Mostly Peaceful Ferguson Protest Sees Two Officers Shot

By William Teach March 12, 2015 – 8:24 am

As The Other McCain points out, this is an entirely expected consequence after over half a year of anti-cop agitation

(St. Louis Today) Two police officers were hit by gunfire early Thursday outside the Ferguson police department.

The shots were fired just after midnight as police were confronting protesters who had gathered outside the police station.

St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar said one officer was with his department and the other was with the Webster Groves department. Both were being treated at Barnes-Jewish Hospital, where Belmar spoke, and were in serious condition.

The chief said at least three shots were fired. He described the injuries of both men as “very serious gunshot injuries.” Neither injury was considered life-threatening.

The protest was over the resignation of the police chief.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Mostly Peaceful Ferguson Protest Sees Two Officers Shot »

Posted in Current Affairs | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Inconceivable: Majority Believe That Federal Policies Encourage Illegal Immigration

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 3:17 pm

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

(Rasmussen) Most voters continue to believe federal government policies encourage illegal immigration, but they still aren’t convinced states should go it alone in enforcing immigration laws.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters think the policies and practices of the federal government encourage people to enter the United States illegally, the highest level of cynicism since June 2012. Twenty-eight percent (28%) disagree, while 15% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Huh.

Still, 48% think relying on the federal government rather than states to enforce immigration laws is the best approach to dealing with illegal immigration. That’s down two points from last August but is in line with findings since February 2011. Forty-two percent (42%) think it’s better to allow individual states to act on their own. Ten percent (10%) are undecided. Support for state action was slightly higher in 2011.

I’d actually agree. The federal government should be the primary enforcement method, establishing specific rules, as dictated by the Constitution, working hard to protect the country and its citizens from those who are entering our country illegally. Unfortunately, Los Federales like to play games.

Most voters (61%) still favor strict government sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Twenty-four percent (24%) oppose such sanctions, while 15% are undecided. Support for these sanctions have run in the high 50s to low 60s for years, and Americans told us in a 2013 survey that employer sanctions are the most effective way to stop illegal immigration.

I’d very much agree, and have written so in the past on multiple occasions.

But 57% believe if a police officer pulls someone over for a traffic violation, the officer should automatically check to see if that person is in the country legally. Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree, and 10% are not sure. These findings also have stayed fairly steady for years, although support for these checks hit a high of 73% in March 2009.

I’d agree. Are you a legal citizen or here legally? No? Arrest, detain, deport.

Read: Inconceivable: Majority Believe That Federal Policies Encourage Illegal Immigration »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

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

…is horrible concrete used to create a brick wall which is bad for climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on all the times Obama learned things from the news.

Read: If All You See… »

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

New Republic Cultist: Stop Calling The Cult Of Climastrology A Cult!

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 10:24 am

The New Republic’s Rebecca Leber seems very upset

You Can’t “Believe” in Climate Change
It’s not a religion. It’s a scientific fact.

Lst week, Environmental Protection Agency chief Gina McCarthy made little impression on Republican senators at an Environment and Public Works hearing, where she said, “Climate change is not a religion. It is not a belief system. It’s a science fact.” She would have been better off aiming her remarks at a different audience—anyone who says he or she “believes” in climate change.

The phrase, “believe in climate change” returns almost a quarter-million Google results. As McCarthy said, science is neither a faith nor a religion, yet the term belief pervades media and politics. Why do advocates so consistently play along with the climate-change-denier narrative?

Conservatives have long drawn comparisons between climate change science and a fervent religion. A 2013 National Review column articulated the parallels thus: “Religion has ritual. Global-warming alarmism has recycling and Earth Day celebrations. Some religions persecute heretics. Some global-warming alarmists identify ‘denialists’ and liken them to Holocaust deniers.”

I agree, it’s not a religion: it’s a cult

Characteristics Associated with Cultic Groups – Revised (Janja Lalich, Ph.D. & Michael D. Langone, Ph.D.)

  • The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law. (in this case, there are multiple leaders)
  • Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.
  • Mind-altering practices (such as meditation, chanting, speaking in tongues, denunciation sessions, and debilitating work routines) are used in excess and serve to suppress doubts about the group and its leader(s). (spreading awareness, demonstrations, dressing as polar bears, etc)
  • The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel
  • The group teaches or implies that its supposedly exalted ends justify whatever means it deems necessary
  • The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

There are many others, I obviously do not want to excerpt the entire article. And when they start yammering on about it being a “scientific fact” and are presented with contradictory evidence, they go loony. Cult.

Read: New Republic Cultist: Stop Calling The Cult Of Climastrology A Cult! »

Posted in Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Cult Of Climastrology Using Kids As Human Shields

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 8:03 am

The CoC is doing a wonderful job of brainwashing and indoctrinating children on the subject of “climate change”, turning them into Good Little Comrades, and turning them into anxiety riddled messes.

(Daily Caller) Environmentalists are now using kids to “school” lawmakers on the science behind man-made global warming.

On Tuesday, six high schoolers from states “hard hit” by global warming will go to Capitol Hill to try and convince lawmakers skeptical of man-made global warming that it’s real and it’s impacting peoples’ lives today.

“What I know about climate change is that it’s real, it’s man-made and there’s scientific evidence to back it up,” Helen Winston, a high schooler from Nebraska, said in a video produced by the liberal campaign group Avaaz.

Levy, Thompson and Winston will target four Republican senators on their hill visits Tuesday within their respective states. Other high schoolers will target Republicans from North Carolina — a state that recently lost a Democratic Senate seat in the 2014 election.

Let’s see: Nebraska, Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina. How did these snowflakes travel to Washington, D.C.?

The push comes as Avaaz releases a new poll showing that 90 percent of 8th graders accept the theory that global warming is mostly man-made. The implication of the whole campaign is that high schoolers and 8th graders are more knowledgeable about climate science than their state’s own elected officials.

“As we release fossil fuels that have been trapped under our earth for millions and millions of years, we’re going to warm the planet, and that’s just from a 6th grade science level. It baffles me that these senators can’t grasp that,” high schooler Bailey Recktenwald of North Carolina told the blog Grist.

So, they’re taking fossil fueled trips to complain about fossil fuels? Obviously, they’re not only learning agitation, but also climahypocrisy. Nothing surprising there.

Read: Cult Of Climastrology Using Kids As Human Shields »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Surprise: Eric Holder Also Used Secret Email Aliases

By William Teach March 11, 2015 – 7:46 am

Recently, Michelle Malkin compiled a list of all the email shenanigans from those within the Most Transparent Administration Evah!!!! She needs to add yet another, though, at least as far as we know, this isn’t as bad as Hillary Clinton’s problems

(Breitbart) Attorney General Eric Holder used secretive email accounts under aliases during his tenure at the Justice Department, raising fresh questions about the Obama administration’s compliance with federal records laws as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reels from her own email scandal.

Holder has emailed under the nom de plume “Henry Yearwood” in the past, former Justice Department officials say. The Huffington Post reported Tuesday that Holder had used three aliases. The current is unknown.

Unlike Clinton, who used a personal email account and her own private email server, preventing government officials from possessing the emails for record-keeping purposes while she was in office, Holder’s email address is a government, usdoj.gov email address.

The DOJ states that the secret email account in no way interfere with Congressional oversight nor FOIA requests. As long as the requester knows what those email addresses are that no one knows. And, “the official told The Huffington Post. Holder has used the aliases to prevent spam and to keep his inbox from being overwhelmed by the public, not to avoid transparency..” Apparently, the federal government cannot afford a decent spam filter with their teeny tiny $3.8 trillion budget. And, how dare you pesky Citizens dare email the top cop! But, wait, it gets better!

(Politico) Only hours after Hillary Clinton answered questions at the U.N. about her use of a personal email address while at the State Department, the Justice Department revealed that Attorney General Eric Holder has used government multiple email aliases. Shortly afterward, an NBC affiliate, News-4, reported that former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel had used a personal email address in at least one correspondence.

In Hagel’s defense, it may, may, have been a mistake, since he does carry two Blackberrys, one for personal and one for government, and may, may, have made mistakes in using the wrong one. That said, that excuse is rather hard to believe, in light of all the other email shenanigans from Obama appointees.

Meanwhile, John F. Harris said Hillary was essentially saying “go to hell” to the media with her news conference. John Hideraker dives into what Hillary said and what she didn’t say.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: Eric Holder Also Used Secret Email Aliases »

Posted in Democrats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Againt Attempts To Explain Why Hot Creates Cold And Snow

By William Teach March 10, 2015 – 4:01 pm

Like a puppy with rabies, Climastrologers have their teeth in this meme and won’t let go

How climate change may be producing more blockbuster snowstorms

After another extreme winter in the eastern United States – symbolized by Boston’s historic snow blitz of 90 inches in just over three weeks – scientists, the media and the public are asking once again: Is climate change causing more extreme snowfall events?

The argument that climate change is leading to greater snowfalls is based on a very simple law of physics – a warmer atmosphere can hold more moisture. But on the other hand, snowfall is dependent on sub-freezing temperatures, so what does it mean for places like the eastern United States, where climate change might make it too warm for snowfall?

In Warmist World, it means more snow and cold.

The best tools we have to answer such a complex question, which incorporate all the physics and competing factors, are the climate models. Put simply, climate models are similar to weather models but run on a much larger scale in both space and time. They take into account interactions between land, oceans and ice, and importantly, they attempt to predict changes in our climate as greenhouse gases increase in the atmosphere.

Weather models are often not particularly accurate when you get to 5 days and out. Because weather is volatile.

All of the climate models predict that mid-latitude storm tracks (like the winter storms we see in the United States) will shift toward the poles with climate change — north in the Northern Hemisphere, and south in the Southern Hemisphere. They also predict more precipitation overall.

Uh huh. They also failed to predict the Pause. And are 95% wrong. The rest is just giving it a good old try in linking more cold and snow with hot. Cult.

Read: Washington Post Againt Attempts To Explain Why Hot Creates Cold And Snow »

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

If All You See…

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

…is a horribly rising sea, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Western Hero, with a post on the competence of government.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Ready For Thirteen Steps To Stop Hotcoldwetdry?

By William Teach March 10, 2015 – 10:56 am

Are you ready for them to mostly ignore Warmists practicing what they preach?

(UK Guardian) With the sustainable development goals and a climate deal coming up this year our panel say how to make the most of this once-in-a-generation opportunity

Let’s see those ideas, each of which comes from the different panelists

  1. Start by asking the tough questions: (things like “When we get down to the tangible elements like finance, how can we improve coherence between different funding streams, and better connect finance with countries’ sustainable development priorities?”)
  2. See climate change and poverty as two sides of the same coin: (in other words, the Cult Of Climastrology is now mixing the two, which is interesting, since Leftist policies tend to create more poverty)
  3. Fight gender inequality: (another mixing of political beliefs from people who practice neither)
  4. Recognise the conflict between economic development and the environment: (in other words, capitalism for Other People is Evil with a capital E)
  5. Don’t get distracted by geopolitics (ignore those actual dangers like war and the continued rise of Islamic extremism)
  6. Accept that this is a moral fight (but, hey, don’t worry about being moral and practicing what you preach. Also amusing because these same people are 110% for abortion on demand)
  7. Find the funding to make change a reality (more and more taxation, obviously)
  8. Look beyond 2015 (a continued push for spreading awareness. Kinda like the guy who carries a The End Is Nye! sign for 30 years)
  9. Learn from the MDGs (supposedly, they are supposed to understand why the Millennium Development Goals have failed. Like the rest of their “science”)
  10. Put trade reform on the agenda (another assault on capitalism)
  11. Focus on the root causes (that would be hardcore Progressive politics, flawed and faked data, and incompetent computer models)
  12. Beware of the dominance of the private sector (this is more hatred of capitalism, along with a push to give Government a lot more power)
  13. Let citizens lead (rather than being about “practice what you preach”, it’s really more about agitation and protests)
  14. Invest in the technology that will deliver the goals (this yammers on about inequality, which is interesting, since the way the new technologies are being developed hurts the middle and lower classes)

So, there you have it. They can’t even get the numbering correctly. The thirteen in my headline comes from the Guardian headline.

Read: Ready For Thirteen Steps To Stop Hotcoldwetdry? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Hillary Clinton To Supposedly Address Email Scandal

By William Teach March 10, 2015 – 7:06 am

In other words, she’s going to give a speech that will briefly touch on the issue, take no questions, and fail to provide a truly adequate explanation

(Politico) Hillary Rodham Clinton is likely to hold a press conference in New York in the next several days to answer reporters questions about a controversy surrounding her use of a private email account at the State Department, according to three people close to the potential Democratic frontrunner.

The decision to address the issue comes amid mounting criticism of her use of a personal email account, which did not comply with State Department regulations issued in 2005 governing email used for official business. Reports in the New York Times and the Associated Press detailed how Clinton used a private server, housed in her suburban New York residence, to channel her emails, which are supposed to be maintained as part of a federal agency’s historic record.

“Supposed to”? No. That makes it sound like it is recommended, when it is, in fact, required by law. Just like for private companies, who can, and have, get in big trouble for not maintaining emails.

Of course, giving a speech, if she actually does that, doesn’t address that there are certainly a lot more pages of emails that she has failed to provide. There are huge gaps. Nor that she was using a personal address for government business, one which was not particularly secure. Nor the propriety of using a personal email for government business.

Obama told CBS in an interview Saturday that he’d learned of Clinton’s use of a private e-mail address and server “through news reports.” However, Earnest conceded Monday that Obama knew Clinton was communicating from a private e-mail account, but was unaware of how that mail was handled or that Clinton did not have an official “state.gov” account.

“Yes, the president was aware of her email address,” Earnest said. “He was not aware of the details of how that email address and that server had been set up or how Secretary Clinton and her team were planning to comply with the Federal Records Act.”

Might that information be important for her boss to know? Government investigators would surely find any private sector boss to be negligent if a direct report acted in this manner. Of course, Obama doesn’t seem to know very much as to what happens within his Executive Office. Nor care. Nor care to follow the same laws required of everyone else.

Read: Hillary Clinton To Supposedly Address Email Scandal »

Posted in Hillary Clinton | 12 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove