If All You See…

…is a rising sea from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on preferences of Somalis in Minneapolis.

It’s surfer girl week.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another fantastic day in America. Spring is in full bloom, summer is fast approaching. This pinup is by Aurthur Sarnoff, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Raised On Hoecakes says to take a chill on defending the Marine supposedly discharged for Bible verses
  2. White House Dossier has the latest Obama golf count
  3. The Camp of The Saints discusses madness and revolution
  4. The Daley Gator highlights more idiocy from leftists in California (I really like the part about “Cal/OSHA is holding public hearings“)
  5. The Last Tradition notes that only certain #BlackLivesMatter
  6. This ain’t Hell… highlights the end of the female Ranger experiment
  7. Yid With Lid discusses Rand Paul’s valuable lesson
  8. A View From The Beach wonders if you’re ready for Din0-chicken
  9. Adrienne’s Corner would like someone to explain “manspreading”
  10. Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler features a great moment in applied socialism
  11. Barking Moonbat EWS has Egypt’s view of Obama
  12. Blazing Cat Fur features a White professor ashamed of his race, and has rules
  13. Capitalism Is Freedom notes the 7 highest paying illegal careers
  14. Chicks On The Right has liberal logic for high school kids
  15. And last, but not least, Fire Andrea Mitchell notes media silence on murdered cops

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 »

Team Obama Readies More Gun Control Regulations

Isn’t it wonderful how people surrounded by armed agents, often with high power weapons, want to do all they can to restrict citizens from exercising their 2nd Amendment Right. Of course, these will all be portrayed as reasonable

(The Hill) The Justice Department plans to move forward this year with more than a dozen new gun-related regulations, according to list of rules the agency has proposed to enact before the end of the Obama administration.

The regulations range from new restrictions on high-powered pistols to gun storage requirements. Chief among them is a renewed effort to keep guns out of the hands of people who are mentally unstable or have been convicted of domestic abuse.

Gun safety advocates have been calling for such reforms since the Sandy Hook school shooting nearly three years ago in Newtown, Conn. They say keeping guns away from dangerous people is of primary importance.

But the gun lobby contends that such a sweeping ban would unfairly root out a number of prospective gun owners who are not a danger to society.

“It’s clear President Obama is beginning his final assault on our Second Amendment rights by forcing his anti-gun agenda on honest law-abiding citizens through executive force,” said Luke O’Dell, vice president of political affairs at the National Association for Gun Rights.

If Obama hates guns so much, his Secret Service protective agents should be armed with billy clubs, tasers, and mace once he leaves office.

As proposed, the regulation makes it illegal for some who has been convicted of a misdemeanor domestic violence offense to own a gun.

The ATF plans to finalize the rule by November, according to the Unified Agenda.
But gun rights advocates are concerned the Obama administration will use this rule to unfairly target certain gun owners.

“That could be a person who spanked his kid, or yelled at his wife, or slapped her husband,” warned Michael Hammond, legislative counsel for the Gun Owners of America.

It could be someone who left their kid in their car for 5 minutes while they ran in the store, or let their kids be “free range”. This could restrict women, as more than 3 million men are victims of domestic assault. 4 million women are victims. By the administration’s own argument, alcohol should be banned, because

  • Over 80% of men who killed or abused a female partner were problem drinkers in the year before the incident.
  • More than 2/3 of homicide and attempted homicide offenders were intoxicated at the time of the incident, compared to fewer than 1/4 of their victims
  • More than 1/4 of homicide offenders used both alcohol and drugs during the incident, compared to just under 6% of non-lethal partner abusers.

They are also looking to cast a wide net on people with “mental illness”

Gun rights advocates argue it would be more effective to ban people on an individual basis, as opposed to banning all people who are mentally ill.

“A person who experienced a temporary reaction to a traumatic event or who has trouble handling household finances may well be treated the same as a violent psychopath,” the NRA wrote.

“Not only is this unjust and stigmatizing, it creates disincentives for those who need mental health treatment to seek it, increasing whatever risks are associated with untreated mental illness,” it added.

How will they define this down? Say, are you super afraid of spiders or snakes, to the point of it being a phobia? Are you a little OCD? Do you get anxiety? Do you have “exaggerated worry about everyday routine life events and activities, with symptoms lasting at least six months; almost always anticipating the worst even though there is little reason to expect it”? Have panic attacks? An eating disorder? Autism? Attention Deficit? Celebrity Worship? Dyslexia? Nicotine withdrawal? Premature ejaculation? Insomnia? Stuttering? Tourettes? Good news, you have a mental disorder, so, you might be banned from owning a firearm.

Oh, hey, look, here’s another mental disorder

Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that’s vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

A narcissistic personality disorder causes problems in many areas of life, such as relationships, work, school or financial affairs. You may be generally unhappy and disappointed when you’re not given the special favors or admiration you believe you deserve. Others may not enjoy being around you, and you may find your relationships unfulfilling.

So, it could be very dangerous to have guns around these types of people, hence, no body guards should have guns.

Uh oh, the rule would restrict illegal aliens from lawfully purchasing firearms. That should make liberals hate the rules.

Look, the proposed rules are not all bad. For one thing, they would restrict those convicted of crimes where they plead guilty by mental disorder from owning guns. Of course, what if it was just shop-lifting? Like many who are convicted felons, not all are the same. What if they were convicted of tax evasion, or other non-violent crimes? This is just another one-size-fits all bit of rule making.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Team Obama Readies More Gun Control Regulations »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful field of carbon sucking flowers that should be replaced with wind turbines, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is protein wisdom, which goes all Hillary Zeppelin.

Read: If All You See… »

Washington Post Warmist Totally Concerned GOP Ignoring “National Security Threat”

Why, yes, yes, this is a growing Cult of Climastrology talking point. Will it obtain the stature of “sustainability”, “food security”, and other Warmists notions? Time will tell. Here’s Catherine Rampall (opinion writer)

The national security threat that Republicans are ignoring

When it comes to the 2016 Republican presidential primary, the candidates have found two big, fertile policy arenas in which to stake out territory: climate change and national security.

Specifically, presidential hopefuls are scrambling to show who is most aggressive on national security and who is most passive on climate change. The ideal candidate would, presumably, be able to claim both superlatives.

But this set of stances is incoherent as a policy platform. Actually it’s worse than incoherent. It’s an oxymoron.

That’s because climate change is a national security issue. You can’t credibly claim to be tough on national security and terrorism while simultaneously boasting how unconcerned you are about global warming.

Obviously, what comes next is “consensus”, that it’s all manmade, blah blah blah, the same old story that can be read time and time again. Now the CoC hysteria is being used to go after Republican presidential contenders. CNN went after Ted Cruz on this same issue on Wednesday.

But extreme weather — high temperatures, droughts, storms, floods — is politically destabilizing. It can lead to food and water shortages, mass migrations, destruction of infrastructure, disputes over refugees, pandemics. Sure, it doesn’t directly create armed conflict or militia groups, but it can generate the conditions under which these threats are more likely to emerge and thrive. Such prospects are scarier when you consider that many of the parts of the world most vulnerable to climate change are also areas with weak governance and civil unrest. Global warming is, if nothing else, a threat multiplier. (note: this is still from Wash Post piece)

Is climate, created by weather, a threat? Of course. It always has been. Especially during cooler periods. Holocene cool periods have seen much worse conditions for war, conflict, disease, starvation, and such than during the warm periods.

At the end of the day, though, if Warmists are so concerned, why have they not given up fossil fuels and gone “carbon neutral” in their own lives? Every little bit helps, ya know. Pick up a few pennies and you soon have real money.

Read: Washington Post Warmist Totally Concerned GOP Ignoring “National Security Threat” »

Say, Can We Head Off A Long Summer Of Riots?

An interesting piece at the Huffington Post by Peter Drier, E.P. Clapp Distinguished Professor of Politics, Occidental College (via Hot Air headlines)

Can We Head Off a Long Hot Summer of Riots and Rebellion?

The nation’s attention has been focused on the recent riots in Baltimore, but the harsh truth is that they could have happened in any major city. Indeed, we could see a long hot summer of urban (and, as in places like Ferguson, suburban) riots that would make the two-day disturbances in Baltimore seem trivial in comparison.

We can surely expect more turmoil next year, too, if social and economic conditions continue to deteriorate, and if candidates for president and Congress fail to make specific suggestions for addressing the suffering and hardship facing the nation.

Huh. Interesting that he pretty much excused Obama for these deteriorating social and economic conditions, and failed to mention that these problems are occurring in deep Democratic areas.

But promises can only quell riots for so long. Hope soon turns to frustration, and then anger, unless there’s real action to change conditions.

He just described Democratic Party policies since the late 1960’s.

Fixing racist police practices and bias in our criminal justice system is important. But the underlying cause of riots is the hopelessness that comes with persistent poverty, unemployment, slum housing, widespread sickness, underfunded schools and lack of opportunity to escape such intolerable conditions.

Forty plus years of Democratic Party policies and control in these areas. Mr. Drier goes on to describe how to fix all this. Did you guess that all his ideas revolve are more of the same programs and policies that have failed, essentially doubling down? He really, really wants to “Invest in Grassroots Organizing and Coalition Building”, giving these same people a “voice in their cities and the larger society”, noting “that voluntary associations and interest groups today are titled toward affluent Americans”, so, framing this in terms of class warfare, a notion that has certainly helped increase strife in the United States, particularly the last 6 years under Obama.

He goes on to note how they have won some “significant victories” over the past few years, with things like an increase in the minimum wage, such as in LA, which just raised the rate to $15 an hour (which will ultimately hurt low and middle class consumers), free full day kindergarten in NY, and, wait for it….

In California, there are significant efforts to curb carbon emissions and explicitly link those efforts to job creation and investment in low-income communities.

Sign. Of course Mr. Drier had to bring Hotcoldwetdry into the mix, but, he fails to mention that these policies hurt the poor, and destroy jobs and income. They can help the big 1%ers who are able to lobby for choice grants and loans from the Government, though.

He provides more complaints about how bad the economy is (without mentioning Obama and Democratic Party policies), leading to his specific ideas, which are the same ol’ same ol’, like

  • Guaranteeing Good Wages and Benefits. Requiring every job in the United States to meet a minimum standard of quality — in wages, benefits, and working conditions — and offer unhindered access to collective representation and a real voice for workers. (they love giving away other people’s money, and don’t seem to care that this will raise the cost of living for the poor)
  • Unlocking Opportunity in the Poorest Communities. Investing resources on a large scale to restart the economy in places where racial bias and sustained disinvestment have produced communities of concentrated poverty. (they’ve done this for 40+ years. What have they achieved?)
  • Taxing concentrated wealth. Funding new investments in job creation, care, and economic renewal by taxing those who benefit most from the current economic model – investors, financiers, wealth managers, and individuals in the highest income brackets. (you knew this one had to be there)
  • Valuing Families. Ending the systematic devaluation of care work, which disproportionately keeps women in poverty, by making high quality child care available to all working parents, raising the quality of jobs in the early childhood education and care fields, transforming homecare and providing financial support to unpaid caregivers. (from the party that pushes irresponsible sex and abortion on demand)

and, of course

Building a Clean Energy Economy. Using the large-scale investments required for transition to a clean energy future to create millions of good jobs that are accessible to all Americans, especially those hardest hit by hard times — workers of color, women, and economically distressed communities.

Perhaps we could just raze these cities, replace them with wind turbines and solar farms, and move all these folks to areas which aren’t double and tripling down on Liberal stupidity. Transitioning to alternatives is good for the environment, and will eventually replace much, if not most or all, of the current use of fossil fuels. But, right now, this won’t help the poor at all. First, it raises the cost of energy and the cost of living, hurting the poor. Second, the jobs have been shown to only appear in small numbers, not the big numbers constantly predicted. Third, how does this help unskilled poor folks in Democrat inner cities with poor educations? They won’t get hired. And, as costs go up, companies will hire fewer people.

It’s no wonder Democrat cities are failing, particularly those that are majority-minority.

Read: Say, Can We Head Off A Long Summer Of Riots? »

Rubio: Say, This Obama Guy’s Middle East “Policy” Has Backfired

Senator Marco Rubio has penned an op-ed in the Washington Post, noting how bad Obama’s Middle East policies have failed

The fall of the Iraqi city of Ramadi to the Islamic State and recent gains by the group in Syria are the latest signs that President Obama’s strategy to defeat this brutal terrorist group is failing. But the problem is far bigger than that. The president’s entire approach to the Middle East has backfired.

The Middle East is more dangerous and unstable than when Obama came into office — a time when Iraq and Syria were more stable, the Iranian nuclear program was considerably less advanced and the Islamic State did not yet exist.

Much of this instability is a result of Obama’s disengagement from the region, best symbolized by the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq in 2011. The vacuum created by America’s pullback has been filled by bad actors, including terrorist extremists, both Sunni and Shiite, who have flourished in the absence of U.S. leadership.

There’s a few more paragraphs of that, noting the rise of ISIS and the problems with Iran, which fails to delve into how bad Obama’s Libya policies were and are, how he started a war then just let things go, his failure to engage during the Iranian Green Uprising and the Arab Spring, his botched Egyptian policies, his poor Israeli policies, has poor Syria policies, which leads into his ideas for the Middle East, which are (read the entire op-ed for the full details)

  • Broaden the coalition
  • Increase U.S. involvement in the fight (note: he’s not calling for a massive surge of troops)
  • Not cut a bad deal with Iran
  • Prevent the Islamic State’s expansion beyond Iraq and Syria

This is all interesting, and what he is doing is laying out a few of his ideas in opposition to Obama. As Hillary once said “at this point, what difference does it make?” Well, it can certainly make a bit of a differnce, being that Obama still has over a year and a half (shudder) left in office, plenty of time to make things worse. But, Obama has as much chance of changing his “policies” as a an alligator does in growing wings. This is a campaign op-ed by a guy running for President, and neither the word “Clinton” nor “Hillary” appear anywhere within the piece. He seems to forget that she was Secretary of State for 4 years, and much of the failure of the policies can be laid are her doorstep. He’s missing a big chance to take her on, force the media and others to ask her tough questions…well, since she won’t actually take questions, force the media to write about what Rubio said. Frame it in terms of “well, here are my ideas for the Middle East, what are Hillary’s? How would her policies be any different from Obama’s during her 4 years at State?” He needs to take a page from Carly Fiorina, and go after the presumptive Democratic nominee.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Rubio: Say, This Obama Guy’s Middle East “Policy” Has Backfired »

Carly Fiorina Launches “Ready To Beat Hillary” Website

I know Carly is somewhat of an Establishment Republican, but, damn, I love her ground game. Wednesday she scheduled a press conference in South Carolina, taking questions from the press, right where Hillary was, not taking questions. Now

(The Hill) Carly Fiorina is “Ready to Beat Hillary” with a new campaign microsite that seeks to undermine the Democratic favorite’s bid for president.

The new site, launched by Fiorina’s campaign Wednesday, plays off the name of the super-PAC launched ahead of Hillary Clinton’s likely bid and solicits email addresses for the campaign to “join Carly Fiorina and the team that will beat Hillary in 2016.”

It includes seven panels levying criticism of Clinton, alongside video from various speeches by Fiorina underscoring her points.

Those remarks touch on Clinton’s response to the attacks in Benghazi, Libya; her family foundation accepting money from “repressive regimes;” and her purported lack of accomplishments and trustworthiness.

I’m surprised she hasn’t gained more traction, but, it’s still early, and there are lots of good (and squishy) Republicans who are name brands already in the race. But, think, Obama, while being sort of known in 2008, was really a low level candidate, with the race being between John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, till Edwards flamed out over his love child, allowing Obama to rise.

Can she win? She seems to understand the methods of the Internet, social media, and going after another candidate, which helps in attracting younger, technology savvy voters, without alienating older voters. I suspect she could end up as the VP to a Ted Cruz or Scott Walker.

Read: Carly Fiorina Launches “Ready To Beat Hillary” Website »

If All You See…

…are rubber rainboots needed to traverse the new flooded drought world, which are also evil since they are made with petroleum, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post on creepy Bernie Sanders.

Read: If All You See… »

Looking At Nature Makes Your Brain Work Better

Usually, when it comes to anything Chris Mooney writes, I’m blasting him as the uber-Warmist he is, along with the material. However, this one is actually pretty interesting

Just looking at nature can help your brain work better, study finds

While still relatively novel in the United States, so-called “green roofs” — urban rooftops covered with grasses, plants and other types of greenery — are becoming increasingly popular around the world. In France, newly built commercial rooftops must sport either greenery or solar panels, according to a recent law. Facebook, meanwhile, recently installed a massive 9-acre green roof at its office in Menlo Park, Calif.

FYI, I have no problems with this, except for the Government mandate part.

The logic is obvious: Green roofs can reduce the retention of heat in urban areas, help to cool down buildings and thereby lower their energy use, and even pull some carbon dioxide from the air and feed it back into plant growth. Plus, they look cool.

Agree on all counts.

But the psychological benefits of green roofs to busy office workers may also be substantial, according to new research. In a study published in the journal Environmental Psychology, the University of Melbourne’s Kate Lee and a group of colleagues found that interrupting a tedious, attention-demanding task with a 40-second “microbreak” — in which one simply looks at a computerized image of a green roof — improved focus as well as subsequent performance on the task.

The research adds to a growing scientific literature on the health advantages— psychological and otherwise — of being exposed to views of nature in urban settings, for instance through the presence of parks or trees. Research in this area is so far along, in fact, that researchers are considering whether it might be possible to identify the right “dose” of nature that people need to receive in order to actually reap significant health benefits.

Interesting, yes? Personally, I have no problem with cities using a bit of money to create little “green spaces”, as well as creating/maintaining parks. Nature is good for us. I bought my townhome, even though I don’t necessarily like the layout as much as some others (tiny bathrooms, TV above the fireplace), because it backs up right to nature. I have a huge backyard (shared by others in an “L” shape, and lots of trees, as well as a pond which runs off from the Neuse River. Though, the noise from the geese, ducks, and especially the frogs can make sure you leave the windows closed at night.

But that’s not the only option — Lee thinks the findings are generalizable beyond green roofs. “Viewing different types of nature (parks and forests) can also boost attention, research shows,” she commented. “Based on this we would hypothesize that other types of urban greening that show similar vegetation characteristics to those studied previously may also boost attention.”

I watch the sky, I love listening to birds, watching trees blow in the wind. A healthy dose of nature is fantastic.

Read: Looking At Nature Makes Your Brain Work Better »

Pirate's Cove