Say, Why Does Hillary Want To Be President, Anyhow?

By William Teach April 12, 2015 – 8:22 am

Today’s the day when Hillary plays small ball with her announcement to run for president. At least, we are assuming that she will announce that, rather than saying she is not running. The Washington Post’s Dan Balz has a few questions

When Hillary Rodham Clinton arrives in Iowa next week as a candidate for president in 2016, every statement, gesture, laugh, outfit, facial expression and interaction with voters will be put under a microscope the likes of which few, if any, previous candidates have experienced.

Doubtful. The media were BIG Hillary supporters in 2008, and switched to Obama when he won the nomination. They’ve barely had a negative word to say during her terrible tenure as Secretary of State, in which she accomplished….can anyone say what she accomplished?

Her every step will be analyzed for signs of change or continuity. Has she learned from her loss to then-candidate Barack Obama in the 2008 primaries? If so, what? Does she act entitled or hungry? Has she shifted on foreign policy issues since she was Obama’s secretary of state? Are her economic views the same as Obama’s or Bill Clinton’s or Elizabeth Warren’s? Does she appear to like campaigning or see it as a necessary duty to reach her ultimate goal? Is she rusty or sharp, chilly or warm? The list is endless.

The answers to these questions will be provided helpfully by the Compliant Media.

Two questions above all others hover over her candidacy: Why does she want to be president? And will voters find her honest, authentic and empathetic enough to entrust her with their futures?

The answer to the first should be interesting. Her campaign released a mission statement to aides, which includes

“We are Hillary for America,” declares the document, first reported by Politicoand later obtained by The New York Times.

“Our purpose: To give every family, every small business, and every American a path to lasting prosperity by electing Hillary Clinton the next President of the United States.”

In a sentence freighted with significance, the memo continues: “This campaign is not about Hillary Clinton and not about us — it’s about the everyday Americans who are trying to build a better life for themselves and their families.”

So, Hillary running is not about Hillary. Riiiiiiight.

Anyhow, Maureen Dowd chimes in with a howler

WHEN my brother Michael was a Senate page, he delivered mail to John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, who had offices across the hall from each other.

He recalled that Kennedy never looked up or acknowledged his presence, but Nixon would greet him with a huge smile. “Hi, Mike,” he’d say. “How are you doing? How’s the family?”

It seemed a bit counterintuitive, especially since my dad, a D.C. police inspector in charge of Senate security, was a huge Kennedy booster. (The two prominent pictures in our house were of the Mona Lisa and J.F.K.) But after puzzling over it, I finally decided that J.F.K. had the sort of magnetism that could ensorcell big crowds, so he did not need to squander it on mail boys. Nixon, on the other hand, lacked large-scale magnetism, so he needed to work hard to charm people one by one, even mail boys.

Or, it could be that Nixon was just a polite person, and actually interested in people. Something that is actually reinforced in Nixon’s book In The Arena. He was an introverted man in an extroverted arena. Introverts often find ways to play that small ball in asking about other people and greeting them. But, hey, this isn’t about Nixon

As Hillary finally admits the axiomatic — she wants to be president — she will take the Nixon approach, trying to charm people one by one in the early states for 2016, an acknowledgement that she cannot emulate the wholesale allure of Bill Clinton or Barack Obama.

In this age of Media Everywhere, 24/7 news stations, people able to take and upload videos in a heartbeat, etc and so on, can playing it small and informal, work? I met Hillary way back in the 1990’s, and she was cordial and warm. It was not a political event. Conservative radio host Mike Gallagher, in his book Surrounded By Idiots, writes about surprising his Democrat wife with a trip to meet Hillary, who was, again, very nice and pleasant. At the end, though, Mo Dowd seems to come off the rails

But if Hillary really wants to help those children, maybe she should give them some of the ostensible and obscene $2.5 billion that she is planning to spend to persuade us to make her grandmother of our country.

Interestingly, for all the Democrat caterwauling about money in politics, they sure like to spend lots themselves. And, at the end of the day, why, exactly, does she want to run for president?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Say, Why Does Hillary Want To Be President, Anyhow? »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 11, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a place featuring capitalist advertisers, who are bad for climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on the Liberal Bubble.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Scottish Warmist: Nationalize All Energy

By William Teach April 11, 2015 – 11:24 am

Of course, this is just one guy writing a letter to the Herald Scotland. But, if one Warmist is writing it, how many others are bobbing their head in agreement?

Energy must be nationalised to address climate change

MES, as the science and engineering literature amply attests, is well established technically. Methods range from electric storage (batteries, capacitors, super-capacitors), magnetic storage (superconducting coils), kinetic energy storage (flywheels), gravitational storage (pumped-hydro, artificial lagoons) to compressed air (in massive underground caverns).

Compressed air and gravitational systems furnish the really massive levels of storage capable of providing the kind of back-up power needed to smooth grid fluctuations in a world of intermittent renewables. For example, lagoon storage systems being developed off Copenhagen, and at Jiangsu, in China, will potentially provide respectively 2.3GWh and 598GWh of electrical energy. These levels are certainly large enough to confidently advocate the rapid development of fossil fuel free grid systems.

Unfortunately, within our worldwide corporate-driven. neo-liberal economic structures, the privatising buccaneers of this system, who control much of the investment in developing technology, will see no merit in storage because nothing is produced and hence nothing exists to sell at a profit. Until energy is nationalised and becomes democratically controlled, the growth of storage capacity, which is essential to the evolution of a secure green electricity grid supply, seems very likely to fail and the transition to green power will not, therefore, advance fast enough to address climate change.

Strange how virtually everything Warmists want dovetails nicely with Far Left Marxist/Socialist/Progressive beliefs, eh?

Read: Scottish Warmist: Nationalize All Energy »

Posted in Global Warming, Progressive Goals | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Game Of Thrones And “Climate Change” Are Totally Linked Or Something

By William Teach April 11, 2015 – 8:10 am

No longer can we just watch a show and be entertained: we must now consider the implications of Serious Issues And Stuff

Has ‘Game of Thrones’ Affected the Way People Think About Climate Change?
Winter is coming, but no one seems to care. Sound familiar?

An invisible force threatens to destroy life as we know it, yet society remains largely indifferent. A small group of devoted soldiers, who know the true strength of this threat, warn us of the horror to come. But alas, their warnings are to no avail. Sound familiar? Fans of HBO’s Game of Thrones, which returns this Sunday for its fifth season, will surely think of the Night’s Watch. For the uninitiated, those are the black-clad warriors who struggle to convince the rest of the realm that everyone is in imminent danger. Ignore the fact that the source of that danger is some zombie-like creatures called White Walkers, and and it might start to sound like something that we’re grappling with in our own dragon-less world: climate change.

In 2012, Arizona State University’s Manjana Milkoreit was struck by the meaningful dialogue transpiring online about the overlaps between Game of Thrones and climate change. These bloggers weren’t simply talking about the show, Milkoreit tells me, but instead were using metaphors to instigate real political conversations—conversations about responsibility, indifference, activism, and the future.

Fans of the show have surely connected the dots already, but the metaphor goes: Winter and the merciless White Walkers represent climate change; the Night’s Watch—the only people who know the extent of the horror Westeros will soon face—are climate scientists; and the status-obsessed capital city of King’s Landing represents an ignorant and inactive public and/or government.

People tend to have a very limited imagination about what a climate-changed future might look like. Even climate thought leaders and scientists lack imagination when looking forward, she says. But shows like Game of Thrones, while filled with dragons and magic, spark meaningful dialogue.

Of course, said dialogue never actually leads to practitioners of the Cult of Climastrology practicing what they preach.

Read: Game Of Thrones And “Climate Change” Are Totally Linked Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Ruth Marcus: The Bathroom Wars For Transgenders Are Totes Serious, You Guys

By William Teach April 11, 2015 – 7:33 am

No, no, no. No giggling. So says The Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus

Beyond the bathroom wars for transgender rights

The White House now offers a gender-neutral restroom, for use by men, women and anyone whose gender is less than certain. If this news tempts you to giggle — please refrain.

See? I told you. No giggling. Of course, you’re probably not giggling in the first place. If you’re a Democrat, you’re probably all for transgendered bathrooms and people going into a bathroom after they pick their sex (as long as men aren’t going into the bathroom your daughter uses at school. This is for Other People). If you’re a Republican, you’re wondering what in the hell is wrong with people and shaking your head.

Certainly, the bathroom wars are a bizarrely outsize aspect of a serious subject, which is ensuring full rights for transgender Americans. Bring up the issue, and it fast deteriorates into a debate, equal parts frivolous and overheated, over what might ensue if a male transitioning to female uses the ladies’ room. (Answer: The transgender individual goes into a stall and closes the door. No big deal.)

Tell me: what’s the difference between a man walking into the ladies room and going in to the stall, which would cause security/the police to be called, and a man claiming he identifies as a women going in?

The White House restroom policy is that anyone can use the facility that fits his or her needs. It added the gender-neutral option, in the Old Executive Office Building, to accommodate anyone who might not feel comfortable — or who might worry that others feel uncomfortable — in a single-sex restroom.

In other words, a special bathroom for the what, .0001 percent of the population which is need of a mental health evaluation?

This move is a minor part of a belated revolution in the way the federal government, and society as a whole, treats the issue of transgender rights. Just a few years ago, it was such an edgy outpost of the broader issue of gay rights that it was at risk of being sacrificed to the larger cause.

A revolution, you guys!

Anyhow, Marcus continues on and on and on about The Serious Importance Of People Confused About Their Dangly and Hidden Bits, leading to

“This president has been the best president in history on trans issues and nobody is in second place,” said Mara Keisling of the National Center for Transgender Equality. “Until this administration, no one even took us into account. It’s not like they were off trying to hurt us or anything — it’s that they didn’t consider us at all.”

Well, at least he’s good at something, considering the shaky state of the economy, poor international relations, the world burning, etc.

If you think that being transgender is creepy, or perverted, or fixable by conversion therapy, these developments probably do not impress you. If, however, you believe that some people are simply born into the wrong bodies — if you trust medical experts who believe that gender dysphoria is a real phenomenon — you probably think these are welcome developments.

If you believe society is pushing this more and more for ….. well, no actual reason, other than it being fashionable, and you have a big problem with males using women’s bathrooms and changing rooms, well, you’re a big meanie or something. Because the Bathroom Wars are like Super Important. Strange how in one breath liberals say that government shouldn’t “be in our bedrooms” and in the next breath want all sorts of government rules, regulations, and laws.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Ruth Marcus: The Bathroom Wars For Transgenders Are Totes Serious, You Guys »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Confesses He’s A Climahypocrite, And He’s A-OK With That

By William Teach April 10, 2015 – 3:26 pm

I’ve been seeing a low level push recently whereby Warmists are finding excuses to by hypocrites, and finding acceptance for being hypocrites. Here’s Peterson Tucsano at the Huffington Post

I Confess: I Am a Climate Change Hypocrite

Anyone engaged in climate action runs into pushback from people not ready or willing to hear about our carbon pollution crisis. Climate action detractors love to accuse climate action figures of hypocrisy. “Here you are blabbing about climate change while using fossil fuels all the time.” Those trying to interrupt the conversation level this charge against individuals and whole institutions. “You fight global warming by flying all over the world. How much CO2 did you people spew just to attend that climate summit?” We hear the message loud and clear–we have no authority to talk about climate change and carbon pollution because we are nothing but hypocrites.

The reality is I am a hypocrite. My life is completely infused with greenhouse gases and fossil fuel pollution. No matter how I try to untether myself from the system–abstaining from air travel in North America and buying carbon offset when I visit family in South Africa, changing all the lightbulbs in our house and hang drying clothes in the attic, walking or biking instead of driving–still I am responsible for over 13 tons of carbon pollution every year simply because I live in the USA. According to the World Bank, the average American is responsible for 17.6 tons of carbon pollution each year, while the world average per person is 5 tons. Why is this?

Then we get to

And even if I did my utmost to purge my life of products, hobbies, and activities that depend on fossil fuels, it would be absolutely futile in making a difference in reducing global rates of greenhouse gas emissions. It would not even a drop in the bucket; it would be a molecule of H2O in the Atlantic Ocean. Too little, too late.

But, what if all Warmists practiced what they preached? Ever thought of that?

And why should I the individual consumer make all the hard choices? Sure I am responsible for my actions, but I have virtually no control over the fossil fuel lifestyle that runs my little town and my country.

You can see where this is going, right?

Perhaps that is why I stand behind ideas put forward by groups like Citizens Climate Lobby advocating for a Carbon Fee and Dividend. Place a fee on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases and suddenly we will see unbelievable ingenuity, creativity, and resourcefulness on the part of consumers–especially governments, corporations, and agriculture, the biggest consumers of fossil fuels. Instead of using that money collected to subsidize wind and solar, give it to households to help with the rising costs of fossil fuels and products dependent on them, and see a new energy market enlivened by market demand for cheaper cleaner energy supplies. As the price rises on greenhouse gases, governments, corporations, and agribusinesses will turn away from dirty energy sources and opt for cheaper cleaner ones, not because the citizens and consumers demand it from them, but because it is too expensive to do otherwise.

That’s right, government intervention on Everyone, regardless of whether they believe.

I am tired of being a hypocrite, of profiting from destructive greenhouse gases, but our current pollution crisis is bigger than what you or I do in our homes because we cannot do enough. We need to get out of our houses, organize, and apply sustained pressure on government to change the system.

There’s a solution: don’t be. But, in Warmist World, everyone must be Forced To Comply.

Now when someone tries to deflect a serious discussion about the climate crisis we face by accusing me of hypocrisy, I reply, “Yes, I confess, I am a hypocrite. Despite my best efforts, my country and my town and its businesses are enabling me to remain one, so that is why I want to talk to you about much bigger solutions to address pollution and climate change than those I can adopt all by myself.”

See how this dovetails in nicely with the overall Progressive goals of bigger and bigger government with more and more power over our lives, while increasing taxation, cost of living, and dependency on Government?

Read: Warmists Confesses He’s A Climahypocrite, And He’s A-OK With That »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 10, 2015 – 1:00 pm

…is a great field full of nature that should have some wind turbines, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on a coming net neutrality Internet tax.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Crazy Warmist Blames Tornado On Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach April 10, 2015 – 10:15 am

You just knew there would be at least one

Because tornadoes, including big ones, never happened before fossil fueles. He even doubles down

A cult. The Cult of Climastrology.

Read: Crazy Warmist Blames Tornado On Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers, Unhinged Tools | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Dashcam Video Of South Carolina Shooting Released

By William Teach April 10, 2015 – 7:14 am

It doesn’t help the case of Officer Michael Slager, who has been fired from the force, in the least

(WISTV)The State Law Enforcement Division has released a copy of the dash cam footage from North Charleston police officer Michael Slager’s patrol car in the moments before he fatally wounded Walter Scott. (you can see the video at the link)

In the video, Slager pulled over Scott and asked to see his license and registration. Scott tells the officer he is missing some paperwork, saying the car is not his but he plans to buy it and the current owner has all of the documents. Right after Scott pulls over, you can also hear Slager tell him his third brake light was out.

Once Slager returns to his car to check Scott’s license, Scott gets out of his vehicle and Slager tells him to get back inside. Scott gets back into his car, then suddenly gets back out and takes off on foot.

You can’t see Slager, but through his microphone you can hear him as he runs after Scott.

There was a warrant out for Scott for unpaid child support. This in no way necessitated the use of force by Slager, especially in light of the video taken by a citizen of the actual incident. It was unjustifiable. He was not a violent felon, he was not carrying a weapon, he was not a danger to society. Let him go. You know where he lives, you have his car.

Slager has been accused of excessive force previously. A big question is, does this have anything to do with racism? Or just give the appearance of racism, due to the fact that the white officer is going to have lots of interactions with Blacks because of where he is patrolling? I certainly cannot say for sure, and nor can anyone else who does not know the officer. One thing that stuck out to me, though, is how easily he dropped what appears to be a Tazer next to the body, without really attempting to check the body for life. It’s like something out of an old cop movie, with the dirty cop ready to drop a “throw down”, ie, a handgun, to frame the perp and protect themselves from charges.

Let’s remember, though, that the vast majority of police officers are good people, and not paint the entire community for the actions of one or a few.

Read: Dashcam Video Of South Carolina Shooting Released »

Posted in Current Affairs | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Hillary To Announce Sunday?

By William Teach April 10, 2015 – 6:46 am

That’s what sources are saying. But don’t expect her to do anything live in front of an audience

(NY Daily News) The long wait’s almost over — Hillary Clinton’s official campaign announcement is expected Sunday, a source close to the campaign told the Daily News.

The former secretary of state is likely to throw her hat in the ring via video and social media as she kicks off her long-expected second shot at the White House.

She’s then expected to begin her campaign with a series of smaller events in early-voting states including Iowa and New Hampshire — though it remains to be seen how low-key the high-profile candidate will be able to keep her trip.

Also

(UK Guardian) Hillary Clinton is planning to officially launch her US presidential campaign on Sunday while en route to Iowa, a source familiar with the campaign has confirmed to the Guardian.

The former secretary of state is scheduled to declare her second run for president on Twitter at noon eastern time on Sunday, the source told the Guardian, followed by a video and email announcement, then a series of conference calls mapping out a blitzkrieg tour beginning in Iowa and looking ahead to more early primary states.

Is this an attempt to woo the young voters, doing all this on social media rather than the traditional announcement? Or, simply a way to avoid putting herself in public? The LA Times has a long discussion of where to announce, and how fraught with danger the location would be. She’s seemingly avoiding that by doing it on video, but that begs the question: if it is long, will people listen beyond a few minutes? Someone simply speaking on a video tends to get tedious, versus the excitement of a live presentation in front of an audience.

One also has to wonder if the media will subject Hillary Clinton to the same tough questioning that we’ve seen associated with the announcements by Ted Cruz and Rand Paul.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Hillary To Announce Sunday? »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove