Trump Refers To Hillary’s Husband’s Sexual Indiscretions As Rape

By William Teach May 19, 2016 – 7:42 am

Donald Trump and the Clintons may have been buddy buddy at one point. I think we can easily say those days are formally over

(Fox News) Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump used the word “rape” Wednesday evening to describe alleged sexual misconduct by former President Bill Clinton.

Trump made the comment during an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity. The real estate mogul was answering questions about an unflattering story published this past weekend by The New York Times involving his relationships with women when he turned his attention to Bill Clinton.

“By the way, you know, it’s not like the worst things, OK,” Trump said. “You look at what Clinton’s gone through with all of the problems and all of the things that he’s done.”

Hannity went on to question whether the newspaper would interview women including Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey. All three have accused Bill Clinton of sexual misconduct.

“In one case, it’s about exposure. In another case, it’s about groping and fondling and touching against a woman’s will,” Hannity said.

“And rape,” Trump responded.

We know what will happen: liberals will circle the wagons around Hillary and Bill. They typically make a major deal out of any rape allegations, even deeming a stolen kiss and consensual sex as sexual assault and rape. Politico is also covering this, and provides this deflection quote

“Trump is doing what he does best, attacking when he feels wounded and dragging the American people through the mud for his own gain,” spokesman Nick Merrill said. “If that’s the kind of campaign he wants to run that’s his choice. Hillary Clinton is running a campaign to be president for all of America. It’s not surprising that after a week of still refusing to release his taxes and likening Oakland and Ferguson to the dangers in Iraq, of course he wants to change the subject. So while he licks his wounds, we’ll continue to focus on improving the lives of the American people.”

The Clinton’s refuse to discuss any of the allegations, and, if they think this will get Trump to drop the subject like with most Republicans, they have another thing coming. Trump doesn’t drop attack lines. He’ll keep using them again and again and again, much in the way Democrats refuse to ever drop a talking point. Trump will make sure everyone knows about Bill’s treatment of women and the way Hillary has enabled this conduct. He’s like an alligator with it’s teeth prey: he won’t let go, and he’s looking to make a death roll.

Meanwhile, Juanita Broaddrick says the NY Times should try interviewing Bill Clinton’s female victims.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Trump Refers To Hillary’s Husband’s Sexual Indiscretions As Rape »

Posted in Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Whew! Colorado School Protected From 5 Year Old With A Gun

By William Teach May 18, 2016 – 2:40 pm

Our long national nightmare is over

(KDVR) A 5 year-old girl was suspended from kindergarten on Monday for bringing a gun to Southeast Elementary School.

It sounds alarming, but the weapon was a bubble gun, a popular plastic toy sold at stores across Colorado.

The girl’s mother, who goes by Emma, said she was shocked when she got a call from the school telling her she needed to pick up her daughter and take her home.

“If they had contacted me and said can you make sure this doesn’t happen again, we just want you to be aware, I think that would have been a more appropriate way to handle the situation. Could we have a warning? It blows bubbles,” she said.

If you’re thinking that the school defended this idiotic policy, you’d be correct. They released a Statement. Because bubble guns and nerf guns and stuff are Bad, you guys. And if you think that the mother thinks common sense should be applied, you would be correct. And if you think the child was very upset and didn’t want to go back to school, you’d be correct.

Read: Whew! Colorado School Protected From 5 Year Old With A Gun »

Posted in Unhinged Tools | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 18, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is the flag of an evil carbon polluting nation, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on Barbara Walters, er, Megyn Kelly interviewing Donald Trump.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Let’s Watch Hillary Lie For 13 Minutes

By William Teach May 18, 2016 – 10:39 am

The Washington Post’s uber-squishy resident Republican, Kathleen Parker, calls this Hillary’s viral nightmare

You could say that it all depends on how you define “lie.” Or, perhaps, that it’s hell to have a public record.

Either way, Hillary Clinton’s vast résumé of, shall we say, inconsistencies, is the dog that caught the car and won’t let go. A viral video collection of her comments on various subjects through the years is bestirring Republican hearts.

To those who’d rather vote for a reality show host than a Clinton, the video merely confirms what they’ve believed all along. For independents and even Democrats, it’s a reminder of how often Clinton has morphed into a fresh incarnation as required by the political moment.

Most of the highlights will be familiar to anyone who follows politics — her varying takes on Bosnia, health care, Wall Street, NAFTA — but the juxtaposition of these ever-shifting views is more jarring than one might expect. Politicians count on Americans’ short attention spans (and memories) as much as they do their own policies and/or charms. This video , inartfully titled “Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight,” clarifies blurred recollections and recasts them in an order that, among other things, reminds us how long the Clintons have been around.

The video isn’t exactly new, having been uploaded on January 29th of this year, but, it has gone viral. Let’s watch (if your stomach can take it)

Read: Let’s Watch Hillary Lie For 13 Minutes »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Team Obama Finalizing Rules On Expanding Overtime Rules

By William Teach May 18, 2016 – 8:40 am

It’s laudable that Team Obama is attempting to increase wages for workers. Too bad they have no idea what they’re doing, because most of them, including O, have never worked in the private sector and never had to balance a spreadsheet, have never had to pay workers, never looked at a profit/loss sheet

(Money) If you’re a salaried worker making under $47,000 a year, you could be in luck: A new rule could make you eligible for overtime pay.

The new rule, expected to be passed by the Labor Department as early as this week, would make some management, administrative and professional employees eligible for overtime pay when they work more than 40 hours a week, USA Today reported. Currently, such workers who earn more than $26,660 a year are exempt from getting overtime, but a new rule proposed by the department last summer would raise that threshold to $50,400.

However, some legal experts say the final version of the regulation likely places the threshold closer to a salary of $47,000—meaning that 5 million salaried workers are expected to be eligible for overtime under the rule. The change would most directly affect the service industry, particularly workers in hotels and restaurants, Gary Chaison, a professor of labor relations at Clarkson University, told Marketplace.

Here’s the thing: if you accept a management position, one which is salaried, companies usually expect you to work more than 40 hours a week with no OT. That’s just the nature of business. I certainly agree with the rule on those making under $26,660, because that is clearly an attempt by businesses to get a lot of work out of a low wage worker without paying them properly. If you’re salary is $45,000 a year? That’s a bit different

Indeed, there could be a raise on the horizon for the approximately 1.2 million Americans that the Labor Department estimates will receive increased wages or a higher base salary as a result of the rule change. However, the bad news is a large number of small businesses are expected to instruct their employees to work no more than 40 hours a week because they can’t handle the additional costs.

To account for the productivity loss, these companies will likely hire part-time workers or cut the base pay of affected employees. Others will switch salaried workers to hourly employees and ask them to track their hours, according to the National Federation of Independent Business.

There are consequences to mucking around with the private sector, making Governmental demands, and they so often do not turn out well for the workers the rules are supposed to help.

Read: Team Obama Finalizing Rules On Expanding Overtime Rules »

Posted in Barry Obama, Economy | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Is Team Trump Backsliding On His ‘Climate Change’ Skepticism?

By William Teach May 18, 2016 – 8:17 am

One of the few things I like about Donald Trump is that he has consistently shown that he is not a believe in anthropogenic climate change. I think he’s foolish to blame it on some Chinese conspiracy.

Um. No. He doesn’t buy into every weather event being ‘climate change’.  He told the Washington Post Editorial Board

I think there’s a change in weather. I am not a great believer in man-made climate change. I’m not a great believer. There is certainly a change in weather that goes — if you look, they had global cooling in the 1920s and now they have global warming, although now they don’t know if they have global warming. They call it all sorts of different things; now they’re using “extreme weather” I guess more than any other phrase. I am not — I know it hurts me with this room, and I know it’s probably a killer with this room — but I am not a believer. Perhaps there’s a minor effect, but I’m not a big believer in man-made climate change.

But, what if his populism streak shines through?

(UK Guardian) Donald Trump will have a climate plan and it will be ugly. For now, the Republican frontrunner is pedaling the kind of denialism his party loves, having called global warming everything from a “hoax” to a “con job” to a Chinese plot. But an interview with his energy adviser late last week hinted that – before too long – Trump might endeavor to Make Atmospheric Carbon Levels Great Again. For those interested in a livable and more equal future, that’s not a good thing.

“My advice would be, while I’m a skeptic as well”, Trump energy honcho Kevin Cramer told ClimateWire last week, “he is a product of political populism, and political populism believes that there needs [to be] some addressing of climate change”. (snip)

Cramer has not had a climate epiphany. He probably just looked at the data.

Nearly half of Republicans – and 72% of independents – say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who thinks climate change is a hoax. A Monmouth University poll found that two-thirds of Americans want to see their government take action on emissions. Today’s populism, it seems, includes a concern for the planet.

Trump has been willing to pander and backslide and change his positions like the wind. There are seemingly no principles involved. Might he change on this one, too? The rest of the Guardian article is unenthusiastic as to what Trump might do. What if he sides with Obama on the Clean Power Plan? What if he decides to implement a carbon tax or cap and trade scheme nationally, as Democrats and a few Republicans want? What if this is more than just a Trump advisor speaking out?

(Reuters) Republican presidential contender Donald Trump said on Tuesday he would renegotiate America’s role in the U.N. global climate accord, spelling potential doom for an agreement many view as a last chance to turn the tide on global warming.

“I will be looking at that very, very seriously, and at a minimum I will be renegotiating those agreements, at a minimum. And at a maximum I may do something else,” the New York real estate mogul said in an interview with Reuters.

“But those agreements are one-sided agreements and they are bad for the United States.”

Trump said he did not believe China, the world’s top emitter of the carbon dioxide gas that many scientists believe is contributing to global climate change, would adhere to its pledge under the Paris deal.

“Not a big fan because other countries don’t adhere to it, and China doesn’t adhere to it, and China’s spewing into the atmosphere,” he said.

What if this doesn’t spell doom for the Paris Accord, but simply means placing tougher measures on China? At one point, Trump wanted to get rid of the Paris Accord, and “described President Obama’s speech to the Paris climate summit last December as “one of the dumbest statements I’ve ever heard.” Now, renegotiation.

Last August, Climate Progress’ Joe Romm said that there is probably nothing to worry about, that a President Trump would likely honor the Paris Accord and O’s Clean Power Plan. He might be right.

So, I tell you, even on this subject, I can no longer trust Trump.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Is Team Trump Backsliding On His ‘Climate Change’ Skepticism? »

Posted in Donald Trump, Global Warming | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

CEI Files Suit Against Warmists US Virgin Islands AG

By William Teach May 17, 2016 – 3:48 pm

There’s a price to pay for attempting to infringe on people’s 1st Amendment rights

(Free Beacon) A libertarian nonprofit group is seeking damages from the U.S. Virgin Islands’ chief law enforcement officer, alleging a politically motivated legal campaign designed to stifle the group’s policy advocacy activities.

Attorneys representing the Competitive Enterprise Institute filed a motion in a Washington, D.C. court on Monday alleging that Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker violated a D.C. law designed to prevent frivolous legal actions targeting policy groups’ rights to free speech and government redress.

Make sure to read the whole thing, which one would think would put an end to these legal system abuses by members of the Cult of Climastrology, but, we all know that they do not care, and will continue their assaults on the Constitution .

Via Instapundit.

Read: CEI Files Suit Against Warmists US Virgin Islands AG »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 17, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is the need for more firefighters because carbon pollution will set everything on fire, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is…hey, we have a Strata-Sphere sighting!!!!!, with a post on Brexit reflecting America’s POTUS choices.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Good News: Ontario’s Climate Tax Will Only Cost $13 A Month

By William Teach May 17, 2016 – 10:30 am

Government models (snicker) tell us so

(Toronto Star) Ontario’s new climate-change plan will cost the average household $13 a month — far less than a carbon tax that would have meant a monthly hit of up to $107, according to an internal report on the scheme.

Premier Kathleen Wynne’s cap-and-trade proposal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enshrined in legislation expected to pass Wednesday, will drag on the economy by 0.03 per cent in 2020.

Growth forecast to be 11 per cent between 2015 and 2020 will be adjusted downward to 10.97 per cent, having roughly the same effect on the provincial economy as a statutory holiday.

That’s according to a government draft obtained by the Star of the “impact modeling and analysis” of Ontario’s new carbon-pricing program being done along with Quebec and Ontario.

In other words, when the Real World invades, the costs will surely go up at least three to four times. When has a government program actually been at the projected cost? Especially when these taxes start spreading through the economy, and businesses have to raise their prices? And businesses will have carbon caps, which means either reducing service or increasing costs.

As well, it points out more than 50 different “carbon-intensive” industries, including auto manufacturing, cement, chemicals, forestry, iron and steel, and petroleum, face some risk under the forthcoming regime.

Environment Minister Glen Murray insisted Monday that that’s why the government will have “transitional assistance” to help businesses adjust to the new reality of polluting less.

You know what they do? Move. Close down. They mostly won’t be looking for “transitional assistance”. And then people are out of work. Then there’s this

(Daily Caller) To reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions that activists tell us will lead to problematic warming, Ontario has become the first jurisdiction in North America to permanently ban coal-fired electricity generation. The consequences are important for Americans to note.

In 2002, when coal provided about 25 percent of our electricity, Ontario had the lowest electricity prices in Canada. We were the nation’s powerhouse with hundreds of thousands of well paid, manufacturing jobs.

Today, with no coal-fired power at all, our electricity rates are 318 percent higher and at least 300,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost in the last 15 years. Tom Adams, independent energy researcher and former board member of the Ontario Independent Electricity Market Operator explains that, although there were several factors that contributed to this fiasco, closing down coal, a flexible, reliable and moderately priced source of supply, was the single most important cause.

The article goes on to note that wind turbines are being forced upon citizens and communities, even on those who were promised that they wouldn’t be forced on “unwilling communities”. They’ve lowered property values, and are shown to cause health issues. The government doesn’t care.

The question that should be put to all climate change activists, people who want to close our least expensive, most efficient power plants in the name of “stopping climate change,” is simple. Are the largely unpredictable problems of people yet to be born more important that the very real problems climate mitigation policy is now causing our most vulnerable citizens? The answer would be most inconvenient.

Of course, Warmists do not care. All this does is increase the size and power of government, which is their purpose. Strangely, they never seem to realize that this will negatively effect their own lives.

BTW, the liberal government won’t confirm the report that shows they want to eliminate the use of natural gas, one of the least costly and most efficient home heating methods, and that the plan would require that homes built after 2030 not include natural gas. Going off natural gas can increase costs by $2000 a year, and converting can cost over $4500.

Read: Good News: Ontario’s Climate Tax Will Only Cost $13 A Month »

Posted in Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Both Clinton And Trump Work To Woo The Other Side Of The Political Aisle

By William Teach May 17, 2016 – 8:08 am

There are two pieces of interest at the NY Times. The first is an opinion piece by Emma Roller, which is about Hillary’s conservative cred

Can Hillary Clinton, Goldwater Girl, Win Over Republicans?

….

Now she’s the one running for president. The Goldwater Girl chapter is in the past, though it is something the veteran Democratic politician talks about as formative to her political identity. “My political beliefs are rooted in the conservatism that I was raised with,” she said in a 1996interview.

What can Hillary Clinton’s past as a Goldwater Girl tell us about her effort to win over Republicans in the general election?

The Clinton campaign seems to be subtly tapping into her conservative past in the hopes of appealing to anti-Trump Republicans in the general election. In recent weeks, her campaign has started courting Jeb Bush’s donors, and has sent out a flurry of news releases playing up the “risk” posed by a Donald J. Trump presidency and quoting Republicans who have voiced concerns about their presumptive nominee.

Of course, this is all minor wooing. She isn’t changing her positions, and she’s not blowing off her party’s base. She isn’t expecting Republicans unhappy with Trump to campaign for her, show their support of her, or even vote for her. She’s surely expecting them to just not vote for Trump. She’ll highlight that Trump is beyond the political beliefs of Conservatives and Republicans. As so many Trump followers note, refusing to vote for Trump helps Hillary.

Then we have this, from the front page of the NY Times in the news section

Donald Trump Borrows From Bernie Sanders’s Playbook to Woo Democrats

Donald J. Trump recently coined a dismissive nickname for Senator Bernie Sanders: “Crazy Bernie.”

But that has not stopped Mr. Trump from borrowing lessons from Mr. Sanders — the Vermont senator whom he also frequently praises from the stump — on how to run against Hillary Clinton, his likely opponent in the general election.

On a range of issues, Mr. Trump seems to be taking a page from the Sanders playbook, expressing a willingness to increase the minimum wage, suggesting that the wealthy may pay higher taxes than under his original proposal, attacking Mrs. Clinton from the left on national security and Wall Street, and making clear that his opposition to free trade will be a centerpiece of his general election campaign.

During the general election time, candidates do want to woo: the want to appeal to independents, interest groups, and even pick off some who traditionally vote for the other party, all while making sure they keep their own folks on the reservation.

Here’s one difference, though: Hillary isn’t going to change her positions. They will be Democrat positions. Trump is actually moving to the left of Hillary on many issues, and taking straight up Democrat party positions on others. He’s not attempting to woo Conservatives and Republicans. And he’s set a tone with his supporters to brand any GOP voter who refuses to vote Trump as cuckservatives, Demoncrats, and traitors. Those are just three of the words I’ve been branded with for refusing to throw my support behind Trump. And the more this all happens, the closer I become to #NeverTrump. I would prefer it to be #NeverHillary. But, I can only abandon principles for pragmatism so far.

Read: Both Clinton And Trump Work To Woo The Other Side Of The Political Aisle »

Posted in Elections | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove