Surprise: They’re Now Going After Mississippi Flag

By William Teach June 23, 2015 – 8:12 am

Since the Charleston shooting, many people with an axe to grind have decided to Blame the Confederate flag (any version), and Republicans have been quick to comply. As Jazz Shaw wrote Sunday, you will be made to care…about the Confederate Battle Flag, a play on Erik Erickson’s posts about being made to care about gay marriage. Now

(AP) A top Mississippi lawmaker said Monday that the Confederate battle emblem is offensive and needs to be removed from the state flag.

House Speaker Philip Gunn became the first top-tier Republican to call for a change in the flag, which has had the Confederate symbol in the upper left corner since Reconstruction.

“We must always remember our past, but that does not mean we must let it define us,” Gunn, a leader in his local Baptist church, said in a statement. “As a Christian, I believe our state’s flag has become a point of offense that needs to be removed. We need to begin having conversations about changing Mississippi’s flag.”

Mississippi and Tennessee officials are grappling with whether to retain Old South symbols, even as South Carolina leaders are pushing to remove a Confederate battle flag that flies outside the statehouse there.

Mississippi voters decided by a 2-to-1 margin in 2001 to keep the state flag that has been used since 1894. It features the Confederate battle emblem — a blue X with 13 stars, over a red field.

A couple of points: after deep reflection, I would agree that the Confederate flag should not be flown over government buildings, nor be a part of any official flag. We don’t fly the British flag, do we? Nor should we be flying the flag of any other country on government property. And, certainly, at a government level, the Confederate flag does have part of its background in slavery.

But this will not stop there. Walmart has stated that they will no longer sell the Confederate flag. Certainly, pressure will be placed on any business that sells them. License plates with the flag will be attacked. Because people have been Offended, there will be a push to have the Confederate Flag, in any form, banned.

I wonder how these same Offended people would respond if the Islamic flag, linked to slavery, mass killings, jihad, Sharia law, abuse of women and gays, misogyny, and so much more, was banned?

Should we ban all versions of the Black Power flag, which is about Black supremacy?

For most who fly the Confederate flag in some form, it has nothing to do with slavery, white power, or anything negative. It’s about Southern pride, being proud to be a Southerner, in the same way Liberals are uber-proud to live in big cities. And vote Democratic Party.

Perhaps we should ban the use of the Democratic donkey, which, while not an official symbol of the Democratic Party, has its roots in Northern anti-Civil War Democrats (Copperheads). Since they had that opinion, wouldn’t that make them pro-slavery? So, the Dem donkey is a symbol of white supremacy.

Furthermore, we should ban the Democratic Party, which stood overall for slavery. Democrats were the Party of the South for a long time, until the Reagan revolution (and, no, the Southern Dems didn’t just become Republicans), and were the ones pushing Jim Crow and Segregation. A goodly chunk, both Northern and Southern Dems, were against the various Civil Rights Acts. So, ban the Democrats. Hey, you guys can’t have it both ways.

Read: Surprise: They’re Now Going After Mississippi Flag »

Posted in Current Affairs | 40 Comments | Trackback URL

Politifact: Obama Yammering On Mass Killings “Mostly False”

By William Teach June 23, 2015 – 7:32 am

Does America have more mass killings than other countries, per Obama?

(Politifact) In his June 18, 2015, remarks from the White House, Obama said, “Now is the time for mourning and for healing. But let’s be clear: At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries. It doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency. And it is in our power to do something about it.”

A flurry of PolitiFact readers — some of them prompted by articles objecting to Obama’s claim — wrote to us to ask us to check it, so we did.

An important point to make right off the bat is that many of the critics have pointed to the first part of Obama’s claim — that “this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries.” As we’ll explain, the critics have a point here — mass violence, including mass shootings, happen in a wide variety of countries.

However, the critics have truncated the quotation, leaving off the next sentence — that “it doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency.” That’s also not fully correct, but it’s not quite as wrong as the first claim.

They go through some statistics and incidents, and move to

In sum, then, Obama is wrong to say that “this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries.” Clearly it does happen elsewhere, and not in trivial numbers. Seven of the countries saw double-digit numbers of people killed in mass shootings during that period.

By contrast, the second part of Obama’s claim — that “it doesn’t happen in other places with this kind of frequency” — isn’t entirely off-base.

And the verdict?

The data shows that it clearly happens in other countries, and in at least three of them, there’s evidence that the rate of killings in mass-shooting events occurred at a higher per-capita rate than in the United States between 2000 and 2014. The only partial support for Obama’s claim is that the per-capita gun-incident fatality rate in the United States does rank in the top one-third of the list of 11 countries studied. On balance, we rate the claim Mostly False.

Of course, Obama was also alluding to gun violence overall, and, it’s certain that the U.S. has a good bit. And a goodly bit of it occurs in deep Democrat cities. Obama’s hometown of Chicago sure has a lot, which Obama doesn’t like to talk about, especially the population that is involved with the majority of gun violence.

Of course, this is the same administration that ran guns to Mexico, which has resulted in hundreds dead, and thousands injured, including children. Crime in Mexico spiked after Operation Fast and Furious was implemented.

Of course, it doesn’t seem like these same anti-gun zealots care much about the threat from Islamic terrorists. In Nigeria, 30 are dead after a suicide bombing in Nigeria, the fourth such bombing this month in Maiduguri, the birthplace of Boko Haram. A North Carolina teen is the latest arrested in a plot to kill hundreds for ISIS.

Of course, the Ramadan Score Card has 44 attacks, 9 suicide bombings, and 359 dead, all in the name of the Religion of Peace.

And, finally, of course, none of that matters to the anti-gun zealots, who wish to disarm law abiding citizens.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Politifact: Obama Yammering On Mass Killings “Mostly False” »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Current Affairs, RoP | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Pakistani Climate Change Minister Calls For Doing Away With Fossil Fuels

By William Teach June 22, 2015 – 4:53 pm

Of course, we’re told that no one is calling for the complete (forced) abandonment of fossil fuels usage

‘Ditching fossil fuels’ essential stablising climate change’

Federal Minister for Climate Change, Senator Mushahidullah Khan, has hailed leading G7 industrial nations for announcing that they will phase out the use of fossil fuels by decarbonising the global economy in the course of this century.

Such move, if actualised, would help control emission of climate altering green house gases (GHGs), which have caused global warming. Eventually, this will lead to stablising climate change and reduction in occurrence of the climate change-induced natural disasters, the minister said in a press statement issued here on Sunday. (Snip)

Mushahidullah Khan said that getting rid of fossil fuels’ use would require energy transition beyond fossil fuels through multiple means, including transport electrification, decommissioning of operating fossil fuel-fired power plants and prevention of the construction of new fossil-fuel-fired power stations in the rich countries.

“Above all, a move to the many forms of renewable energy from solar, wind, water and air is must for shifting away from fossil fuels,” he emphasised.

Of course, there is absolutely nothing available that can replace fossil fuels at this time. It would be great if there was. Warmists, though, want to put the cart before the horse.

Then they jump in their own fossil fueled vehicles.

Read: Pakistani Climate Change Minister Calls For Doing Away With Fossil Fuels »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 22, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a world flooded because Someone Else refused to turn their AC up to 85, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on Jonathan Gruber’s big influence on Ocare.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Doom: Warmists Proclaim Collapse Of Society By 2040

By William Teach June 22, 2015 – 10:15 am

Bummer. Of course, it’s all based on computer models and Everyone Else being forced to change their behaviors to align with those expressed by the Cult Of Climastrology, behaviors Warmists themselves won’t practice in their own lives

(UK Independent ) A scientific model supported by the Foreign Office has suggested that society will collapse in less than three decades due to catastrophic food shortages if policies do not change.

The model, developed by a team at Anglia Ruskin University’s Global Sustainability Institute, does not account for society reacting to escalating crises by changing global behaviour and policies.

However the model does show that our current way of life appears to be unsustainable and could have dramatic worldwide consequences.

Dr Aled Jones, the Director of the Global Sustainability Institute, told Insurge Intelligence:  “We ran the model forward to the year 2040, along a business-as-usual trajectory based on ‘do-nothing’ trends — that is, without any feedback loops that would change the underlying trend.

photo 62971d4a_zps18828beb.gif

Read: Doom: Warmists Proclaim Collapse Of Society By 2040 »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Should The U.S. Apologize For Climate Change?

By William Teach June 22, 2015 – 7:53 am

Alternate headline: Should the United States issue a formal apology for being so darn productive and advanced?

Should the United States Issue a Formal Apology for Climate Change?

It’s 2017 and the newly elected president of the United States is apologizing to the world for its contribution to environmental injustices at home and globally. Could this happen? Should it happen?

There’s a long list of historic environmental injustices that the United States has inflicted upon its own peoples and cultures, and globally. Environmental racism (where environmental laws, policies and practices have differentially affected individuals, groups of communities based on race or colour), the watered-down approach of American companies toward corporate social responsibility, and its significant contribution towards climate change all form part of an embarrassing environmental scorecard.

As a proud and courageous nation, the United States should be honest with itself. It’s time for the damaging and dangerous notions, fantasies, and myths of American exceptionalism and Manifest Destiny that continue to influence some elements of the nation’s political ideology to be confined to history.

Uh huh.

So, why apologize?

Over the past few years, there have been a number of political apologies offered by nations for historical and more recent injustices.[2]

As a nation, any empathy toward its neighbours brings with it feelings of shame and guilt for some aspects of its way of life. Through apologizing, that dignity and self-esteem could be restored.[3]

Our fragile planet demands that we renew and focus our energies on the resolution of conflicts, and that it is done in a way that does not simply submerge the resentments that inevitably accompany such conflicts but acknowledges and responds to them. I believe that apologizing can help in that effort.

But apologizing is more than merely an acknowledgment of offences together with an expression of remorse. It is an ongoing commitment to change the nation’s behaviour. It is a process that requires of all parties attitudes of honesty, generosity, humility, commitment, and courage.

Strange. This almost sounds like “climate change” is all part of a greater far, far left Progressive agenda. Of course, mentioning “honesty” in a discussion of “climate change”, considering all the lies Warmists have told, is a hoot.

But, hey, I’ll tell you what, I’ll agree to Mr. Paul Collins’ call for an apology when every member of the Cult of Climastrology proves an apology is needed by giving up their own use of fossil fuels and go carbon neutral in their own lives.

Read: Say, Should The U.S. Apologize For Climate Change? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Krugman: U.S. Is Totally Racist Because Of No Welfare State And White Flight 40 Years Ago

By William Teach June 22, 2015 – 7:11 am

Democrats very much want a “national conversation” on race post-Charleston shooting. Well, what they really want is a soliloquy, as well as a massive amount of Blamestorming, particularly of Republicans. It seems that Democrats haven’t gotten over losing the Civil War 150 years ago, along with losing when it came to eradicating Jim Crow/Segregation laws and the passage of the Civil Rights laws. Here’s comes Paul Krugman

Slavery’s Long Shadow

America is a much less racist nation than it used to be, and I’m not just talking about the still remarkable fact that an African-American occupies the White House. The raw institutional racism that prevailed before the civil rights movement ended Jim Crow is gone, although subtler discrimination persists. Individual attitudes have changed, too, dramatically in some cases. For example, as recently as the 1980s half of Americans opposed interracial marriage, a position now held by only a tiny minority.

Yet racial hatred is still a potent force in our society, as we’ve just been reminded to our horror. And I’m sorry to say this, but the racial divide is still a defining feature of our political economy, the reason America is unique among advanced nations in its harsh treatment of the less fortunate and its willingness to tolerate unnecessary suffering among its citizens.

Of course, saying this brings angry denials from many conservatives, so let me try to be cool and careful here, and cite some of the overwhelming evidence for the continuing centrality of race in our national politics.

OK. Let’s see it.

The first, by the political scientist Larry Bartels, analyzed the move of the white working class away from Democrats, a move made famous in Thomas Frank’s “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” Mr. Frank argued that working-class whites were being induced to vote against their own interests by the right’s exploitation of cultural issues. But Mr. Bartels showed that the working-class turn against Democrats wasn’t a national phenomenon — it was entirely restricted to the South, where whites turned overwhelmingly Republican after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and Richard Nixon’s adoption of the so-called Southern strategy.

So, white flight from Detroit, which started well over 40 years ago. Perhaps Mr. Krugman could explain why Whites fled Detroit. Oh, wait, we can see the results of what happened: falling property values, a massive increase in crime, a collapse of the education system, a collapse of the economic values, a collapse of social capital. Can Paul explain why, in the absence of the fleeing Whites, Detroit, went from being called the Paris of the West to being called the Mogadishu of America? Why it has been called the murder capital of the US many times? Why Whites were no longer considered welcome per the words of the first Black mayor of Detroit, Coleman Young, who also said that Detroit was now a Black city? And spent oodles of money only on Blacks? Oh, right, we aren’t allowed to have that conversation, because it doesn’t fit the soliloquy.

The second paper, by the economists Alberto Alesina, Edward Glaeser, and Bruce Sacerdote, was titled “Why Doesn’t the United States Have a European-style Welfare State?” Its authors — who are not, by the way, especially liberal — explored a number of hypotheses, but eventually concluded that race is central, because in America programs that help the needy are all too often seen as programs that help Those People: “Within the United States, race is the single most important predictor of support for welfare. America’s troubled race relations are clearly a major reason for the absence of an American welfare state.”

Interesting. We can certainly discuss the idiocy of not having a welfare state being raaaaacism, but, let’s wonder about Liberals thinking that Blacks cannot survive without welfare and massive help from government. Is that not racist, believing that Blacks are too stupid, too lazy, to succeed on their own? Have you ever seen Liberal like Paul Krugman call for a welfare state for Asians, Latinos, or Whites, among others?

And it’s not just health reform: a history of slavery is a strong predictor of everything from gun control (or rather its absence), to low minimum wages and hostility to unions, to tax policy.

So, unless you follow the far, far left Progressive policy prescriptions, you’re racist. Soliloquy.

But that hasn’t happened yet. Every once in a while you hear a chorus of voices declaring that race is no longer a problem in America. That’s wishful thinking; we are still haunted by our nation’s original sin.

Of course, Democrats will never let this meme go, and will never work to better race relations (which, interestingly, have gotten worse with Obama’s election). How better to keep Blacks in the box Democrats put them in? Is it not racism to see Blacks as an interest group, rather than individuals with different hopes and aspirations? Dems raise money off of this, get support from the Black community, despite Liberals being very bad for Blacks. Republicans freed the slaves: Democrats did all they could to put them back in chains. Today’s chains are ghettos of crime and despair in mostly liberal cities like Detroit, Baltimore, Newark, Chicago, Birmingham, and others.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Krugman: U.S. Is Totally Racist Because Of No Welfare State And White Flight 40 Years Ago »

Posted in Current Affairs, Liberal World | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

“World shocked at enduring racism, gun violence in US” Or Somethin

By William Teach June 21, 2015 – 5:02 pm

This is simply a veiled anti-gun screed pretending to be a news article

(Raleigh N&O) Often the target of U.S. human rights accusations, China wasted little time returning such charges following the shooting at a historic black church in South Carolina that left nine people dead. Elsewhere around the world, the attack renewed perceptions that Americans have too many guns and have yet to overcome racial tensions.

Some said the attack reinforced their reservations about personal security in the U.S. — particularly as a non-white foreigner — while others said they’d still feel safe if they were to visit.

Especially in Australia and northeast Asia, where firearms are strictly controlled and gun violence almost unheard of, many were baffled by the determination among many Americans to own guns despite repeated mass shootings, such as the 2012 tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where a gunman killed 20 children and six adults.

“We don’t understand America’s need for guns,” said Philip Alpers, director of the University of Sydney’s GunPolicy.org project that compares gun laws across the world. “It is very puzzling for non-Americans.”

“The USA is completely out of step with the rest of the world. We’ve tightened our gun laws and have seen a reduction,” said Claire Taylor, the director of media and public relations at Gun Free South Africa.

Meanwhile, this same world doesn’t seem to concerned nor shocked over the continued spread of radical Islam, both the violent and non-violent versions. Including in Africa and Australia.

Ahmad Syafi’i Maarif, a prominent Indonesian intellectual and former leader of Muhammadiyah, one of the country’s largest Muslim organizations, said the church shooting shocked many.

Meanwhile, there have been over 26000 deadly jihad attacks since 9/11. 3277 were killed in May 2015.

Interestingly, the article fails to mention who is perpetrating a goodly chunk of the violence despite the small percentage of the population.

Read: “World shocked at enduring racism, gun violence in US” Or Somethin »

Posted in 2nd Amendment | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 21, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a world being baked by too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Alan Colmes’ Liberaland, with a post whining about Rick Perry discussing God in relation to the Charleston shooting.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach June 21, 2015 – 9:02 am

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America. The sun is shining, the birds are singing, a great time to spend some time in the garden. This pinup is another by Aurthur Sarnoff, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Independent Sentinel discusses some more idiot Greenies
  2. The People’s Cube covers green future cooking
  3. The Last Tradition notes some interesting news that didn’t go national
  4. The First Street journal notes a funny thing on the way to the riots
  5. The Daley Gator discusses the most important part about immigration
  6. Raised On Hoecakes notes things that matter
  7. Powerline has liberal hypocrisy in two tweets
  8. Patterico notes sexual harassment in the Hillary State Dept
  9. Neo-neocon wonders why there is so little concern about the OPM hack
  10. Moonbattery covers an insane lie by CNN to defend Islamists
  11. Legal Insurrection discusses insane exploitation of the Charleston murders
  12. Jihad Watch covers a bit more from the RoP
  13. Fire Andrea Mitchell wonders what would have happened if Root had targeted police
  14. Fausta (DaTechGuy) notes that the government wants to protect you from….ham
  15. And last, but not least, Chicks On The Right wonders about Hillary lecturing on racism

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 | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove