…is rising waters from snow melting because someone drove a fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist
Going to sleep meow???? pic.twitter.com/JXwjX8wp8J
— Sara Jean Underwood (@SaraUnderwood) January 11, 2016
The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on 2015’s miserable economic growth.
Photobucket is down at moment, so had to find a Tweet to sorta fit.
Read: If All You See…. »
In a word, yes
State Attorney General Climate Change Investigations Are Unconstitutional
Should government officials be able to cut off donations to groups because they employ people disparaged as “climate change deniers,†even if the group in question is a think tank that studies a wide range of topics, only a few of which relate to climate change at all, and the “denial†in question includes telling politically inconvenient truths about the cost of proposed climate change legislation? Only a single-issue zealot with ideological blinders and a contempt for the First Amendment would think so.
Of course, Warmists are Zealots, and utterly intolerant to the point of wanting, at a minimum, to shut public discourse down. The piece itself is regarding the investigations of ExxonMobil by multiple Democratic Party AGs, and very much serves as a reminder about the abusive power of government.
Read: Are State Investigations Aimed At Skeptics Unconstitutional? »
Once again, let me state quite clearly that I do not support Trump. If he’s the eventual GOP presidential nominee, I’ll vote for him while holding my nose. He’s still better than anyone the Democrats might nominate, but, I trust him about as much as I trust Jeb Bush and Chris Christie, meaning, not much. That said, we know that Trump got in a spat with Fox News about having Megyn Kelly as a moderator, and decided to take his ball and go home for the night. So, how did Kelly respond? Well, right out of the box we get this
KELLY: So let’s get started.
Senator Cruz, before we get to the issues, let’s address the elephant not in the room tonight.
(LAUGHTER)
Donald Trump has chosen not to attend this evening’s presidential debate. What message do you think that sends to the voters of Iowa?
You stay classy, Megyn. The other candidates have a chance to debate topics other than Donald Trump, topics of serious concern, yet, she decides to attempt to make this personal. Pathetic. And she continued on
KELLY: The divide between you and Mr. Trump has turned into one of the biggest stories in the country. And for six months that — your campaign, during this campaign, you praised Mr. Trump as somebody who you thought was an effective voice against the Washington cartel. You said you were glad that he was running as a Republican.
But when he started to criticize you, your message changed, and you suddenly started to portray him as the voice of the Washington cartel, and suggested he would do the Democrats’ bidding. Which is it?
Looks like Trump is living rent free in her head.
Much of the rest of the debate was an attempt by Kelly, Brett Baier, and Chris Wallace to create a food fight, rather than a substantive debate. Politico notes 10 moments, and many of them revolve around creating a fight between the candidates, and even John Kasich taking shots at Governor Rick Snyder.
Later, Cruz grumbled that Wallace seemed to be goading the other candidates on stage to attack him. “It is a debate” Wallace responded.
Then Cruz took an underhanded shot at the absent Trump. “If you guys ask one more mean question, I might have to leave the stage,” he joked.
This is serious business, and yet the moderators were attempting to create the Jerry Springer Show.
Read: Fox News GOP Debate Starts Off With Attempt To Bash Trump »
Yesterday I noted the Washington Post Editorial Board taking shots at Bernie Sanders, essentially calling him a liar. He decided to fight back, as noted in the Washington Post news section
Bernie Sanders unloads on The Washington Post
Wait, isn’t that a rather gun-centric and violence laden headline? Anyhow
The first volley was the editorial, posted late Wednesday online and in Thursday’s print edition, headlined: “A campaign full of fiction.” The print edition sub-headline contended, “Sen. Sanders is not a brave truth-teller. He’s just telling progressives what they want to hear.”
At a breakfast with reporters here Thursday that was hosted by Bloomberg Politics, Sanders fired back — again and again and again.
“That’s not a new argument. We’ve been hearing that months and months, and that’s in a sense what this campaign is about,” Sanders said in response to a request for his reaction to the editorial. “People are telling us, whether it’s the Washington Post editorial board or anybody else, our ideas are too ambitious — can’t happen. Too bold — really? Well, here’s something which is really bold. In the last 30 years, there has been a massive transfer of wealth from the middle class and working families of this country. The middle class has become poorer and trillions of dollars have been transferred to the top one-tenth of 1 percent.”
And he went on and on and on in his attacks on the WPEB, and even took a few shots at the New York Times over an article that claimed his campaign discussed going negative on Hillary. It’s quite clear that the Washington Post, both in the newsroom and on the opinion pages, is in the bag for Hillary.
Obviously, this doesn’t mean I support Mr. Sanders for any office. While his concerns are valid, his solutions are, at a minimum, problematic. There is a concern over the disappearing middle class, and there is a concern over the “transfer of wealth” to the richest of the rich. Democrats like Sanders tend to think that the money pie is just one size, and that the rich are taking more and more of that pie. They are wrong: that pie has always grown bigger and bigger. Just because the rich get richer doesn’t mean that the other 99% can’t get ahead. But, thanks to liberal policies, often surrounding the use of taxpayer money to reward campaign contributors, along with many others, that pie has stagnated. Democratic policies have reduced the ability of the middle class to continue to expand. Government is not the answer, it is a hindrance. When it plays referee, things are fine. When it actively becomes involved, often choosing winners and losers, makes this regulation and that rule, it tends to harm those in the middle and lower classes, while enriching the very high end earners.
The Washington Post Editorial Board decided to fire back at Bernie, with a new editorial entitled Bernie Sanders’ Ideas are not too bold. They are too facile. By which they mean simplistic, shallow, and naive. Well, I guess Sanders’ plans aren’t quite on par with Hillary’s complicated plan to use an insecure private server for government business, all to avoid oversight and freedom of information requests, but, hey, sometimes simple works best.
One has to wonder where the attacks on Mrs. Clinton are: her plans are no more detailed than Sanders’ are.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Read: Sanders Fires Back At Washington Post For Editorial Hit Job »
Trackback URL
…is a world so warm that it creates snow from all that moisture, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Fire Andrea Mitchell, with a post on Megyn Kelly bringing on Michael Moore to bash Trump.
Read: If All You See… »
The Hill’s Jullian Hattem notes that this problem is not going away, no matter how Hillary and her surrogates spin it
Six months after it began, the federal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server shows no signs of slowing down.
Former FBI officials said the length of the probe is not unusual and speculated that a decision on whether to file charges against Clinton or her top aides could come later this year, during the heat of the general election campaign.
“I don’t know that there’s any magical cutoff date,†said Ron Hosko, the FBI’s former assistant director of the criminal investigative division and a 30-year veteran of the bureau.
There’s no possible way the FBI doesn’t recommend convening a Grand Jury, and no way that a GJ doesn’t recommend indictment on numerous charges, not unless the Obama administration spikes the whole thing, which is doubtful. There is way more of a downside for Team Obama to help Hillary out. If that did happen, you can bet there would be immediate calls for a special prosecutor, which Democrats would then call “political’. The question at that point would be whether the GOP would hold strong and offer real rebuttals. Remember, there was a special prosecutor for the Valerie Plame issue, who investigated the issue long, long after it was already known who leaked Plame’s name.
The State Department and Clinton’s campaign contend that none of the information in the emails was classified when it was originally sent, and they have portrayed the matter as an interagency dispute.
Regardless, there are rules and laws that must be followed, and Hillary and her staff would have been well aware of those rules, having to sign numerous documents about record keeping, transmitting material, from the sensitive to secret, and a host of other things. Certainly, using an unsecured server outside of the control of the US Department Of State and government overall would be something that would be considered illegal, especially when transmitting State Dept communications. Go ahead and try using an email system outside of your corporate one and see if Los Federales will by OK with that, especially when you delete 50% of them.
Terresa Monroe-Hamilton writes
There is already more than enough evidence to nail Hillary Clinton. They are dragging this out to dot their i’s and cross their t’s… to bring down someone like Clinton, you have to have all your ducks in a row. Hillary’s foot soldiers, Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin or Jake Sullivan, have the most to worry about here as they are on the front line. Hillary will in the end feed them to the dogs if she thinks it will save her worthless hide.
Most people would already be indicted and convicted of the numerous charges that will certainly be leveled at Hillary. Keeping classified documents in an unsecured location, concealing documents from government computers, and even perjury, at a minimum. Military members have been charged under the Espionage Act for doing things like sending selfies that showed computer screens from their submarines. And, Clinton Inc will not hesitate to throw her underlings under the bus, which could see some turn against her for testimony.
Read: Pssst: FBI Is Not Letting Up On Its Probe Into Hillary »
All because the members of the Cult of Climastrology refuse to give up their own use of fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral
Climate Change Makes Biblical Plagues a More Regular Threat to Farmers
A swarm of locusts that covers the land and the skies, devours crops, and leaves cattle without grass for grazing is a plague worthy of the Bible. In Argentina, where farmers have reported locust clouds “four miles long and nearly two miles high,†according to the New York Times, the threat is all too real.
The country is facing the worst infestation of locusts in 60 years and most believe there is no stopping the swarm at this point, only a possibility of lessening its effects….
While Argentina is facing a very clear and present danger, there’s a looming threat of a swarm for other countries too—a threat that may be growing. “Locust are becoming even more dangerous in the context of exceptional weather events associated to climate change,†according to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, which notes that the high incidence of drought in the 21st century has also worsened the impact of locusts in Africa…
See? It’s horrible! Locusts! And it will get worse because of ‘climate change’! It’s the worst in 60 years…wait, this happened before? Remember 1874, “The year of the locust“? Or when the skies turned black in 1875? The ancient Egyptians had carvings of locust infestations. China has had them as far back as 311AD, and had a big problem in the 9th century. India has had them, prior to the Modern Warm Period. Swarms of locusts are nothing new for Mother Nature, but, this time, Warmists simply have to link it to anthropogenic climate change. Nor is this the first time they’ve tried to make the link. Of course, they say that the swarms in the past were from natural warming, while this time it is because of mankind’s “carbon pollution.”
Read: ‘Climate Change” Could Bring Biblical Plagues Or Something »
Of course, said Equalities chief doesn’t mean this in a bad way, he’s saying that Western society is being disrespectful for even trying to get Muslims from Muslim nations to integrate when they move to 1st World nations
(UK Daily Mail) Muslim communities are not like others in Britain and the country should accept they will never integrate, the former head of the equalities watchdog has claimed.
Trevor Phillips, the former chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, said it was disrespectful to assume that Muslim communities would change.
He told a meeting at the Policy Exchange think tank in Westminster on Monday that Muslims ‘see the world differently from the rest of us’.
According to The Times, he said: ‘Continuously pretending that a group is somehow eventually going to become like the rest of us is perhaps the deepest form of disrespect.
‘Because what you are essentially saying is the fact that they behave in a different way, some of which we may not like, is because they haven’t yet seen the light. It may be that they see the world differently to the rest of us.’
See? Asking people who come to our countries to integrate is disrespectful.
The Muslim Council of Britain has insisted that members of the religion are compatible with UK life, and believes that the idea of demanding change from Muslims has promoted discrimination.
A spokesman for the organisation told The Times: ‘It assumes that Muslims are not equal, and not civilised enough to be part and parcel of British society, which they most certainly are.’
Phillips is completely correct on that many, many Muslims are not like us, that they do not integrate, that they do not see the world as we do. Yes, many do integrate, but, even some of them hold on to antiquated views, especially when it comes to women and gays. It’s more of a problem in Europe, especially in the UK, Sweden, Norway, France, and Germany, where these immigrants from Muslim areas demand to be allowed to practice their lives as they did in the old country, and the government’s asceeded to those demands, which is how we end up with no go zones, mosques and Islamic schools advocating for extremism, and sexual assaults, such as Rotherham.
We see the values that the current round of “refugees” are bringing to Europe, and they are not compatible with Western values. Progressives will tell us that we must be accommodating to these people, typically right up to the point that Progressives are affected themselves. It begs the question, why must we tolerated this behavior? These people are coming to our countries. Why is it wrong to want to hold on to our values and societal norms? If these Muslims do not like our values, perhaps they should stay where feel comfortable, or go somewhere else that has the same values.
Typically, 2nd and 3rd generations will integrate. But, that doesn’t seem to be happening all that much with Muslims, if we use the United Kingdom as a model. In many cases, these newer generations are more radical than the previous generations. They want everyone to bow to their culture.
Read: Former Racial Equalities Chief: Muslims Do Not Want To Integrate »
The Washington Post Editorial Board is in high outrage over Bernie Sanders, calling his campaign “fiction filled”
SEN. BERNIE Sanders (I-Vt.) is leading in New Hampshire and within striking distance in Iowa, in large part because he is playing the role of uncorrupted anti-establishment crusader. But Mr. Sanders is not a brave truth-teller. He is a politician selling his own brand of fiction to a slice of the country that eagerly wants to buy it.
Mr. Sanders’s tale starts with the bad guys: Wall Street and corporate money. The existence of large banks and lax campaign finance laws explains why working Americans are not thriving, he says, and why the progressive agenda has not advanced. Here is a reality check: Wall Street has already undergone a round of reform, significantly reducing the risks big banks pose to the financial system. The evolution and structure of the world economy, not mere corporate deck-stacking, explained many of the big economic challenges the country still faces. And even with radical campaign finance reform, many Americans and their representatives would still oppose the Sanders agenda.
Yet, since Obama took over the White House, 58% of all new income has gone to the top 1%. Real wages for the middle and lower classes have gone down. Fanny and Freddie are offering home loans with just 3% down. Oh, and let’s not forget that outlets such as the Washington Post blamed George W. Bush for the financial issues at the end of his 2nd term, not world economy.
Mr. Sanders’s story continues with fantastical claims about how he would make the European social model work in the United States. He admits that he would have to raise taxes on the middle class in order to pay for his universal, Medicare-for-all health-care plan, and he promises massive savings on health-care costs that would translate into generous benefits for ordinary people, putting them well ahead, on net. But he does not adequately explain where those massive savings would come from. Getting rid of corporate advertising and overhead would only yield so much. Savings would also have to come from slashing payments to doctors and hospitals and denying benefits that people want.
It’s an interesting line of attack: Bernie isn’t specific about how he would go about taxing the hell out of citizens and private entities to Do Something. Yet, this same paper, along with all the other Left leaning papers, never had a problem with Democratic candidates yammering on about raising taxes on the rich to pay for multiple pet projects.
Mr. Sanders is a lot like many other politicians. Strong ideological preferences guide his thinking, except when politics does, as it has on gun control. When reality is ideologically or politically inconvenient, he and his campaign talk around it. Mr. Sanders’s success so far does not show that the country is ready for a political revolution. It merely proves that many progressives like being told everything they want to hear.
Now, I’m not here to defend Bernie in terms of his political beliefs. There’s zero chance I would vote for him. As far as politicians go, he is generally more honest than most. Of course he’s going to pander and patronize here and there. He’s a politician, and has been at this game for a long, long time.
What I am going to note is how the liberal media seems to be attacking him while protecting Hillary. Has the WPEB ever run an editorial hitting Hillary in such a manner? Will they run one? Hillary has a long, long resume of lying, fibbing, and stretching the truth. She attacks anyone who dares criticize her. And she has a major problem with her private server, along with the possibility of using her position of Secretary of State to enrich the Clinton Foundation. She’ll be lucky if she isn’t indicted before all the Democrat primaries are concluded. If she wasn’t Hillary, she would have already been indicted.
Back in 2008, the media was in the bag for Hillary, with the base leaning towards John Edwards (until he flamed out, then they started looking at Obama). It looks like nothing has changed. Hillary has in no way explained her so-called plans, exactly what the WPEB accuses Sanders’ campaign of being “fiction filled”. We should probably expect more attacks on Sanders by the in-the-bag Hillary media, right up to indictment time.
Crossed at Right Wing News.
Trackback URL
Remember when Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) wanted to use RICO statutes to prosecute Skeptics? He’s pushed for carbon fees and had an all night yap session on ‘climate change’. He’s one of the most vocal members of the Cult of Climastrology in the Senate. His senate page is littered with ‘climate change’ yammerings, as is his Twitter page. He’s had his “time to wake up” speeches. He’s been pitching a fit over fossil fuels for a long time. Yet, when it comes to his own backyard, we get
(WPRI) U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse said Thursday he supports plans to build a new gas-fired power plant in Burrillville, despite his longstanding advocacy for policies to tackle climate change.
During an exclusive interview with WPRI.com at his Capitol Hill office, Whitehouse said that while he thinks the world needs to move away from fossil fuels, he views the Burrillville plant as part of the solution to the problem of inadequate natural gas supply in Southern New England. (snip)
“I don’t think it’s valuable from Rhode Island’s perspective to make Rhode Islanders pay high winter gas prices when it doesn’t change the overall complexion of the gas market,†he continued. “So I am not objecting to that particular plant, because it’s a choke point issue.â€
So, it’s not fair for his constituents to pay more for his beliefs, but, it’s OK for non-constituents to pay more. And, like most Warmists, he engages in excusemaking to avoid practicing what he preaches, which you’ll see more of if your read the whole article.
Read: Warmist Senator Sheldon Whitehouse A-OK With Fossil Fueled Energy Plant In His State »
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.