Poll: Majority Disapprove Of Obama’s Handling Of ISIS

By William Teach October 8, 2014 – 8:40 am

It’s no wonder Senator Kay Hagan (D-NC) stated after her debate with Thom Tillis Tuesday night that Tillis should stop linking the election to Obama because “The president is not on the ballot. This race is about who’s going to represent North Carolina in the U.S. Senate.” Democrats really, really, really want to pretend that Obama doesn’t exist

(The Hill) A majority of Americans are unhappy with how President Obama is handling the U.S. fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), according to a new poll released.

Some 51 percent of respondents in the CBS News poll released Wednesday said they disapprove of the job the president is doing with the radical jihadist group, while just four in 10 approved. Those numbers are slightly worse than a month ago, when 48 percent disapproved of how Obama was approaching the situation.

I certainly approve of his air strikes on ISIS, though they do not seem to be making a difference, except in terms of dead jihadis. I would hope that he is using special ops groups to fight on the ground against ISIS/ISIL, something he will hopefully not state out loud or allow to be leaked. However, his constantly telling ISIS that we will not use boots on the ground, as well as releasing his so-called plan to fight them, is disturbing and smacks more of politics than a real concern for protecting America and her citizens and property.

The survey also found that voters gave Republicans a substantial advantage on the issue of terrorism, with 53 percent saying the GOP does a better job on the issue. By contest, fewer than a third — 32 percent — favored Democrats on the subject.

And 54 percent said a terror attack against the U.S. homeland is somewhat or very likely — similar to last month, but up 10 points from March of this year.

It really doesn’t help when Obama seems to go golfing and fundraising whenever we see the Islamic State do something, like behead someone or take over a town.

Meanwhile

(NY Times) When he soared to victory by almost 10 million votes in 2008, President Obama won in states like Virginia that Democratic candidates had not captured since 1964. He was trumpeted as a transformational leader who remade American politics by creating a new electoral map and a diverse voter coalition to shape the Democratic Party for the 21st century.

But for now he has been reduced to something else: an isolated political figure who is viewed as a liability to Democrats in the very states where voters by the thousands had once stood to cheer him.

As November nears, Mr. Obama and his loyalists are being forced to reconcile that it is not only Democrats in conservative-leaning states, like Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas, who are avoiding him. The president who became the first Democrat since Franklin D. Roosevelt to twice win a majority of the vote is flying in politically restricted airspace.

Democratic senators in Colorado, North Carolina and Virginia — states that were pivotal to his success and whose demographics reflect his winning coalition of young, minority and female voters — do not want him. Nor does his party’s Senate nominee in Iowa, where Mr. Obama won twice and whose youth-filled 2008 Democratic caucuses vaulted him toward the nomination.

Even Senator Chuck Schumer says it’s better for Obama to be absent, and

Yet even the slightest injection of the Obama brand into this election seems perilous for Democrats.

Democrats are just not that into Obama anymore, and understand that his policies are, for the most part, worthless, failed, disasters, and Obama doesn’t care much about doing the hard work the job requires.

Read: Poll: Majority Disapprove Of Obama’s Handling Of ISIS »

Posted in Barry Obama, Democrats, Elections | Comments Off on Poll: Majority Disapprove Of Obama’s Handling Of ISIS | Trackback URL

Somehow, Florida’s Record Setting Hurricane Drought Is A Bad Thing

By William Teach October 8, 2014 – 8:14 am

The Washington Post Capital Weather Gang is known for it’s Big Warmist positions, including James Samenow. Only a Warmist would be this concerned

Why Florida’s record-setting hurricane drought portends danger

Florida has gone 3,270 days without a hurricane – nearly nine years and, by far, the longest stretch on record (the next longest streak is 5 seasons from 1980-1984, in records dating back to 1851). Meanwhile, the Sunshine state’s population and development have boomed.

Florida is long overdue for a destructive hurricane and has never had so many people and so much property in the way. This dangerous state of affairs is compounded by the potential for complacency and lack of recent experience. When hurricanes don’t strike over such a long period of time, some people may be lulled into a false sense of security and/or forget how horrible hurricanes can be.

In other words, they’re Very Concerned that their prognostications for big hurricane seasons being the new normal have crashed and burned, and they really, really, really want so fantastic hurricanes to strike Florida. Remember, the original prognostication was that the normal would look like the 2005 season, which was very active, and included lots of major hurricanes, with lots of storms making landfall. That prognostication immediately died on the vine as hurricane activity, particularly for landfalling storms, dropped precipitously. So, the next palm reading stated that hurricane activity would be normal or lower, but the storms would be worse. Nope. Didn’t happen.

And then there are newcomer Floridians who haven’t ever had to endure a hurricane. Weather.com notes that more than 1 million people have moved to Florida since Wilma in 2005, the last hurricane to hit the state. “That’s potentially 1 million people who are inexperienced with the impacts of hurricanes and tropical storms and lack the experience boarding up a home, cleaning out a flooded home or battling mandatory evacuation traffic,” Weather.com writes.

Wilma was the last major hurricane to strike the United States, and, if there are no major hurricane landfalls by November 23rd, that will be the new records for the longest period without a landfalling major hurricane, 3316 days, the previous record having been during the Civil War era.

It’s not a matter of if but when an active cycle of hurricanes returns to Florida. In 2004 and 2005 alone, seven hurricanes hit (Charley, Frances, Jeanne, and Ivan in 2004; Dennis, Katrina, and Wilma in 2005.).

That is true. At some point, a hurricane is going to strike Florida. And the minute one does, it will be blamed on “climate change”, much like with Superstorm Sandy (which was made worse by interaction with a big cold front).

There are some good points, getting beyond all the doomy talk, about the danger of people becoming complacent, as well as there being so many more people and so many more properties, many with much higher values. That said, this is what is referred to as “wish casting” by Delaware Jack in the comments, who notes that many news outlets portend doom and gloom for every storm that occurs. I’d contend that wish casting has moved from hoping for ratings over normal storm doom to wish casting to blame every rain drop, dry period, snow storm, etc, on “climate change”.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Somehow, Florida’s Record Setting Hurricane Drought Is A Bad Thing »

Posted in Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Whatever Happened To The Bloodbath From NC’s New Gun Laws?

By William Teach October 7, 2014 – 4:06 pm

Strange, yet another liberal prognostication that failed to materialize (via The Daley Gator)

(WNCN) A state law that allows concealed carry permits holders to take their guns into bars and restaurants is now one year old, but even though the law is set in the books, the debate over concealed carry has not died down.

State lawmakers made it legal to carry concealed handguns in places like bars, movie theaters and in locked compartments of cars on school and state government parking lots one year ago Wednesday.

“And there’s been no incidences, so the law is playing out exactly as we thought it would,” Chmiel said.

As Gator Doug points out

Once again, the Cult of Gun Control is proven clueless. Every new law allowing CHL’s, or open carry, or stand your ground, or allowing carry in restaurants is followed by fear mongering by the gun grabbers. And, every time, they are wrong. Yet, they never evolve, they just keep emoting and acting as if they do not have good sense, which, of course, they don’t.

Interestingly, the places with the most restrictions tend to have the most shootings, usually by criminals who care less about following the law.

Read: Say, Whatever Happened To The Bloodbath From NC’s New Gun Laws? »

Posted in 2nd Amendment | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 7, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful tree in nature in a place that is great for solar panels, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Average Bubba, with a post wondering if Obama recognizes the threat from radical Islam.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Climate Hysteria Today: Nothing Is More Dangerous Than Hotcoldwetdry

By William Teach October 7, 2014 – 10:00 am

From The Doom Files

Editorial: No threat more threatening than climate change

….

An evaluation of the actual danger posed by the Islamic State is a subject for a later time, but at least right now, the group – while it is vicious and barbaric and wants to hurt us – has limited capability to make that happen on American soil.

Yet, climate change already has invaded the homeland, reducing to ruins the homes of thousands of Americans, turning them into refugees of a sort. In his U.N. speech, Obama listed just a few of the terrors we already have experienced: “Along our eastern coast, the city of Miami now floods at high tide. In our west, wildfire season now stretches most of the year. In our heartland, farms have been parched by the worst drought in generations, and drenched by the wettest spring in our history. A hurricane left parts of this great city (New York) dark and underwater.”

There was absolutely no weather, no hurricanes, no tornadoes, no floods and droughts, no blizzards, nothing, prior to the invention of the fossil fueled vehicle, ya know! BTW, Obama performed a act of un-science by terming Sandy a hurricane at landfall. It wasn’t. In fact, what made Sandy so bad was a cold front that interacted with the storm.

Earth’s rising temperature represents a greater menace than any terrorist “sleeper cell.”

Not sure about you, but a 1.4F increase in global temperatures in the last 160 years has me terrified. I’m writing this from inside my safety fort with a few stuffed animals and some hot cocoa, wearing onesies, just like your Typical Warmist.

Extreme weather events are not the only danger: As food and water shortages increase and already vulnerable people suffer dislocation and loss, the stability of governments and even civil societies are jeopardized.

If you’ll check your pre-Common Core history books, you’ll see that the weather of the Earth was really stable during the 4.5 billion years preceding the Industrial Revolution. Climate Change, ie, cool periods, didn’t help in bringing down civilizations like the Roman Empire and Mayans.

Still, while most Americans worry more about terrorism than the environment, activists sense a change. You wouldn’t know it from watching mainstream media, but the message about the need for action is getting through to more ordinary Americans than in the past: The estimated 300,000 to 400,000 people who participated in the largest “climate justice” march in history on Sept. 21 aren’t putting away their signs and going home for good. The numbers of people engaging in civil disobedience is expanding. A movement to persuade institutions to divest from fossil fuels is still tiny, but growing.

They want Other People to divest from fossil fuels, yet, they themselves used vast amounts to travel to NYC (and other cities) to protest. Go figure.

We should do what we can to support them: In the not-so-long term, it won’t matter what harm the Islamic State can or can’t do if a rising planet temperature has the effect most scientists predict: global chaos.

Read: Climate Hysteria Today: Nothing Is More Dangerous Than Hotcoldwetdry »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Imam: No, Muslims Shouldn’t Have To Apologize For Islamic State

By William Teach October 7, 2014 – 8:41 am

Very interesting thought process going on

(Huffington Post) American Muslim leaders gathered at Washington’s National Press Club late last month to release a scathing 17-page letter to the Islamic State that distanced mainstream Muslims from the militant group’s actions. But one prominent imam from Northern Virginia refused to give his endorsement.

“It sounded like they were apologizing for something they haven’t done, like they were running for cover,” Imam Johari Abdul-Malik said in an interview with The Huffington Post.

President Barack Obama has called on the world’s Muslims to “explicitly, forcefully and consistently reject” the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, while Secretary of State John Kerry recently said that Muslims need to “reclaim Islam.” In response, some of the largest Muslim organizations have issued sweeping condemnations of the militant group’s extremism. The letter unveiled at the National Press Club had the signatures of 126 prominent Islamic scholars, including the grand muftis of Egypt, Jerusalem, Bulgaria and Kosovo.

But not all Muslims have engaged in these condemnations. Many have written blog posts and created social media campaigns to criticize what they see as Muslim institutions’ knee-jerk instinct to decry faraway atrocities that are unconnected to their communities.

That’s an interesting point of view: why should they have to apologize when they aren’t involved? That leads to another thought: why should White people have to apologize for slavery when absolutely none of us were alive when it occurred here in the United States? Heck, my family wasn’t even here in the US, having legally immigrated in the early part of the 20th century on my Dad’s side, and escaping from Europe in the late 1930’s on my Mom’s side.

Anyhow

“When you ask Muslims to condemn or denounce heinous actions, ideologies or groups what you’re saying is that you don’t trust any Muslim,” Sana Saeed, a San Francisco-based producer at the digital Al Jazeera channel AJ+, wrote in a recent blog post, “Why I Won’t Condemn ISIS. “[Y]ou’re saying that I can’t be trusted until and unless I vocalize dissent against an individual, an action, an ideology or a group that claims to do something in the name of a shared identity.”

Interestingly, it wasn’t until White American’s stood up and said “no more institutional racism in my name” that the Civil Rights era truly made strides. Perhaps if more of the so-called moderate Muslims stood up to the extremists, they could significantly reduced the high number of Muslims who are being radicalized.

But, then there’s this

(Breitbart) The Imam’s frustrations and grievances would be perfectly understandable were his mosque not associated with a plethora of Islamic terrorists. Nowhere in the Huffington Post piece does it mention that Dar Al-Hijrah is the mosque with arguably the most convicted terrorists associated with the establishment.

Current Imam Abdul-Malik is the progeny of former chief al-Qaeda recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki, who once served as Imam at the Dar Al-Hijrah mosque.

Major Nidal Malik Hassan, who was responsible for the jihadi attack on Fort Hood in 2009, was also a frequent attendee of the radical mosque.

Additionally, two of the September 11th hijackers were members of the Dar Al-Hijrah congregation.

Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, whom the Huffington Post portrays as a victimized Muslim, has spoken in the past in defense of convicted terrorist Abdul Rahman Al-Amoudi. The Holy Land Foundation trial found Al-Amoudi’s American Muslim Council not only to be a front group for the Muslim Brotherhood, but also guilty of raising funds for terror group Hamas.

Oops.

Read: Imam: No, Muslims Shouldn’t Have To Apologize For Islamic State »

Posted in RoP | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Suggests Racial Profiling To Protect America From Ebola

By William Teach October 7, 2014 – 8:19 am

It’s no wonder when the Editorial Board is comprised heavily of White People and Men

Stopping Ebola in America

The widening Ebola epidemic in West Africa — combined with the fears generated by an Ebola patient who carried the virus to Dallas — have led to calls for the United States to screen travelers when they reach American airports. That is a reasonable defensive tactic if done judiciously, although it is unclear if that would have stopped the Liberian man, who carried the virus to Dallas before developing symptoms.

Thomas Eric Duncan lied when leaving West Africa, because we all know that people are honest when they’ve been exposed to something like Ebola and want to escape the country and come to the US to be saved. But, for the Times to suggest advanced and intrusive screening for certain people, most who will be Black, is racist! Remember, we aren’t allowed to do this for those traveling from the Middle East who could have links to Islamic terrorist groups.

The American health care system needs to react with greater vigilance when cases do reach this country. It is incredible that doctors in a Dallas hospital reportedly made no effort to ascertain the patient’s travel patterns, and there were delays in cleaning the Dallas apartment where he had been staying, disposing of the medical waste and moving other residents of the apartment to a safer location.

True, but what did those who work for Obama do when he arrived? By the way, that’s a word that appears nowhere within the article: “Obama”.

Top American health officials are strongly opposed, with good reason, to take the more extreme step of banning all travel to the United States from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, where the epidemic is concentrated, as several prominent Republicans, like Louisiana’s governor, Bobby Jindal, have recommended. That could actually hamper the battle to contain the epidemic abroad — the first line of defense against the disease — in part by leaving Americans who are risking their lives to contain the epidemic stranded in Africa with no way to return home. If volunteer workers can’t return home, they may elect not to go in the first place, thus weakening the fight against the epidemic.

No Obama, but we do get a Jindal mention. Said travel ban would not be about Americans returning, who would be required to be checked heavily, but against those who live there and simply want to get the hell out.

There is room to improve the screening in West Africa, where government officials and workers are often incompetent and in some cases unable to use the temperature devices they have been given. Still the system seems to be working. Though the epidemic has been growing since it was first identified in March, only one case, Mr. Duncan’s, has reached the United States, while scores of people have been blocked from boarding planes.

Oh, the Editorial Board wants those Black people to do most of the work. Racist!

Even so, it makes sense to add another layer of protection at airports in this country. Travelers from West Africa could be asked to fill out an additional questionnaire, on which they might be less tempted to lie since they will already have reached American soil. Verbal questioning could further probe whether a passenger is likely to be infected. Until the epidemic in West Africa is controlled, it remains possible, even likely, that another Ebola case would reach this country. The American health care system should be prepared to move quickly, treat the victim and trace and isolate all people the patient had contact with. Bungled responses like the one in Dallas are simply unacceptable.

Interrogating them here? Racist!

Interestingly, again, Obama is not mentioned. If Bush, or some Republican, was president, think on the way that paragraph, heck, the entire article, would be changed in order to say that President Republican was failing to protect the citizens of the United States. Things like

Even so, it makes sense to add another layer of protection at airports in this country, which President Republican and his/her administration seem loathe to do. Travelers from West Africa could be asked to fill out an additional questionnaire, on which they might be less tempted to lie since they will already have reached American soil, a simple method for which President Republican has been slow to act. Verbal questioning could further probe whether a passenger is likely to be infected. Until the epidemic in West Africa is controlled, it remains possible, even likely, that another Ebola case would reach this country. President Republican has promised thousands of military members to help, yet only a few hundred have been deployed. What is the Republican administration waiting for? People are dying. The American health care system should be prepared to move quickly, treat the victim and trace and isolate all people the patient had contact with. Bungled responses like the one in Dallas, with President Republican’s FEMA, CDC, and other federal agencies nowhere in sight are simply unacceptable.

Still, it’s interesting that the Times thinks more screening people who will mostly be Black is a Good Idea when it comes to Ebola, but not Middle Eastern men with possible links to terrorist groups.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: NY Times Suggests Racial Profiling To Protect America From Ebola »

Posted in Current Affairs | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Oops: NASA Finds Earth’s Deep Oceans Not Warming

By William Teach October 6, 2014 – 2:42 pm

How will Warmists spin this? Head in the sand? Say it means nothing? Say the science is settled? Deflect to the military supposedly believing? Throw out a few slurs?

NASA Study Finds Earth’s Ocean Abyss Has Not Warmed

The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years.

So, in other words, the excuse of the oceans ate my warming was about as credible as “no, really, officer, I had no idea how fast I was going”.

Scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean temperature data from 2005 to 2013 and found the ocean abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably. Study coauthor Josh Willis of JPL said these findings do not throw suspicion on climate change itself.

Well, of course not. Nothing can dissuade cultish zealots. You have a better chance of persuading Westboro Baptist Church members that gay marriage is OK, convincing Iran to support recognize the right of Israel to exist, to keep Obama from being an utterly partisan hack.

“The sea level is still rising,” Willis noted. “We’re just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details.”

Well, yeah, that’s what happens during Holocene warm periods.

“The deep parts of the ocean are harder to measure,” said JPL’s William Llovel, lead author of the study published Sunday in the journal Nature Climate Change. “The combination of satellite and direct temperature data gives us a glimpse of how much sea level rise is due to deep warming. The answer is — not much.”

To arrive at their conclusion, the JPL scientists did a straightforward subtraction calculation, using data for 2005-2013 from the Argo buoys, NASA’s Jason-1 and Jason-2 satellites, and the agency’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites. From the total amount of sea level rise, they subtracted the amount of rise from the expansion in the upper ocean, and the amount of rise that came from added meltwater. The remainder represented the amount of sea level rise caused by warming in the deep ocean.

The remainder was essentially zero. Deep ocean warming contributed virtually nothing to sea level rise during this period.

Whelp, there goes that prognostication right out the window. No that, again, anything will change the utterly closed and un-science interested minds of Warmists.

Read: Oops: NASA Finds Earth’s Deep Oceans Not Warming »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach October 6, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful tropical tree that will soon be growing in the Arctic, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Right Wing News, with a post on a court deciding whether chimps get human rights.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Know How To Get Conservatives To Support A Carbon Tax?

By William Teach October 6, 2014 – 11:25 am

Warmist Ian Adams opines

(Oregon Live) Conservatives are conditioned to wince at the mention of the word “tax.” Mention the term “carbon tax,” and many will recoil altogether. Still, in the only place in North America where a carbon tax has been introduced, it has been something of a success. U.S. states in the Pacific Northwest are beginning to take notice.

Canada’s British Columbia introduced a carbon tax in 2008. Designed to be revenue neutral, the tax places a price on carbon dioxide emissions, while simultaneously offsetting the cost of implementation with tax reductions in other areas. Thus, B.C. has been able to cut more than $760 million worth of income and other taxes.

Not mentioned are the artificial increases in costs of living associated with carbon taxes, along with things like rolling brownouts, inability to properly heat homes, and limitations on freedom, among others. Oh, and how 1st world nations are slowly abandoning their Hotcoldwetdry measures and taxes.

Long-time conservative tax targets like the death tax and capital gains tax could be eliminated and offset by carbon-tax revenue. Moreover, this could be done while simultaneously complying with the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed regulations on greenhouse gas emissions in a much less economically destructive way. The absolute cornerstone of conservative support for a carbon tax will be authentic revenue neutrality. Particularly out west, where tax burdens are among the most onerous in the nation, any effort to price carbon without an attendant and commensurate reduction elsewhere will be met with opposition.

1st, good luck with eliminating any taxes. Democrats will pitch a fit, proclaiming that as an attempt to kill granny, and , besides, it’s racist and favors the 1%!

Second, this is a false premise about revenue neutrality. Even if it could be achieved (good luck with that!), it would not create any neutrality within our personal and business budgets. The pain of any carbon tax well out does any benefits. Decreases in GDP. Increases in unemployment. Fewer small business start ups. The lower the economic strata the more harm will be done. All for virtually no “environmental” benefit. And this is all based on a false premise that mankind’s release of CO2 is the primary/sole cause of the miniscule increase in global temps over the last 160 years.

Read: Know How To Get Conservatives To Support A Carbon Tax? »

Posted in Carbon Credits, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove