Democrat Sugar Daddy Tom Steyer Is Massive Climahypocrite

By William Teach July 6, 2014 – 4:14 pm

But, then, aren’t most Warmists hypocrites? Some are just more hypocritical than others. What’s most shocking is that this article was published in the NY Times

To environmentalists across Australia, it is a baffling anachronism in an era of climate change: the construction of a 4,000-acre mine in New South Wales that will churn out carbon-laden coal for the next 30 years.

The mine’s groundbreaking, in a state forest this year, inspired a veteran to stand in front of a bulldozer and a music teacher to chain himself to a piece of excavation equipment.

But the project had an unlikely financial backer in the United States, whose infusion of cash helped set it in motion: Tom Steyer, the most influential environmentalist in American politics, who has vowed to spend $100 million this year to defeat candidates who oppose policies to combat climate change. (snip)

Over the past 15 years, Mr. Steyer’s fund, Farallon Capital Management, has pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into companies that operate coal mines and coal-fired power plants from Indonesia to China, records and interviews show. (snip)

Mr. Steyer sold his ownership stake in Farallon in late 2012, but he has not cut ties with it entirely. He remains a passive investor, his aides said, though they declined to describe the size of his investment. Employees at Farallon screen out any fossil-fuel-related holdings from his portfolio, and he no longer earns a share of the profits from the fund, the aides said.

He made his money, and now he can be free to pretend to care about “climate change”. All those coal projects will last for 15-30 years, minimum, and Steyer can pretend he’s all sorts of concerned about “climate change”, much like how Al Gore can be “concerned”, despite selling Current TV to fossil fuels backed Al Jazeera. All while looking to shutter plants here in America, causing our cost of living to skyrocket while making energy more unstable. Of course

In interviews, several prominent environmentalists argued that Mr. Steyer’s unrivaled spending to support climate-change policies outweighed the impact of the carbon pollution unleashed by his past investments.

“This is precisely what we want people to do: sell investments in fossil fuels and get to work solving the problem of climate change,” said Bill McKibben, a founder of the group 350.org, which pushes financial institutions to divest from fossil fuels.

Of course many Warmist groups (who use lots of fossil fuels themselves) will forgive him: he’s pumping lots of cash into their causes.

Read: Democrat Sugar Daddy Tom Steyer Is Massive Climahypocrite »

Posted in Climahypocrites | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

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

…are awesome carbon friendly bikes which Everyone Else should be forced to ride, you might just be a Warmist

It’s Bike Week, and the blog of the day is American Power, with a post on stalker trolls.

BTW, since I may not get to it, apparently riding bikes is now racist.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup – 150th Edition!

By William Teach July 6, 2014 – 8:50 am

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in the awesome nation of America. This pinup is by Gil Elvgren, with a wee bit of help. Can you believe this is the 150th edition of this weekly post? 150 straight Sundays!

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Yid With Lid wonders about pot being a basic human right in The People’s Republic Of Berkley
  2. Wild Thing discusses what pro-illegals did to the American Flag on the 4th
  3. The People’s Cube features a really awkward jihadi moment
  4. The Other McCain delves into gender theory
  5. The Jawa Report notes what a judge told CAIR
  6. The Camp Of The Saints discusses American fascism
  7. White House Dossier covers Obama’s shameful politicization of the 4th
  8. Rio Norte Line wonders if sex is a right
  9. No Tricks Zone notes destruction of climate data
  10. Not A Lot Of People Know That covers strange data in Ohio
  11. Patterico wonders about “natural rights”
  12. Moonbattery has enraged moonbats on Hobby Lobby
  13. Legal Insurrection notes the number of new pages of Obamacare regulations released
  14. House Of Eratosthenes wonders about Progressives on the Founding Fathers
  15. And last, but not least, Fire Andrea Mitchell discusses the 300k diseased illegals

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

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 – 150th Edition! »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Whiny College Students Claim Discrimination Over NC Voter ID Law

By William Teach July 6, 2014 – 8:23 am

The funniest part about all these voter ID lawsuits is that the groups suing could use all the money they’re spending to purchase legal state ID cards for everyone

(NY Times) Joining a challenge to a state law alongside the N.A.A.C.P., the American Civil Liberties Union and the Justice Department, lawyers for seven college students and three voter-registration advocates are making the novel constitutional argument that the law violates the 26th Amendment, which lowered the voting age to 18 from 21. The amendment also declares that the right to vote “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.”

Hmm, there’s another Amendment which uses the word a similar word to abridged, “infringed“, but these same Leftist groups have no qualms about violating that. They also do not mind violating Free Speech with all sorts of “code of conduct” style restrictions at colleges. Nor free expression of religion.

“There’s an unprecedented effort nationally by Republican-controlled legislatures to restrict the franchise in a way we haven’t seen in a long time,” said Marc Elias, the Democratic election lawyer bringing the age-discrimination claim. “Young voting in particular is a part of that effort.”

What about all the Democrat states, such as Hawaii, that require ID? Voters are also required to sign a book verifying they cast a vote!!!!

Under the North Carolina law passed last year, the period for early voting was shortened and same-day registration was eliminated. Beginning in 2016, voters will need to show photo identification, and student ID cards, including those issued by state universities, will not be acceptable. In most instances, neither will an out-of-state driver’s license.

The law also eliminated a program in which teenagers filled out their voter-registration forms early and were automatically registered when they turned 18.

“For people like me, it makes what should be a simple process very difficult,” said Josue Berduo, 20, an economics major at North Carolina State University and a Democrat who is one of the plaintiffs.

Sniffle, poor little snowflakes, actually having to go and register when they turn 18. Such a burden! And obtaining a legally recognized ID card? Goodness, it would be so burdensome to have to pay *GASP* $10 for an ID, and, oh, yeah, have a document that proves they are a North Carolina resident. I’m pretty certain that most students have at least a state ID card or driver’s license, which are necessary to get into bars, even if one is not old enough to drink.

Mr. Berduo, who is from Asheville, N.C., has a state identification card. But many students do not, he said, and no matter how much attention the law gets, some students will be unaware of the changes and will arrive at polling places carrying out-of-state licenses or student identification cards.

Well, if they have an out of state ID, then are they North Carolina residents and eligible to vote in North Carolina elections? Should they not be voting in their own states? I was a New Jersey resident for most of my undergraduate time at ECU. I voted in NJ. Not NC. If students who are North Carolina residents want to vote, there is a simple solution: obtain a valid ID card. It’s super easy. But the point of all the suits is to make it easier for Democrats to cheat, in this case to make it easier for out of state students to vote in North Carolina and their home states.

And, in a big shocker, the students can go to the DMV and obtain a free, yes, free, Voter ID Card. All you have to do is prove a few things, including that you are a NC resident. Democrats want more and more and more rules, regulations, and laws that impact our lives on a daily basis, yet freak out over voter ID (in Red states, of course, not where required in Blue states).

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Whiny College Students Claim Discrimination Over NC Voter ID Law »

Posted in Liberal World, NC News | Comments Off on Whiny College Students Claim Discrimination Over NC Voter ID Law | Trackback URL

Losing The Senate Would Be Good For Obama Or Something

By William Teach July 5, 2014 – 3:57 pm

Um, yeah, sure, uh-huh. Looks like Dana Milbank has written off Democrats keeping the Senate and has moved to spin

For Obama, loss of the Senate could be freeing

(lots of whining about Obama not getting credit for our super awesome economy (sic))

No wonder this bear wants to break loose. And maybe he will — if Republicans take control of the Senate.

Crazy talk, you say? Maybe so. The prevailing view is that a Republican Senate would only compound Obama’s woes by bottling up confirmations, doubling the number of investigations and chipping away at Obamacare and other legislative achievements.

Milbank goes into his “reasons” why losing the Senate would be good for Obama, including

There would be no more excuses for Republicans’ failure to put forward their own health-care plan, immigration proposals, specific cuts to popular government programs, and pet causes involving abortion, birth control and gay rights. This would set up real clashes with Obama — who could employ the veto pen he hasn’t used a single time since Republicans gained control of the House in 2010 — and sharp contrasts that would put him on the winning side of public opinion.

How would clashing with Republicans be any different? He’s played the blame and demonization game from day 1.

Read: Losing The Senate Would Be Good For Obama Or Something »

Posted in Barry Obama, Liberal World | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 5, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled boat causing lake levels to fall, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on super-transparency.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Pause Hits 17 Years, 10 Months

By William Teach July 5, 2014 – 12:24 pm

I know, I know, Warmists will deny the actual data, because their computer models and overwrought rhetoric are more important

Via Climate Depot, here’s Christopher Monckton

Taking the least-squares linear-regression trend on Remote Sensing Systems’ satellite-based monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature dataset, there has been no global warming – none at all – for 17 years 10 months. This is the longest continuous period without any warming in the global instrumental temperature record since the satellites first watched in 1979. It has endured for more than half the entire satellite temperature record. Yet the lengthening Pause coincides with a continuing, rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration. (big snip)

The Pause is a growing embarrassment to those who had told us with “substantial confidence” that the science was settled and the debate over. Nature had other ideas. Though numerous more or less implausible excuses for the Pause are appearing in nervous reviewed journals, the possibility that the Pause is occurring because the computer models are simply wrong about the sensitivity of temperature to manmade greenhouse gases can no longer be dismissed.

Obviously, Warmists will deny this. They just cannot accept scientific data when it conflicts with their cultish beliefs.

My typical disclaimer: this does not disprove warming. The Earth is currently in a typical Holocene warm period. Well, actually, a low level warm period. What this does show is that the Warmists are mostly wrong in regards to the cause of the Modern Warm Period.

Read: Pause Hits 17 Years, 10 Months »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama Looking For Way To Get Women Free Abortifacients

By William Teach July 5, 2014 – 8:49 am

This is something that has them Highly Concerned

(NY Times) The Obama administration, reeling from back-to-back blows from the Supreme Court this week, is weighing options that would provide contraceptive coverage to thousands of women who are about to lose it or never had it because of their employers’ religious objections.

The administration must move fast. Legal and health care experts expect a rush to court involving scores of employers seeking to take advantage of the two decisions, one involving Hobby Lobby Stores, which affects for-profit businesses, and the other on Wheaton College that concerns religiously affiliated nonprofit groups. About 100 cases are pending.

One proposal the White House is studying would put companies’ insurers or health plan administrators on the spot for contraceptive coverage, with details of reimbursement to be worked out later.

Another would give the administration itself a larger role in offering cost-free coverage to women who cannot get it through their employers, although the option for a new government entitlement appears unrealistic for financial and political reasons.

The White House is under such pressure that no one has been able to work out details of how the alternatives would be financed or administered.

Details schmetails, Obama has free abortifacients to provide to his base, religious beliefs be damned! The lawsuits so far have all been about covering abortifacients, not standard contraception, a point that the Times finally gets around to within their discussion of the Supreme Court’s female justices having a tizzy over the Wheaton decision.

The Obama administration says the cost of providing contraceptives will be offset by savings that result from greater use of birth control, “fewer unplanned pregnancies” and improvement in women’s health. But, Mr. Condeluci said, “It may be years before the savings are realized.”

It’s a cute talking point, but it doesn’t address the fundamental protection laid out in the 1st Amendment about government restricting the free practice of religion. Again, this debate boils down to Constitutionalists vs moochers.

Read: Obama Looking For Way To Get Women Free Abortifacients »

Posted in 1st Amendment, Barry Obama | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Is America Really That Polarized?

By William Teach July 5, 2014 – 8:27 am

Yes, and no, as The Washington Post’s Dan Balz points out

Forget what you’ve heard about an America divided into warring camps, living in red and blue states or congressional districts. We actually agree on lots of things.

That, at least, is the conclusion of a study conducted by the Program for Public Consultation (PPC), whose goal is to give the public a louder voice in the policymaking process. (The study is also available on the Web site of Voice of the People.)

The group analyzed answers to more than 300 survey questions taken over the past few years and dealing with public-policy choices, and it compared responses from people who live in red congressional districts or states with those who live in blue districts or states.

The analysis found overwhelming convergence in attitudes, regardless of the makeup of the state or district where people live. People in red districts or states and those in blue districts or states truly disagreed with each other just 4 percent of the time.

Of course, one of the problems with the results could be who is asked within the red/blue states. The Party/ideological position breakdown is not provided. The results could also go to the questions asked. Regardless, the conclusion to the gridlock in Congress is

(Stephen) Kull (director of PPC) doesn’t dispute the fact that Congress is polarized along partisan lines. But he said it’s wrong to blame that on a polarized population. Members of Congress, he said, are responding not to their constituents but to the power (and money) of special interests that have their own, partisan agendas.

A couple points. First, gridlock is what the Constitution intended. It was set up to be a slow, ponderous process for passing laws at a national level. The States were supposed to be the primary government entities. Second, if the study is to be believed, we may agree on ends, but we do not necessarily agree on means. Take investing in renewable energy. There is a red/blue split of 59.1/63.5 believing that it is important. But, how do we get there? I’m all for it. What I am not for is pissing away taxpayer money in order to repay campaign contributors, along with dumping money into companies that will go nowhere. I’ve also mentioned I think research and development for individual buildings, rather than the these giants solar/wind farms would be better. Warmists claim they love renewables, yet, when construction occurs, they want it stopped. They say they love hydro-thermal. Yet, they want existing dams torn down.

There is a point, though, about special interests and money, and power, in Government. Not just Congress, but the presidency, as well.  A strong, centralized government doesn’t always listen to We The People. They may pretend to, but over time they focus more on the big monied interests. Hence the reason for term limits and repealing the 17th Amendment. Shift power from the federal government and back to the States, where it belongs.

But wait. There is another view, offered by Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University who has written extensively on the topic of polarization.

Abramowitz prefers to look at the issue through the differences between Republicans and Democrats in red states, blue states and purple states, not just by comparing the districts. He also argues that the differences on a number of basic issues that are at the heart of the national political debate underscore the degree to which the country is divided.

At the end of the day, why is this a Bad Thing? People have different opinions. Americans on the right want to debate and help those on the left understand why they are wrong. Those on the Left want to shut down debate, tell those on the right to shut up, and even pass laws restricting certain thoughts. They would prefer a more homogenized version of political thought, where everyone believes the same thing. In some cases, are forced to believe the same thing.

There is a fundamental difference between those who believe in low taxation, a weak central government, adhering to the Constitution, and freedom/liberty, as opposed to those who believe in mooching, a domineering central government, high taxes (for Other People), thought crimes, and living by the fruits of other people’s labor.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Is America Really That Polarized? »

Posted in Politics | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Fighting Hotcoldwetdry Is What Independence Day Is About!

By William Teach July 4, 2014 – 4:50 pm

This is the kind of stuff that I missed out on without cable services at home (idiot neighbor ran into junction box, cutting cable. Nice of them to tell me, eh? Kudos to the Time Warner Cable guy, who went above and beyond, not just fixing that, but, replacing other things and tuning up my service). Here’s Robert Redford

Addressing Climate Change Should Inspire Patriotism, Not Gridlock

Heading into the July 4th celebration of America’s independence got me thinking about when it comes to huge challenges we’ve faced as a nation, we have a rich and storied history of aspirational spirit and belief in what we, together, can accomplish.

Are we losing this quintessentially American drive for excellence? Have we stopped believing in ourselves? Sometimes it feels that way when one tries to parse the political rhetoric barreling at us day in and day out.

So, if you don’t rise to the occasion of solving “climate change”, you’re now unpatriotic.

This, and the rest of Redford’s missive, could easily inspire a giant, mega post. But, hey, why bother? These people are loons. And hypocrites. This is straight from the Progressive playbook. Funny how they never seem to realize that insulting people with opposing views will always cause them to not only not take action, but dig their heels in and go the opposite way.

Meanwhile, Noah Rothman covers a Duke professor who is calling for “real conflict” over inequity and “climate change”. Wouldn’t that require guns, which the Left hates?

Read: Fighting Hotcoldwetdry Is What Independence Day Is About! »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove