Shockingly, Washington Post Snowflake Has Conniption Fit Over Word “Beautiful”

By William Teach March 22, 2016 – 7:43 am

It’s time for yet another episode of Offended! First off, Washington Post Opinions Deputy Digital Editor Karen Attiah tweeted out this Monday (via The Lid)

Finally, a few hours later, she explains, and, like most liberals, ends up an emotional wreck, all sorts of triggering and microaggressions

I asked Trump a policy question. Then he called me ‘beautiful.’

Donald Trump, the Republican front-runner for the presidential nomination, met with The Washington Post’s editorial board Monday to answer questions ranging from his views on NATO and the American criminal justice system to the violence that has been plaguing his rallies. We hoped that we would get to peel back some of the layers of Trump. In our meeting, when asked whether he thought there were racial disparities in how laws are enforced, Trump said he had “no opinion.” As time was running out, I wanted to press him a little more on if he plans to run on and/or govern on a message of racial inclusion. (snip to relevant portion)

As the meeting ended and we were walking out of the room, I thanked Trump for taking my question. He turned to me and said, “I really hope I answered your question,” and added casually with a smile, “Beautiful.” I was stunned. I didn’t say thank you, and I don’t think I smiled. He then walked out to meet with my Post colleagues briefly before heading to the elevator. I stayed in the conference room for a few minutes as it sunk in that the potential GOP nominee for president thought it was okay to comment on my appearance. Did he just say that?

Oh noes! Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes… The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria! Seriously, stunned? Sitting in a room for a few minutes? Does someone need some coloring books?

Planning out how to question Trump in a way that was illuminating was like planning for asymmetrical warfare against an opponent who doesn’t follow the same rules as you do. Who doesn’t believe in rules. Who thinks that rules won’t help make America great again. In Trump’s world, commenting on a woman’s appearance in a professional setting is fair game, as is predicting riots if he doesn’t get the nomination, threatening the speaker of the House, vowing to “open up” libel laws to go after “unfair” media, and helping to stoke the flames of violence at his rallies.

Perhaps someone should accept a compliment for what it is, and move on with their life.

Perhaps he thought that calling me beautiful would make me ignore the fact that he brazenly lied about his polling numbers among Hispanic voters. Or make me believe that he wasn’t really a racist. Who knows? At least now I know, firsthand, that the sexism that Trump puts on display against Megyn Kelly under the lights of national TV is not that much different from how he is in real life toward female journalists.

Sad.

It’s now sexist and stuff to offer a compliment? Good grief, only in Liberal World does a person have a meltdown over a compliment! As Jeff Dunetz wrote at The Lid “if thats what Karen Attiah calls being hit on, she really needs to switch to decaf.”

Of course, that begs the question, was Donald Trump even talking about Ms. Attiah? It sure doesn’t appear, as she writes the encounter, that he was hitting on her. He could have been talking about the overall interview. Perhaps he had a good time. He could have been talking about something he saw out the window, or a photo on the wall. What’s the full context?

Even if he was calling her beautiful, is that a reason to go into full Special Snowflake meltdown? Can certain people, meaning leftists/feminists, no longer take a compliment?

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/712003671253364736

That may be a bit over the top, much like the post I snagged it from, but it does highlight the problem when dealing with Leftists. Like pitching a fit and writing a piece in one of the nation’s premier newspapers to highlight your Outrage and being Offended.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Shockingly, Washington Post Snowflake Has Conniption Fit Over Word “Beautiful” »

Posted in Donald Trump, Special Snowflake Syndrome | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Tweets And Emails From Warmists Killing Gaia With Carbon Pollution

By William Teach March 21, 2016 – 3:58 pm

It’s so sad!

Emails And Tweets Help Drive Climate Change

Even email and social network campaigns used to promote Earth Hour, the annual symbolic dimming of lights to fight global warming, are inevitably contributing to climate change.

In the 10th edition of the World Wild Fund for Nature (WWF), an NGO-backed event that raises awareness on climate change effects, the world’s landmark monuments and participating establishments will go dark at 8:30 p.m. their local time for a whole hour. Along with the activity comes the call to adjust lifestyles to slash people’s carbon footprints, including using bikes, carpooling and becoming “eco-responsible.”

But there’s another largely unnoticed carbon pollutant in all this climate change discussion: people’s email and social network activity.

“Electricity consumption related to the growth of digital technologies is exploding,” warns Alain Anglade of the French Environment and Energy Management Agency in an AFP report.

How much does it account for?

The report breaks this down to several practical scenarios: five dozens of these 0.14-ounce emails per day from a smartphone or laptop are equivalent to driving an average-size car per kilometer or 0.6 miles. A 1-megabyte email attachment, too, is the same as low-wattage light bulb turned on for two hours.

It doesn’t seem like much, but, then we have to factor in the servers, routers, and computers. This is similar with tweets, and surely Facebook posts, Instagram, etc. And, it all adds up in a cumulative manner, which means that Warmists are causing global temperatures to spike, and could cause hundreds of millions of climate refugees by 2100, not too mention burying the coastal areas under 6 feet or more of sea rise, killing hundreds of millions of citizens of the world, make areas un-livable, and even cause the 6th Great Extinction. Why won’t members of the Cult of Climastrology give up their evil big carbon polluting ways and help us save the world?

Read: Bummer: Tweets And Emails From Warmists Killing Gaia With Carbon Pollution »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach March 21, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a world where the Sun beats down brighter from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Doug Ross @ Journal, with a post on how many Somalis with terror issues are coming to the U.S. And today’s Larwren’s Linx, since I forgot to update the Sunday one.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama To Lay Wreath For Cuban Who Would Have Stood Against Everything Cuba Is About

By William Teach March 21, 2016 – 10:22 am

Obama is in Cuba, and it’s totally Historic, ya know. Here’s what he’s going to be doing today, right about now

(USA Today) Wreath-laying and tour at the José Marti Memorial, 10:20 a.m.
• Official welcoming ceremony, Palace of the Revolution, 11 a.m.
• One-on-one meeting with Cuban President Raul Castro, 11:30 a.m.
• Expanded meeting between U.S. and Cuban officials, 1 p.m.
• Statements to the press by Presidents Obama and Castro, 1:50 p.m.
• Entrepreneurship summit, 3:45 p.m.
• State Dinner at the Palace of the Revolution, 7:25 p.m.

Jose Marti was a classical liberal (this is very much different from those who call themselves liberals these days, who are really Socialists, Marxists, and Progressives), who stood for freedom and democracy. Who stood for limited government. For freedom and liberty for the people. Essentially, everything that the government and system in Cuba is not. He was a key person in Cuba gaining independence from the dominance of Spain.

And, Marti essentially stood in opposition for most things Barack Obama stands for.

Read: Obama To Lay Wreath For Cuban Who Would Have Stood Against Everything Cuba Is About »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Who Will Lead The Anti-Capitalist Climate Revolution?

By William Teach March 21, 2016 – 7:20 am

Who indeed? We find out from Stefania Barca, a senior researcher at the Center for Social Studies of the University of Coimbra (Portugal).

Labor in the Age of Climate Change
Any just transition to a green economy must take place on labor’s terms — not capital’s.

Climate change must be stopped. But who will do the stopping? Who, in other words, could be the political subject of an anticapitalist climate revolution?

I am convinced this social agent could be, and indeed must be, the global working class. Yet to play this role, the working class must develop an emancipatory ecological class consciousness.

So, the class of people hurt most by the policies pushed by rich, Left leaning climate alarmists are supposed to embrace anti-capitalism to…..essentially solve nothing, because the policies pushed by the Cult of Climastrology would really have almost no effect on the problem they say Mankind has created. And you have to read that like for ecological class consciousness. It’s 5 pages of unhinged leftism, with a hatred of capitalism (which, of course, fails to note that they wouldn’t be able to produce the document and publish it on the Internet without capitalism). There’s too much to attempt to excerpt.

Yet important cleavages exist within this consensus, especially when it comes to the just transition. Some groups simply push for job creation in a greened economy. Others, refusing to abide market solutions, have adopted a radical critique of capitalism.

How this schism shakes out will decide whether labor unwittingly bolsters capital — or confronts capital and climate change.

Why does it seem that so much of what the Warmists push is about changing to some other economy, other than capitalism? Not that we’re seeing a capitalist economy at the moment, as it is driven much by cronyism and government edicts and dictates. Warmists want to utterly change, and, if you read through the rest of the article, you’ll note that the author is not particularly happy with the current methods employed and proposed, as they, shockingly, harm The Worker. He wants climate and social justice employed, and ends with

The alternative is more promising, if more challenging: an ecosocialism powered by an emancipatory, ecological class consciousness. It would demand class struggle on a higher level — the level of global political ecology. But it would offer the possibility of a truly sustainable world, forged on labor’s terms rather than capital’s.

Why does this seem like hardcore leftist dogma, with smatterings of Marxism? Why does it sound so political? Because this is what it’s all about.

Who was hurt the most with the all the “communist” revolutions around the world, after being told they’d all be a workers paradise?

Read: Say, Who Will Lead The Anti-Capitalist Climate Revolution? »

Posted in Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Juan Williams: Donald Trump Is Playing The Race Card Or Something

By William Teach March 21, 2016 – 7:02 am

Opinion pieces by uber-Liberal Williams are always amusing in their delusion. This one sure seems to be about projections

Juan Williams: Trump plays the race card

After last week’s primary romp in Florida it is all but official – the GOP is the party of Donald Trump.

And having Trump as the party’s leader means GOP figures at every level – from Congress to school boards – will have to carry a lot of racial baggage.

Last week, a USA Today/Rock the Vote poll found Trump trailing Hillary Clinton among voters under age 35 across all ethnicities in a general election contest. Within that cohort, Trump lost by 13-1 among black voters, 5-1 among Asian votes and 4-1 among Hispanic voters — but by a relatively more modest 2-1 among white voters.

It’s no surprise Trump is losing badly among Blacks: they’ve been kept on the Democratic plantation for decades, what with all the patronizing and government giveaways, much of which keeps so many Blacks poor and dependent. Nor is it unusual to lose among young Hispanics. What makes this “racial”?

It lets Trump off the hook to describe him merely as a populist. On the other side of the partisan divide, Bernie Sanders is running a populist campaign attracting strong support among white Democrats — but there is none of Trump’s anger at Muslims, racial minorities and immigrants. One study of Trump’s voters found strongest support in areas with the highest percentage of Google searches for racist humor.

I’d like to see that study. Why no link to it, Juan? Again, I’m not a Trump supporter, but, what’s the problem with being angry at Islamists, who want to infiltrate our country and move it towards a more radical Islamic tenor, along with all the violent attacks? What’s wrong with being angry at those who come to our country illegally or overstay their visas, taking American jobs, driving down wages, and using up our resources, all while many of them DEMAND we speak their language, give them stuff, and legalize them, while at the same time showing their allegiance to the countries they left? When they bring their crime, from identity theft to rape and murder, shouldn’t we be angry?

There are real factors, with a racial overlay, fueling Trump’s rise. White working class men are being squeezed by the loss of blue-collar jobs, stagnant wages and high levels of debt. Last year, two Princeton economists reported record suicides and drug abuse among whites, an indication of rising social and economic pressure. Trump has become the loudest voice of this white anxiety and frustration.

Apparently, it’s unacceptable for White people to express their concerns and frustrations. Only everyone Not White can do that. Of course, technically, all the Hispanics are white, so, it’s not racism, it’s bigotry. I get very tired of people like Juan Williams trotting out the race card in situations that it doesn’t apply. What Trump is pushing could be considered bigotry, and even discrimination. But, discrimination is not always a bad thing. Is it bad to discriminate against people who sympathize with radical Islamic viewpoints, and not want them to be allowed in the country? Heck no.

But now Trump has so alienated Hispanics with his harsh immigration policies — and the rhetoric that accompanies those policies — that Republicans are racially isolated again. Their only hope in the November general election is to generate extremely high turnout among whites.

“Hispanics” is not a race.

Trump’s response to calls to restrain his rhetoric is to argue that he is a truth-teller who refuses to be bound by political correctness. “I said tremendous crime is coming across – everybody knows that’s true,” he said later. “So why, when I mention [it], all of a sudden I’m a racist. I’m not a racist.”

Let’s agree that he is not a racist. Maybe he is just a man bringing an unrepentant racial strategy to 21st Century national politics.

Maybe he’s concerned with the people who Peggy Noonan referred to as the unprotected. People who politicians seem to care little about, as they pander to Blacks and illegal aliens. Perhaps they want the political system to listen to them, to take their concerns to heart.

As far as playing a race card, no Democrat has the moral authority to blame anyone else, since they go racial at the drop of a hat smartphone (hey, it’s 2016). You can expect them to do it during the general election, much as they’ve been doing during the primaries, much as they do during non-election seasons. Trump events where relatively peaceful until Black Lives Matter decided to show up and cause trouble. And Juan Williams is race hustling with that last sentence. It’s what Democrats do. I don’t think Trump will be as bad as some say, and, perhaps minorities will be better off economically with a president who wants to make the economy better, rather than keeping minorities poor and reliant on the government as the Democrats want.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Juan Williams: Donald Trump Is Playing The Race Card Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, GOP | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 20, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a field perfect for a solar project funded by the federal government, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on anti-Semites costing CUNY big time.

It’s Spring week!

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach March 20, 2016 – 9:22 am

Happy Sunday! It’s another great day in America, and it’s the first day of Spring! Since it’s rather chilly and dreary today, perhaps a good day for some bowling, as painted by Arnold Armitage, with a wee bit of help?

What’s happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Right Wing News notes hyper-lefties shutting down roads to block Trump
  2. Raised On Hoecakes covers “Who said it, Trump or Hillary?”
  3. The Lonely Conservative wonders if we’re as dumb as they think we are
  4. The Other McCain hits up feminist tumblr
  5. This ain’t Hell… has your Sunday feel good stories
  6. Weasel Zippers notes the Queen is refusing to meet with Obama
  7. Independent Sentinel covers private citizens not counting on keeping their private property
  8. The Diary Of Daedalus says Little Green Footballs is a Nazi site
  9. The Daley Gator has some “congratulations” for the FBI on this Islamist guy
  10. Public Secrets has a reason for saying #NeverTrump
  11. Powerline highlights more federal overreach
  12. Political Clown Parade notes that Communism seems a great idea for Fidel Castro right up to…..
  13. Pamela Geller notes “Draw Mohamed Day”
  14. Neo-neocon covers Trump and religion
  15. And last, but not least, Moonbattery covers Fabio and Trump

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Senator Tillis: Senate “fulfilling its constitutional obligation by deferring consent in order to let the people’s voice be heard”

By William Teach March 20, 2016 – 8:09 am

Here’s an interesting point: the Constitution has no requirement that the Senate hold hearings and a vote on anyone nominated by the President. Article II, Section 2

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States,….

If the Senate withholds that Advice and Consent, it sure seems Constitutional

(Daily Caller) “Justice Scalia was widely admired and respected for defending the original intent of the Constitution and its prescribed separation of powers, and he served as a critical check on President Obama’s executive overreaches,” Senator Thom Tillis said. “While the Constitution allows the president to nominate a Supreme Court justice, our founding fathers also made sure to give the Senate advise and consent authority, to help protect the integrity of our system of checks and balances.”

“The president and Democratic leaders aren’t exactly thrilled with giving the American people a voice,” Tillis continued. “And contrary to their claims, the Senate is doing its job and fulfilling its constitutional obligation by deferring consent in order to let the people’s voice be heard.”

It’s an excellent point. There is no requirement to hold hearings or a vote. Considering that Democrats blocked many Bush appointees for lower courts for years, and, furthermore, refused to pass an actual budget in both the Democratic Party run House and Senate during the years 2009 through 2010, and the Democratic Party run Senate refused to consider a budget once the GOP took over the House in 2011, they have no leg to stand on.

“Will they join us in doing our jobs on behalf of the American people? Or will they instead seek to further divide our nation by turning the Supreme Court process into a blatantly partisan back and forth?” he said. “Are they going to resort to blocking and sabotaging important legislation and good-faith efforts to help the American people…all in the name of seeking to score cheap political points in an election year?”

Of course they will seek to further divide. It’s what they do. It’s what Obama has been doing since even before the 2008 general election. Everything with them is about power, and they like the notion of picking fights for power. Heck, even liberal Democrats are not happy about the pick

Liberal House Democrats are holding their fire on President Obama’s choice of Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court.

Many liberals on and off Capitol Hill had pushed the president to pick a minority nominee –– specifically a black woman, which would be an historic first –– and some liberal advocacy groups quickly condemned Obama’s choice of an older white man with a centrist track record.

But a number of House liberals, while privately grumbling about the decision, have been exceedingly careful not to criticize the president publicly. Instead, they’re praising Garland’s legal bona fides and training their attacks on the Senate Republicans blocking the nomination.

It’s a sign that Democrats appreciate the tactical acumen behind the Garland pick, even if they are not especially enamored of the judge himself.

They wanted a hardcore Progressive who would legislate from the bench, using their feelings, foreign law, and Social Justice in their rulings. In other words, they want someone who cares little for the American Constitution in their attempt to remake America. Hilariously, they claim that Republicans are violating the Constitution for refusing to hold hearings and take a vote. To repeat, a SCOTUS pick requires Advice and Consent to be appointed. The Constitution does not specify how, and, if Senators say their advice is “there should be no pick till the next president” and they refuse to provide consent, that’s Constitutional.

I still think that it would be better to slow walk the pick and set it up for a vote just after the election, because, if Hillary wins, and she will more than likely beat Donald Trump in the Electoral College, Garland Merrick would be better than anyone Hillary picks. How to convey this to the Republican voters, and especially the Conservative base, to make sure they are pumped up and get out to vote?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Senator Tillis: Senate “fulfilling its constitutional obligation by deferring consent in order to let the people’s voice be heard” »

Posted in Constitution | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 19, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a greenhouse which will be needed in the future when carbon pollution makes it too hot for plants to survive outside, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post wondering if the GOP has had a weaker front-runner than Trump.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove