Say, Why Does Donald Trump’s Support Keep Expanding?

By William Teach March 1, 2016 – 2:53 pm

An interesting answer to the question, provided by James Holman at The Washington Post

Many readers would probably be stunned by some of the people who are secretly supporting Trump and don’t want to admit it on the record. His coalition includes not just rock-ribbed conservatives and God-fearing evangelicals but Ivy-League-educated professionals. Some realize he’s not actually that authentically conservative and look the other way. Some, who fancy themselves moderates, admire the businessman’s malleability. Yesterday, as an example of someone in that vein, former Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert (who lost to Ted Cruz in the 2012 Texas Senate primary) endorsed Trump. Others just like to jump on bandwagons and back winners.

The more that Republican elites express alarm, the more a swath of these folks think that Trump might be just the change agent that’s needed to nuke Washington. Remember, most grassroots activists believe these D.C. politicians and talking heads are part of the problem. When I was in Alabama on my five-day road trip through the SEC Primary states, a local official came up to me, asked me to turn off my tape recorder and whispered that he was supporting Trump. Over the past few days, I’ve spoken with Republicans in the same boat from Minnesota and Massachusetts to Texas and Tennessee.

Interesting points, part of which explains why so many rock solid conservatives have gone for Trump.

From Massachusetts, for instance, The Post’s Ben Terris argues that Trump is the favorite because he’s perfectly channeled the voice and spirit of a loudmouthed sports fan from the state. “People follow politics here like they follow the Patriots or the Red Sox. They want to know a politician is a fighter and has their back,” state Rep. Geoff Diehl said.”

At the end of the day we have to remember that the GOP must take the White House back. Principles are great, but, we’re talking politics.

Read: Say, Why Does Donald Trump’s Support Keep Expanding? »

Posted in GOP | 11 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

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

…is a field that would be perfect for a solar farm, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Foreign Policy 101.

That’s Michelle Ryan, another British actress.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Warmists Trot Out “Hairy Nose” From Pollution

By William Teach March 1, 2016 – 10:30 am

Here’s another case of taking a legitimate environmental issue which has serious implications for the health of living creatures, including humans, and linking it to Hotcoldwetdry. Also, it’s just weird

(BBC) Air pollution in China is no laughing matter, but one campaign group hopes its bizarre new film will provoke both laughs and action among urban Chinese.

“Hairy Nose” depicts a bleak future where people have evolved lengthy nasal hair to filter out the smog.

It ends with a warning that if people don’t change their ways, pollution will change them.

The charity, WildAid, told the BBC they wanted people to stop waiting for government action to fix the problem.

“We wanted to find some humorous way to talk about the very serious problem we are facing,” said WildAid’s China representative, May Mei.

https://twitter.com/aestas_f/status/704581827764224000

You can see the video at the link. And, you know, China does have a serious air pollution problem, and, yes, a lot of it is from the use of oil and coal. But, the problem is not CO2, it is the other things that are being released. Of course we get this

Ms Mei said WildAid wanted to tell people to stop waiting for the government to take action on pollution and climate change, and instead come up with their own creative ways to be more green.

That’s how you take a legitimate issue and make it stupid.

Read: Warmists Trot Out “Hairy Nose” From Pollution »

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

Obama To Meet With GOP On Filling SCOTUS Vacancy, Forgetting One Thing

By William Teach March 1, 2016 – 8:16 am

Can you guess what that one thing, which is pretty big, is?

(Reuters) U.S. President Barack Obama will press Senate Republican leaders on Tuesday to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, despite Republican vows to not to act on anyone he nominates.

Obama is slated to speak at 11:30 a.m. EST (1630 GMT) with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the Republican head of the Senate Judiciary Committee Chuck Grassley at the White House.

Doesn’t he have to actually nominate someone, first? It’s a rather necessary component in the process.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said on Monday that Obama was committed to having a serious discussion with the lawmakers about his “constitutional responsibility” to appoint a successor to Scalia and how he would like to see the process play out.

“We’ll have to see if Republicans are also committed to that kind of serious conversation,” Earnest told reporters at a briefing. “Maybe they won’t be, and if they aren’t, then maybe it will be a shorter-than-expected meeting.”

I hope McConnell and Grassley realize this is, most likely, a setup. Rarely does Obama bother talking with people in Congress, even those in his own party, and, when he does, it tends to be a set up, in one form or another. They should simply tell Obama to go ahead and nominate someone, and leave it at that.

Oh, and if he fails to show up on time, they should walk out.

Read: Obama To Meet With GOP On Filling SCOTUS Vacancy, Forgetting One Thing »

Posted in Barry Obama, GOP | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Calls Trump Threat To Democracy, Invokes Hitler, Chavez

By William Teach March 1, 2016 – 7:50 am

Is this just standard Republican hatred, typical from liberal papers during election season, or serious concern that a Republican will be able to defeat the Democrats candidate, so it’s time to destroy him? This comes from the Washington Post Editorial Board

Voters shouldn’t reward Trump’s assault on democracy

SOME READERS ask how Donald Trump can be a threat to democracy if he is putting himself forward as a candidate. If he ends up attracting a majority of American voters, what could be more democratic?

First, you don’t have to go back to history’s most famous example, Adolf Hitler, to understand that authoritarian rulers can achieve power through the ballot box. In the world today, it has become almost commonplace for elected leaders to lock the door behind them once they achieve power. Vladi­mir Putin in Russia, Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, Yoweri Museveni in Uganda, Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey — all found ways once in power to restrict opposition, muzzle the media and erode checks and balances.

And there we go, a Hitler reference! Funny how Obama isn’t mentioned, considering his massive expansion of the power of the Executive office.

Mr. Trump gives ample reason to fear that he would not respect traditional limits on executive authority. He promotes actions that would be illegal, such as torture. He intimates that he would use government to attack those who displease him. “They better be careful, they have a lot to hide,” he said last week of a wealthy Chicago family that had donated to a super PAC that opposes him. He promises diktats — impose a tariff, build a wall — as if Congress is nothing but an inconvenience. His vow to round up and deport 11 million undocumented immigrants, while perhaps not requiring congressional action, would necessitate a kind of intrusive police power this country has never seen. As Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) said before flip-flopping on the idea last week, such a roundup would require “jackboots to knock on your door and every door in America.”

Funny, because the Washington Post never chided Obama for using the IRS as a tool to attack US citizens engaged in their 1st Amendment Rights. And Obama has used lots of diktats, ignoring Congress altogether. You can find many parallels between what the WPEB says about Trump, and what Obama has done. Which should provide a legitimate concern for Republican voters backing Trump. The last thing we need is yet another over-powered President.

But, hey, we got a Hitler reference!

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post Calls Trump Threat To Democracy, Invokes Hitler, Chavez »

Posted in GOP | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Man With Long Criminal History Shot, Killed By Raleigh Police Officer

By William Teach February 29, 2016 – 9:14 pm

I’m going to try to avoid editorializing as much as possible, but, can you guess why this is a big story?

(WRAL) A Raleigh police officer killed a drug suspect fleeing arrest Monday afternoon, Police Chief Cassandra Deck-Brown said.

An officer, whose name hasn’t been released, was chasing a man on foot who was wanted on a felony drug charge and ended up shooting him, Deck-Brown said. The shooting occurred shortly after noon near the intersection of Bragg and East streets.

A gun was found “in close proximity to” the dead man, the chief said.

Police haven’t released the name of the shooting victim, but Rolanda Byrd told WRAL News that it was her 24-year-old son, Akiel Denkins, who had an outstanding warrant.

That’s right, he was Black, the officer was white. Denkins had a long, long rap sheet, including illegally carrying a concealed firearm. There’s a peaceful vigil for this paragon of virtue (which in no means he should have been shot unless he pointed a gun at the officer), which includes

https://twitter.com/diasporadical_z/status/704459488980561922

Pleasant. And everyone is saying what a great guy this father of 2 was

https://twitter.com/HEPennypacker84/status/704468920921681920

Regardless, as I’ve been saying in comments at articles, everyone needs to take a deep breath and wait for the results of the investigation. Neither the Raleigh PD, the State PD, internal investigations, nor the SBI are going to discuss anything till they have the facts. Unfortunately, that leaves lots of time for people and the media to create their own narrative, which often ends up being at odds with the facts, but, by that time, the Narrative has been established, such as “hands up don’t shoot”. If the cop did wrong, he should be charged and tried. One thing you can surely guarantee, Raleigh will be national news for a few days, and we’ll probably have the same race inciters here by tomorrow.

Read: Man With Long Criminal History Shot, Killed By Raleigh Police Officer »

Posted in NC News | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Looks To Protect Hillary’s Illegal Email Actions

By William Teach February 29, 2016 – 2:54 pm

According to Abbe David Lowell, a big shot council for Democrats during the time of the Clinton impeacment, the classification system is broken

EVERY few years, a news event demonstrates how dysfunctional, arbitrary and counterproductive the country’s system of classifying information really is. Sometimes it’s an article or book about government conduct that causes hand-wringing among intelligence officials. Sometimes it’s a prosecution under the nearly 100-year-old Espionage Act for mishandling classified information, instead of for actual spying. Now we have calls for prosecuting Hillary Clinton because, when she was secretary of state, she had documents on her private email server that have since been declared top secret.

Mrs. Clinton, along with others accused of mishandling classified information, argues that government information is “overclassified” and that it is poorly labeled, making it impossible to know what is actually top secret. They are right. This debate might prove useful if it forces the government to deal with a bigger issue: the need for a saner system for classified information.

Here’s the thing: even if he is correct, the law is the law, and as one of the top officials in the Executive branch, she should have known better, and should be held to a higher standard, instead of than at a standard less than what a very low ranking official would find themselves being treated to. She intentionally used a server in contradiction to law and rules, exposing national security to the outside, all supposedly for her convenience. You try telling the IRS that filing your taxes is inconvenient, see what happens.

Skipping to the end we read

In Mrs. Clinton’s case, people can reasonably assert that in using a private email server she thwarted open government rules or risked the possibility that sensitive information would be disclosed. But the idea that she violated laws about classified information is simply wrong. Any investigation based on after-the-fact determinations of classification would do nothing to protect national security and would distract from the need to reform classification laws.

See, this isn’t about the “broken system,” it’s about protecting Hillary. Liberals yammer on, and rightly so, about certain people, big shots, being treated differently under the law than everyone else. Should we treat Hillary differently?

Read: NY Times Looks To Protect Hillary’s Illegal Email Actions »

Posted in Hillary Clinton, Liberal World | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 29, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil diet soda, which not only releases carbon pollution, but can make you eat more, which is bad for climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post on Allahu Akbar in Moscow.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

The Fate Of The Planet Is At Stake In 2016 Or Something

By William Teach February 29, 2016 – 8:05 am

The NY Times’ Paul Krugman, with his big McMansion and fossil fueled travel, is vexed by the 2016 election, and is worried that the planet is doomed if the wrong president is picked. Seriously, the fate of the planet is on the line

Planet On The Ballot

We now have a pretty good idea who will be on the ballot in November: Hillary Clinton, almost surely (after the South Carolina blowout,prediction markets give her a 96 percent probability of securing her party’s nomination), and Donald Trump, with high likelihood (currently 80 percent probability on the markets). But even if there’s a stunning upset in what’s left of the primaries, we already know very well what will be at stake — namely, the fate of the planet.

Why do I say this?

Obviously, the partisan divide on environmental policy has been growing ever wider. Just eight years ago the G.O.P. nominated John McCain, whose platform included a call for a “cap and trade” system — that is, a system that restricts emissions, but allows pollution permits to be bought and sold — to limit greenhouse gases. Since then, however, denial of climate science and opposition to anything that might avert catastrophe have become essential pillars of Republican identity. So the choice in 2016 is starker than ever before.

But, if we elect the correct fascist president, everything will be OK!

But here’s the thing: the next president won’t need to pass comprehensive legislation, or indeed any legislation, to take a big step toward saving the planet. Dramatic progress in energy technology has put us in a position where executive action — action that relies on existing law — can achieve great things. All we need is an executive willing to take that action, and a Supreme Court that won’t stand in its way.

He repeats himself later in his screed

And as I said, no new legislation would be needed, just a president willing to act and a Supreme Court that won’t stand in that president’s way, sacrificing the planet in the name of conservative ideology. What’s more, the Paris agreement from last year means that if the U.S. moves forward on climate action, much of the world will follow our lead.

Why does it always seem as if ‘climate change’ is an excuse to institute bigger and bigger Centralized government in an authoritative manner? You can bet that Krugman will have a conniption fit if a President Trump started signing lots and lots of Executive Orders, right? Of course he will. But, he will be very happy if a President Hillary Clinton does the same, instituting lots and lots of taxes and controls on citizens and private entities, none of which will really negatively affect someone like Krugman.

Read: The Fate Of The Planet Is At Stake In 2016 Or Something »

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

Liberals Protest Their Own Culture of Racism And Sexual Assault At Oscars

By William Teach February 29, 2016 – 7:37 am

Is Hollywood overwhelmingly left leaning? Of course it is. And people have been complaining for weeks about #OscarsSoWhite. Some decided to boycott. Of course, most who were boycotting weren’t up for an award in the first place. People wondered if Chris Rock would take on the “racism” as the host. Yes, he did

(Breitbart) Comedian Chris Rock opened the 88th Academy Awards on Sunday by commenting on the #OscarsSoWhite controversy.

“Man, I counted at least 15 black people in that montage!” he said in reference to this year’s lack of diversity among acting nominees. “You realize if they nominated hosts, I wouldn’t even get this job!” (snip)

Rock also joked the Academy should create “black categories,” noting: “You already do it with men and women, think about it. There’s no real reason to have a men and a women category in acting. It’s not track and field, you don’t have to separate them.”

Well, maybe we should consider that Blacks already have numerous awards (that’s a short list) that are open ONLY to Black people. Of course, somehow, these Black actors and actresses are “heroes“.

Rock later introduced the evening’s first presenters, saying, “You want diversity? We got diversity. Please welcome Emily Blunt and somebody whiter, Charlize Theron.”

Now, consider, if Rock was white and the presenters where Black, and he said “somebody blacker”, would that have been racist? You know that the line would have created a firestorm. So would many of his other lines if they went the other way. But, hey, these lefties at the Oscars were laughing about being called racists. Are they racists? Good question. But, it is amusing that they are basically accusing themselves of being racists. But, Rock is being slammed by Black activists for one line

The joke: “Why are we protesting this Oscars? It’s the 88th Academy Awards, which means this ‘no black nominees’ thing happened at least 71 other times. You got to figure that it happened in the 50s, in the 60s. One of those years, Sidney [Poitier] didn’t put out a movie. I’m sure there were no black nominees some of those years, say ‘62’ or ‘63. Black people did not protest. Why? Because we had real things to protest at the time. We were too busy being raped and lynched to care about who won best cinematographer. When your grandmother’s swinging from a tree, it’s really hard to care about best documentary foregin short.”

It’s the line about “real things to protest” that has gotten people Offended.

Then we had Sheriff Joe Biden, who created massive traffic problems when he showed up at the Oscars

(Breitbart) Vice President Joe Biden gave a brief speech in support of victims of sexual violence while introducing Lady Gaga at the Academy Awards on Sunday night.

“Too many women and men… are still victims of sexual abuse,” Joe Biden said, after receiving a raucous standing ovation.

Biden urged the Oscars audience and viewers watching at home to “take the pledge, a pledge that says, ‘I will intervene in situations where consent cannot or has not been given.’”

Let’s see: racism in Hollywood. Sexual assault in Hollywood and college campuses. Why are liberals so racist and sexual assaulty?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Liberals Protest Their Own Culture of Racism And Sexual Assault At Oscars »

Posted in Liberal World | 6 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove