Washington Post: Trump Won Nevada On Anger

By William Teach February 24, 2016 – 7:52 am

The Nevada caucuses are over, and Donald Trump took it handily, garnering 45.9% of the vote, which gives him another 12 delegates. Rubio was at 23.9%, while Ted Cruz had 21.4%, and each receives 5 delegates. The Washington Post’s Phillip Bump knows why Trump keeps winning: anger

How Donald Trump dominated Nevada, in one word: Anger

Donald Trump won New Hampshire, a moderate Northeastern state that prides itself on its sober analysis of the candidates at hand. Donald Trump won South Carolina, a conservative Southern state with a number of religious voters. Donald Trump has now won Nevada, a Western state with its own eclectic mix of Republican voting groups.

Trump won them all. According to preliminary entrance poll data reported by CNN, he won every age group and every education group and both genders — and even every racial and ethnic group. About 1 in 10 Nevada Republicans were Hispanic. More than 4 in 10 of them backed Donald Trump (according to entrance polls with a notably large margin of error).

What’s the theme here? What’s the thing that’s turned Donald Trump from the never-gonna-happen outsider of last June into the how-can-he-be-stopped candidate of February?

Nevada offers one hint: Anger.

Bump is actually on to something

Nevada Republicans are mad at the government. This probably isn’t too much of a surprise, given that it’s also the home of the family of Cliven Bundy, but it’s still remarkable how much angrier it is than previous states. Voters were mad.

And voters didn’t want a politician to address that anger. Six in 10 Nevada Republicans said that they were looking for the next president to be someone from “outside politics.” That’s 6 in 10 of a “huge” turnout, by the way. And 70 percent of them voted for Donald Trump.

Yes, voters are angry. Republicans are angry over the way Obama has stepped on, to put it nicely, the Constitution and the nation. They’re angry about the lousy economy. Sure, unemployment is low (once you look beyond the huge numbers of people who dropped out of the jobs market in despair), but wages are way down. No one complains about the fight for $15 folks being angry. The media didn’t complain about Occupy Wall Street being angry. We have this horrible Iran deal. Obama’s throwing out executive orders like candy. Obamacare is still around. And so much more, but, here’s the kicker: they’re mad that the elected Republicans really haven’t done much to stop Obama and the Democrats. They refuse to really fight back. They won’t use the power of the purse. A lot of the the fight seems to emanate from the States, such as the lawsuit against Obama’s climate change power plant regulations. The federally elected Republicans make lots of promises to get elected, then try to just get along.

Let’s not forget that Obama was all about anger in 2008. His voters were angry over Iraq, angry over the economy meltdown (which was global, BTW). He tapped into that anger, and pushed “hope and change”. He talked in lofty goals, and made all the angry Democrats and independents, and even some squishy Republicans believe in him. They cared little for his record, or that he is a far, far left Progressive. They just bought into what Obama was peddling.

Right now, the  anger over the past 7 years of Obama and Establishment GOP idiocy is on display, and Trump has tapped into it. And, what’s wrong with anger? Should citizens not be angry over the state of the nation?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post: Trump Won Nevada On Anger »

Posted in Elections | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Get Children To Sing Little Ditty About Not Needing No CO2

By William Teach February 23, 2016 – 2:26 pm

It sure seems like child abuse to teach children that they are doomed and brainwash them (via Climate Depot, which has lots of videos)

Children “Astronauts” Awarded by Bonn and UN for Climate Song

The Mayor of Bonn and the UN awarded a group of young pupils a prize for best childrens’s global climate change song today for a performance that helped build awareness and commitment among young people in the run up to the Paris Climate Change Conference. Their catchy winning song was “Climate Astronauts”!

The children from Gottfried Kinkel Primary School in Bonn, Germany, took home the award for best children’s song in the 2015 Global Youth Music Contest, which was organized by the International Association for the Advancement of Innovative Approaches to Global Challenges, in cooperation with UNESCO and the United Nations Climate Change secretariat.

Let’s look at some of the lyrics

We are astronauts, and we can see
We are astronauts, what’s good for you
We are astronauts, no plastic bags
We are astronauts, don’t waste the food
We are astronauts, turn out the lights
We are astronauts, in the night
We are astronauts, don’t need no cars
We are astronauts, we go by bike

We are climate, climate astronauts
We are climate, climate astronauts

So, no cars, eh? I wonder how much they would whine if their parents refused to drive them to a play date? But, really, you know this had to be written by adults, and look at the first two lines “we can see…what’s good for you.” Seems eerily reminiscent of what I’ve been telling you about Warmists, who are part of the overall Progressive movement: this is nice fascism, meaning that The Government knows what is best for you, and will force you to comply. Free will? Not so much in Warmist World.

Other lines include We don’t need no CO2 and don’t need no bath, along with we go by feet. You can bet these little brainwashed rug rats will want their own fossil fueled vehicle the minute they can legally drive.

Read: Warmists Get Children To Sing Little Ditty About Not Needing No CO2 »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach February 23, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is a sea that rose a horrendous 5.5 inches during the 20th Century, showing our doom, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on how the Obama admin is helping non-citizens vote.

Grace Park was born in L.A., but lived in Canada from when she was 22 months old, so, still Canadian.

Read: If All You See… »

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

After 7 Years In Office, Obama Finally To Offer Plan On Closing Gitmo

By William Teach February 23, 2016 – 10:00 am

Obama’s first act as POTUS was to sign an Executive Order to find a way to close Guantanamo Bay detention facility. What happened after that is that Obama learned that just because the Emperor makes a statement doesn’t mean everyone else in government will jump to make it happen. And, when Obama failed to provide a rational plan to close Gitmo, instead focusing on lots of other things, like fundraising, vacations, golf, parties, and denigrating the opposition, it wasn’t going to happen. Furthermore, his attempted shenanigans in trying to prosecute some jihadis, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad in a civilian court around the corner from the former site of the World Trade Center, made people leery of his ultimate goals. Now, he will reportedly try again

(Fox News) President Obama is expected to detail his plan Tuesday to begin the shutdown of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, in a last-ditch effort to make good on a 2008 campaign promise.

Obama will speak at 10:30 a.m. Tuesday morning from the Roosevelt Room, the White House announced, saying the topic would be Guantanamo Bay but giving no further details.

Obama’s address comes as the plan to shut down the controversial facility and transfer the remaining detainees to a holding center in the United States will be delivered to Congress.

Interestingly, none of the plans include building a detention facility or using an existing one anywhere near Chicago.

The U.S. officials say the plan considers 13 different locations in the U.S., including seven existing prison facilities in Colorado, South Carolina and Kansas, as well as six other locations on current military bases. They say the plan doesn’t recommend a preferred site and the cost estimates are meant to provide a starting point for a conversation with Congress.

Nothing in any deep Democratic states. Huh. The GOP should totally troll Obama by authorizing the construction of a facility in Chicago, near Obama’s home in the toney Hyde Park area. It is currently illegal for the military to transfer any detainee to US soil, per two laws Obama signed, and, despite Obama whining that those laws were unconstitutional (despite signing them), the military says it will comply with the law.

So, expect Obama to show up around 10:40-10:50.

Read: After 7 Years In Office, Obama Finally To Offer Plan On Closing Gitmo »

Posted in Barry Obama, War On Terrorism | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

New Study Shows We’re Totally Doomed From Sea Rise Or Something

By William Teach February 23, 2016 – 8:10 am

Another day, another activist study from members of the Cult of Climastrology. Memeorandum has the big pull with an opinion piece disguised as a news article entitled Seas Are Rising at Fastest Rate in Last 28 Centuries by hyper-Warmist Justin Gillis. I prefer the NJ.com article, which I saw last night (you can often find me commenting there under the name DevilUKnow), but, let’s look at the AP article by another hyper-Warmist, Seth Borenstein, due to it’s brevity

Sea levels on Earth are rising several times faster than they have in the past 2,800 years and are accelerating because of man-made global warming, according to new studies.

An international team of scientists dug into two dozen locations across the globe to chart gently rising and falling seas over centuries and millennia. Until the 1880s and the world’s industrialization, the fastest seas rose was about 1 to 1.5 inches (3 to 4 centimeters) a century, plus or minus a bit. During that time global sea level really didn’t get much higher or lower than 3 inches above or below the 2,000-year average.

But in the 20th century the world’s seas rose 5.5 inches (14 centimeters). Since 1993 the rate has soared to a foot per century (30 centimeters). And two different studies published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said by 2100 that the world’s oceans will rise between 11 to 52 inches (28 to 131 centimeters), depending on how much heat-trapping gas Earth’s industries and vehicles expel.

A couple things to note. First off, a good chunk of the last 2,800 years encompassed multiple cool and warm periods, so a lower rate of rise would be a certainty. Second, they are playing semantics games with averages over that period of time in order to make it appear as if a 5.5 inch increase during the 20th Century is abnormal.

Third, we have to consider that most studies found that the sea rise during the 20th was 7 inches. I’ve mentioned many, many times that the average sea rise over the last 7,000 years is estimated to be 6-8 inches per century (that time frame is used due to the calming of the massive sea rise due to the end of the last glacial age 20,000 years ago, which lasted till about 7,000 years ago). Think back to school math classes on how to get an average. Since Holocene cool periods will see low to negative sea rise, warm periods must be much higher, estimated to be in the range of 12-20 inches per century. So, 5.5 inches is actually below average. Can we cancel the Doom now?

Fourth, this is all about scaremongering. The Cult of Climastrology has pulled this schtick many, many times. 11-52 inches more by 2100? That’s a hell of a spread, and not particularly scientific. Sea level rise has actually slowed since 2004.

Fifth, despite no proof, all the articles I linked, and many others, immediately blame Mankind, as does the lead author

“There’s no question that the 20th century is the fastest,” said Rutgers earth and planetary sciences professor Bob Kopp, lead author of the study that looked back at sea levels over the past three millennia. “It’s because of the temperature increase in the 20th century which has been driven by fossil fuel use.”

Does anyone want to bet that Kopp and the others involved in the study have not given up their own use of fossil fuels?

Jonathan Overpeck at the University of Arizona, who wasn’t part of the studies, praised them, saying they show a clear cause and effect between warming and sea level rise.

True. But, that doesn’t prove anthropogenic causation. It doesn’t prove CO2 is the control knob. It just proves that seas rise during a Holocene warm period, not why. It also proves that sea rise is lower than the average, and that we should all relax. There’s no need to allow government to implement massive tax schemes, along with more and more control of our lives, private entities, and economies. Not for a measly 5.5 inches of sea rise.

Read: New Study Shows We’re Totally Doomed From Sea Rise Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Adviser Makes Trump’s Immigration Plan Sound Entirely Reasonable

By William Teach February 23, 2016 – 7:42 am

The Daily Caller sat down with Trump senior policy adviser Stephen Miller regarding a variety of questions, most of which seemed to revolve are Trump’s immigration plans. Here’s what we get

“There’s an overarching principle that covers all immigration policy — three principles to be exact,” Miller told TheDC in a phone interview.

“The first is that a nation without borders is not a nation. You’ve heard [Trump] say many times in many interviews either we’re a country or we’re not. It’s that simple. We’re either a country or we’re not. Similarly, the second principle is a nation without walls is not a nation, which is an extension of the first principle, but in other words. If you have laws, you enforce them,” he said.

“The last principle of the three is that a nation that does not serve its citizens is not a nation, which is to say that the social contract of the country is that the interest group that is served is not special interests, or lobbyists, or transnational corporations, or citizens of other countries. It is the citizens of this country, the United States,” he added.

Miller described the current immigration system as catering to everyone but the American citizens, and that the whole world will know that people can no longer come to American illegally if he’s elected. The plan encompasses those who overstay their visas, who make up roughly 40% of those here illegally. Trump plans on enforcing the existing laws on the books, including the use of biometric entrance/exit systems.

He wants to streamline immigration hearings while doing away with catch and release policies. Miller also stated that the Trump campaign believes that the 14th Amendment does not confer birthright citizenship to foreigners born in the United States (Ann Coulter, despite having turned into a buffoon in the past few years, and especially when it comes to people who do not support Trump, actually makes a good argument against birthright citizenship. She’s smart, but, still a wanker).

Trump would also reduce legal immigration. On this, I’d like to hear a bit more detail. Most of this part of the interview revolved around Trump’s proposed temporary ban on Muslims, but, I think we need to look at those who are coming over and getting paid less to take American’s jobs (see Disney, for one). How many other countries allow foreigners to come in and take their citizen’s jobs? We could certainly use more temporary migrant labor, which strong controls to make sure they leave when they’re supposed to, and companies who hire them should be responsible for providing health insurance to their workers.

Most of this can all be seen at Trump’s website, which lays out his plans and policies on immigration. Interestingly, one thing missing is his position on touch-back amnesty, something which I could swear appeared at that link just two weeks ago when someone on Twitter dared me to read his plan (something I had previously done months ago). Trump has seemingly been in favor of a pathway to citizenship for the “good ones”. Personally, I’m not opposed to some staying, as long as they pay fines and fees, have no criminal issues, and speak English. They would be banned from being eligible for social services such as welfare, food stamps, medicare, etc for a short period of, say, 5 years. These illegals must show that they are capable of providing for their lives, rather than relying on the government.

Numbers USA has given Trump’s plan a C+. They summarize his positions, including this

2. No legal status would be granted to those illegal aliens until illegal immigration is brought under control. At a minimum, that includes a fence and adequate Border Patrol activity. He still hasn’t said if he would take away the jobs magnet nor has he commented on a number of interior enforcement tools.

I’m still not big fan of Trump, my Trust Factor for him is low overall, but, on this particular issue, my trust factor is high, unlike with most elected Republicans who seem to give lip service to building a wall and you know they would immediately go for amnesty.

Still not a Trump supporter, though. However, his immigration plan is pretty sound.

Read: Trump Adviser Makes Trump’s Immigration Plan Sound Entirely Reasonable »

Posted in GOP, Illegal Immigration | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Oops: Sheriff Joe Biden Said POTUS Shouldn’t Nominate A SCOTUS Candidate During The Political Season

By William Teach February 22, 2016 – 6:10 pm

Allahpundit call this “game over”

In which C-SPAN archivists drop a 20-megaton political warhead directly on Obama and the Democrats. The best part? Biden actually goes a little further than Republicans have gone this month in opposing an election-year replacement for Scalia. Not only doesn’t he want a vacancy filled, not only doesn’t he want the Judiciary Committee to even hold hearings on a nomination, he wants the president to decline making a nomination altogether. The current GOP line is that Obama has every right as president to offer a nomination, just as the Senate has every right to withhold its advice and consent. Biden 1992 wanted Bush 41 to keep any nominations in his pocket. Amazing.

He wonders how the White House spins this, when we now have Biden, Obama, Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer all on record calling for obstruction of Supreme Court nominees during election season.

Read: Oops: Sheriff Joe Biden Said POTUS Shouldn’t Nominate A SCOTUS Candidate During The Political Season »

Posted in Current Affairs, Joe Biden | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times: ‘Climate Change” Could Cause Contagious Cancer

By William Teach February 22, 2016 – 3:51 pm

Today’s scaremonger, via the Paper Of Record (via Climate Depot and Junk Science)

Scientists Ponder the Prospect of Contagious Cancer

Imagine if instead, cancer cells had the ability to press on to another body. A cancer like that would have the power to metastasize not just from organ to organ, but from person to person, evolving deadly new skills along the way.

While there is no sign of an imminent threat, several recent papers suggest that the eventual emergence of a contagious human cancer is in the realm of medical possibility. This would not be a disease, like cervical cancer, that is set off by the spread of viruses, but rather one in which cancer cells actually travel from one person to another and thrive in their new location.

No sign of imminent threat, except our old pal Hotcoldwetdry, at least as it applies to just one animal, the Tasmanian Devil, which is apparently passing on cancer as they attempt to rip each other’s faces off

One theory is that the animals are unusually vulnerable. Driven so close to extinction — by climate change, perhaps, or human predators — the species is lacking in genetic diversity.

Of course, it can only be anthropogenic climate change, rather than what has been going on for billions of years. Why? Because shut up, that’s why. Why are you such a science hater?

Read: NY Times: ‘Climate Change” Could Cause Contagious Cancer »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | Comments Off on NY Times: ‘Climate Change” Could Cause Contagious Cancer | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 22, 2016 – 1:00 pm

…is wonderful wonder trees that should be replaced with wind turbines via a federal grant to a Democratic company, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Fire Andrea Mitchell, with a post on Megyn Kelly whining.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Special Snowflakes Complain Their Activism Is Causing Them Emotional Problems At School

By William Teach February 22, 2016 – 10:00 am

Self-inflicted gun shot wounds

‘Sissyfication of Millennials’: Ivy League Students Complain of Mental Stress and Failing Grades Due to Their Campus Diversity Activism

Social justice activists at Brown University have complained their activism is taking an emotional toll on them and that their extracurricular activities have at times caused them to fail classes. Perhaps unsurprisingly, their claims won them some derision on social media.

This “mental, emotional and physical stress” was featured in an article Thursday in the Providence, Rhode Island campus newspaper, the Brown Daily Herald which reported:

“There are people breaking down, dropping out of classes and failing classes because of the activism work they are taking on,” David, an undergraduate whose name has been changed to preserve anonymity, said. Throughout the year, he has worked to confront issues of racism and diversity on campus.

His role as a student activist has taken a toll on his mental, physical and emotional health. “My grades dropped dramatically. My health completely changed. I lost weight. I’m on antidepressants and anti-anxiety pills right now. (Counseling and Psychological Services) counselors called me. I had deans calling me to make sure I was okay,” he said. […]

Justice Gaines ’16, who uses the [gender neutral] pronouns xe, xem and xyr, said student activism efforts on campus are necessary. “I don’t feel okay with seeing students go through hardships without helping and organizing to make things better.”

These special snowflakes are having panic attacks which cause them to miss class, and they actually tell their teachers these are the reasons, and the teachers give them a pass.

A student activist for Latino issues told the paper, “Homework was the least of my worries.”

The headline for the originating article is “Schoolwork, advocacy place strain on student activists”, and this is my favorite comment

It’s increasingly difficult to create effective satire, because reality is clearly more absurd than any fiction imaginable.

These Special Snowflakes have already created a situation whereby employers will be/are highly skeptical about hiring them. This just adds to the tendency of employers to send out the “Thank you for your application. We have decided to go in a different direction” email, which will certainly not end with “please apply again at a later time”, because companies want nothing to do with whiny people who whine, who will blow off work for their activism, not too mention being too emotionally drained or something to do their jobs correctly. Oh, and then there’s that little thing about these Special Snowflakes being a constant threat for a lawsuit.

Read: Special Snowflakes Complain Their Activism Is Causing Them Emotional Problems At School »

Posted in Special Snowflake Syndrome | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove