenly come out in favor of those things?

The GOP’s current draft platform — prepared in advanced of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, kicking off July 18 — defines marriage “as the union of one man and one woman” and calls for a reversal of the 2015 Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

As it should. One thing they could have in there is the notion of governmentally recognized civil union, since this is America, founded on the notion, among others, that if it isn’t actually negatively affecting you, why do you care? If two people love each other, that love should be able to be formalized under the eyes of the law.

There is no “conversion therapy” within the bill.

Rachel Hoff, an openly gay defense lobbyist for a center-right policy center, was among the GOP platform committee members who gathered Monday to shape the party’s platform. She called for the GOP to take a neutral position on same-sex marriage.

Yes, let’s push the GOP over towards the Democratic side.

Citing Trump, the Log Cabin Republicans’ Angelo said, “This isn’t my GOP, and I know it’s not yours either. Heck, it’s not even Donald Trump’s! When given a chance to follow the lead of our presumptive presidential nominee and reach out to the LGBT community in the wake of the awful terrorist massacre in Orlando on the gay nightclub Pulse, the Platform Committee said NO.”

It’s been this way for a long time, explicitly ever since leftists started pushing their gay marriage agenda. And as far as transgenders go, well, Republicans are going to take a stand against opening up bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers to people who do not belong in there due to their actual biology, much less the fact that bad people will take advantage of those types of policies to do bad things.

Read: GOP Platform Is Most “Anti-LBGT” In History Or Something »

Posted in Current Affairs | 30 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Gambles On Being The “Law And Order” Candidate, Which Is A “Dog-Whistle” Or Something

By William Teach July 14, 2016 – 7:08 am

Law and order is apparently all about raaaaacism these days, and very vexing to liberals

(The Hill) Donald Trump’s embrace of “law and order” on the campaign trail is a risk that could pay big dividends, political experts say.

Trump, who is on the verge of becoming the Republican presidential nominee next week, has begun to characterize himself as “the law-and-order candidate” in the wake of last week’s mass shooting in Dallas, where a sniper killed five police officers and wounded another seven.

It’s a loaded phrase, harkening back to the 1960s, when Republican presidential candidates Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon adopted it during the campaigns of 1964 and 1968, respectively. The expression was perceived as carrying racial connotations — a dog whistle to white voters amid civil rights protests — so Trump’s resurrection of the language could further erode his standing with minority voters.

“I don’t know of many African Americans and Latinos who heard Mr. Trump’s words and did not recoil at the thought that we’re returning to an era we thought was behind us,” Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), former head of the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), said Wednesday.

How dare Trump want law and order, when we have seen riots in the streets, lawlessness, violence, oh, and the article forgets the way Hillary got away with violating federal laws, ones for which the rest of us would have been prosecuted over. But, apparently, Liberals think that upholding the law is a racist notion, which we can see in action in Democratic Party run cities like Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis, Ferguson, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Newark, and so many others.

With that in mind, some political experts suggested Trump’s “law-and-order” push is another indication that the billionaire businessman sees the surest route to the White House in energizing the white, male, working-class voters who largely constitute his base, rather than shifting his general-election message to appeal to minorities and women.

“He is trying to win an election primarily with the working and middle class white vote where he thinks law and order will resonate,” Julian E. Zelizer, political historian at Princeton University, said Tuesday.

So women and minorities do not see law and order as important? Really?

In the eyes of black lawmakers on Capitol Hill, Trump is simply using racially loaded language as a calculated strategy.

“Anything that would bring together people who are angry about something, he has a network of buttons that he pushes. ‘Law and order’ is one of them,” Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), another prominent CBC member, said Wednesday.

Well, we can understand why Rangel is against law and order, considering all the charges that have been lobbed his way of tax evasion and other financial dealings.

Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a hero of the Civil Rights era, agreed.

“It reminds me of another period. You cannot bring the country together by speaking of ‘law and order,'” said Lewis, who was beaten nearly to death by police during a 1965 voting rights march in Selma, Ala.

“I don’t think politicians can go around saying that,” Lewis added. “This is a time for healing. Not a time for division.”

Got that? Law and order are decisive. It’s no wonder Democratic Party run cities are messes. And, yes, it’s no wonder the Black community is disproportionately responsible for both violent and property crimes when they are told that following the law is “racist.”

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Trump Gambles On Being The “Law And Order” Candidate, Which Is A “Dog-Whistle” Or Something »

Posted in Donald Trump, Liberal World | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Warmists Upset That Trump Doesn’t Agree With Dictators On ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach July 13, 2016 – 4:31 pm

I’ve noted previously that while I like that Donald Trump is a skeptic, his reasoning behind it, that it is a Chinese scheme, is silly. That said, there’s this

(Daily Caller)  The Sierra Club has released a report claiming if real estate mogul Donald Trump were elected president he would be “the the only world leader today to deny the science of climate change.”

The environmental group’s report includes quotes about global warming from the leaders of 195 countries recognized by the U.S. Department of State. The Sierra Club uses this as evidence a future President Trump would be at odds with America’s closest allies on global warming.

“In fact, a review of the data indicates that Trump might very well be the only world leader not calling for urgent climate action,” according to the Sierra Club, America’s oldest environmental group.

Interestingly enough, it also means Trump disagrees with some of America’s rivals as well, including third world dictators and communist regimes.

That list includes such notables as Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un of North Korea, Vladimir Putin (according to the report), Cuban President Raul Castro, and leaders of Ecuador, China, Iran, Venezuela and Zimbabwe. Let’s also not forget that Osama Bin Laden was a big Warmist. I’m sure we can find many others that could be named. Great company you’re in, Warmists.

Read: Warmists Upset That Trump Doesn’t Agree With Dictators On ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Should We Be Worried About The Carbon Footprint Of Crime?

By William Teach July 13, 2016 – 1:00 pm

Another day, another nutty study from the Cult of Climastrology, which has a deep need to link pretty much everything to their cultish beliefs

(Daily Caller) Politicians aren’t concerned enough about the environmental impact of crime and policing, according to an academic study published Monday by the University of Surrey.

The study used computer modeling to estimate that over 4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), equivalent to the emissions of 900,000 British homes, were emitted by crime in England and Wales in 2011.

Of course it used computer models.

The largest single sources of CO2 emissions from crime was burglary due to large volume of offences. The criminal justice system aimed at preventing crime was also a major source of emissions and use “money currently spent addressing crime might be spent in the absence of crime.”

The authors even speculated that the if the criminal justice system were eliminated entirely, there’d be fewer CO2 emissions.

So, let’s do away with cops and judges and prosecutors. Who cares if crime would explode, we’re saving the planet!

“The analysis illustrates the complex ways that institutions in society and the associated economic activity shape the impact we have on our climate,” Skudder continued. “We have shown that it is possible to take into account the environmental implications of crime alongside the social and economic costs, as part of crime prevention policy appraisals.”

Read: Should We Be Worried About The Carbon Footprint Of Crime? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 13, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a rising ocean for horrible fossil fueled carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day Political Clown Parade, with a post noting it’s nappy time for Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Obama Uses Speech At Dallas Memorial To Talk About Himself

By William Teach July 13, 2016 – 7:17 am

Unsurprisingly, Obama used the memorial for a murdered Dallas police officer to get all sorts of political. He yammered on about racism, blaming Other People. He yammered on about gun control, even saying it was easier to get a Glock than a book. He took shots at the police. As Charles Cooke noted

This, remember, was a funeral — a funeral for one of the police officers who was murdered last Thursday. It wasn’t a rally. It wasn’t a White House press conference. It wasn’t a public statement, hastily arranged on the airport tarmac. It was a funeral. Presumably, those attending had all sorts of political opinions. Presumably, some of the cops were Republicans. Presumably, there was some serious disagreement in that room as to how the country should move forward. Wouldn’t it have been better to wait until the proceedings were over to call for change? Wouldn’t it have been more politically effective for the president to have made his push somewhere else?

Yes, it would

(Daily Caller) President Obama referred to himself 45 times over the course of the speech he delivered Tuesday at the memorial service for the five police officers killed in Dallas last week.

Obama would refer to himself 43 more times throughout the speech — most of which he personally wrote, according to the LA Times — including one instance where he referred to himself in the third-person: “the president.”

You can read the whole thing at Time. Then we have this

https://twitter.com/WilliamTeach/status/753030812975656961

It’s a tale of two speeches. Say what you will about George W. Bush, the man has a sense of propriety, understanding the situation he’s in, and while Obama was preachy and looked down his nose at people, yammering about himself, Bush was gracious, offering empathy, sympathy, and talked about people coming together. He mentioned the slain police officers almost immediately

At times, it seems like the forces pulling us apart are stronger than the forces binding us together. Argument turns too easily into animosity. Disagreement escalates too quickly into dehumanization. Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples, while judging ourselves by our best intentions. (Applause.) And this has strained our bonds of understanding and common purpose.

But Americans, I think, have a great advantage. To renew our unity, we only need to remember our values. We have never been held together by blood or background. We are bound by things of the spirit – by shared commitments to common ideals.

At our best, we practice empathy, imagining ourselves in the lives and circumstances of others. This is the bridge across our nation’s deepest divisions. And it is not merely a matter of tolerance, but of learning from the struggles and stories of our fellow citizens, and finding our better selves in the process.

At our best, we honor the image of God we see in one another. We recognize that we are brothers and sisters, sharing the same brief moment on earth, and owing each other the loyalty of our shared humanity.

President Bush continued on in that vein for a bit longer, before ending with

Today, all of us feel a sense of loss – but not equally. I’d like to conclude with a word to the families, the spouses, and especially the children of the fallen. Your loved one’s time with you was too short, and they did not get the chance to properly say goodbye. But they went where duty called. They defended us, even to the end. They finished well. We will not forget what they did for us.

Your loss is unfair. We cannot explain it. We can stand beside you and share your grief. And we can pray that God will comfort you with a hope deeper than sorrow and stronger than death.

May God bless you.

He understood that this was a memorial, not a political rally, and he talked to and with the people in attendance, not at them like someone else.

Read: Obama Uses Speech At Dallas Memorial To Talk About Himself »

Posted in Barry Obama, GWB | 28 Comments | Trackback URL

Police Offer Lots Of Suggestions For Pokemon GO Players

By William Teach July 13, 2016 – 6:58 am

Are you part of the Pokemon GO craze? On the bright side, the game has done more to get kids off the couch than 7 years of Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move!” push. These things are showing up everywhere. People are walking all over my workplace looking for them (I caught people making an arm motion like they were throwing something at me twice yesterday), and I saw a bunch looking at their phones walking around the golf course. They didn’t have clubs. Heck, even the US Marines noticed them.

But, see, there’s a bit of a problem, because we’re getting things like this

As many have noted, it’s a shame that people have to actually be told this. Here in the Triangle, both the Wake Forest and Apex police departments are concerned

(WTVD) Local law enforcement are warning of the real dangers associated with a virtual gaming app that’s sweeping the nation.

Pokemon Go, the free app that allows users to superimpose a digital world onto the real one while catching animated Pokemon characters, launched this week.

In parts of the country, police have responded to assaults and robberies due to unsuspecting gamers being lured into the path of criminals.

In Apex, police have responded to six calls in three days about reports of a suspicious person or someone trespassing. Incident reports show groups of people are being spotted lurking in front of businesses after hours and even people’s backyards late at night.

The Wake Forest PD offered a list of advice

  • Watch out for your surroundings: Look up and be aware of who is around you;
  • Parents, limit places kids can go: Set boundaries to avoid stranger danger for kids who are unattended;
  • Don’t Pokemon Go and drive: Catching Pikachu isn’t worth crashing;
  • Tell people where you’re going if it is somewhere you’ve never been;
  • Don’t trespass: People might call the police if you enter private property and hunting for Pokemon and other virtual characters is no excuse;
  • If you are stopped by police: Show them you are playing a game;
  • Parents – tell your kids about stranger-danger. The way that the game is designed can bring people together in the real world as they search for Pokemon in common areas called “gyms” and “pokestops.” Obviously, you never know who you could run into while playing.
  • And as always, if you run into an individual that is seemingly up to no good – don’t hesitate to dial 911!

Like with the Holocaust Museum and Arlington Cemetery, did we really need to be told this? Apparently so. Heck, the Wake County Sheriff’s Office actually had to explain what to do when there’s a stopped school bus.

Overall, though, Pokemon GO seems to be a pretty good game for *ssssshhhh don’t tell them* getting people up and about. I don’t play it myself, not the type of game that interests me, but, people are having fun. They just need to be careful.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Police Offer Lots Of Suggestions For Pokemon GO Players »

Posted in Like, Gnarly, Dude | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Mussels Will Be Off The Menu In 85 Years Or Something

By William Teach July 12, 2016 – 5:36 pm

Yet another future prognostication of doom from the Cult of Climastrology

(Telegraph)  Moules-frites and moules mariniere will be largely consigned to the pages of culinary history by the end of the century, scientists have predicted.

The increasing acidity of the oceans due to climate change means that farming or fishing for mussels will be commercially unviable by 2100.

Researchers at Washington University in Seattle have established that a mussel’s ability to grip to a rock or rope is dependent on the acidity of the surrounding sea. (snip)

Prof Emily Carrington, one of the lead researchers, carried out tests which revealed that increased acidity, or lower pH, substantially weakened a mussel’s ability to adhere a surface.

She predicts that within 85 years the acidity of the coastal regions where mussels currently thrive will pass a threshold beyond which nearly half will be unable to cling on long enough to be farmed.

Uh huh. Of course, there are numerous studies that show that an increase in CO2 is causing the oceans to become more neutral, not acidic. And there is variability within the PH range all the time, due to temperature, which, shockingly, fluctuates during the seasons.

She said there would be no gradual increase in mortality, however, with the shellfish clinging on until the sea reached the 7.6pH level. “Things will get really bad all of a sudden,” she said.

Got that? We won’t notice till suddenly doom. Way in the future. When no one will remember the prognostication. This is all about scaring people while pretending to use science.

Read: Mussels Will Be Off The Menu In 85 Years Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 9 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove