If All You See…

By William Teach July 15, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrid carbon pollution wind, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Sweetness and Light, with a post doing the math on Honduran kids deported.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Shocker: Warmists Tend To Be Big Energy Hogs

By William Teach July 15, 2014 – 11:00 am

And by “shocker”, I mean this is completely a non-shocking notion. Warmists are hypocrites, generally refusing to give up, or even cut back on, their own use of fossil fuels, nor take more than token measures to reduce their “carbon footprint”

(UK Telegraph)  People who claim to worry about climate change use more electricity than those who do not, a Government study has found.

Those who say they are concerned about the prospect of climate change consume more energy than those who say it is “too far into the future to worry about,” the study commissioned by the Department for Energy and Climate Change found.

That is in part due to age, as people over 65 are more frugal with electricity but much less concerned about global warming.

However, even when pensioners are discounted, there is only a “weak trend” to show that people who profess to care about climate change do much to cut their energy use.

The findings were based on the Household Electricity Survey, which closely monitored the electricity use and views of 250 families over a year. The report, by experts from Loughborough University and Cambridge Architectural Research, was commissioned and published by DECC.

And what does all this mean? That Warmists should practice what they preach? Nope

“This means that policy makers cannot rely on stated behaviours alone in assessing the extent to which households turn off unused appliances,” the report noted.

The findings will strengthen the case of those who argue that more coercive methods are needed if people’s energy consumption is to be reduced.

But of course! More Government control of people’s lives.

I’d suspect that a study here in America would find the same thing, if not worse energy use amongst our Warmists.

Read: Shocker: Warmists Tend To Be Big Energy Hogs »

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

Obama’s Made The World More Tranquil Or Something

By William Teach July 15, 2014 – 8:43 am

So far, White House spokesweasel Josh Earnest has been better than his predecessor, Jay Carney, at least when it comes to demeanor. Less sneering. Otherwise, they are cut from the same cloth. Evasive, willing to throw invective, and willing to make really silly statements

(CNS News) White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday the Obama administration’s foreign policies in a number of areas have enhanced the world’s “tranquility” – a word that raised eyebrows as reporters pointed to situations in Gaza, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Ukraine and the South China Sea.

More than one reporter during Monday’s press briefing referred to a front-page Wall Street Journal article highlighting some of those crises, and citing security strategists as saying “the breadth of global instability now unfolding hasn’t been seen since the late 1970s.”

“How does the White House react to the notion that the president is a bystander to all these crises?” asked Fox News’ Ed Henry, citing the widening gaps between the sides in the Iranian nuclear talks, the conflict in and around Gaza, and the Syrian civil war.

“I think that there have been a number of situations in which you’ve seen this administration intervene in a meaningful way, that has substantially furthered American interests and substantially improved the, uh, you know, the – the tranquility of the global community,” Earnest replied.

This is so bad that even Dana Milbank isn’t buying it. The article is entitled “A foreign policy strikeout” on the web front page. Inside, the headline is Another swing and a miss for Obama’s foreign policy

President Obama has described his foreign-policy doctrine as an attempt to hit singles, doubles and the occasional home run. But at this stage of the game, it looks as though he has popped out, grounded into a double play and been hit by a pitch.

Actually, it more often looks like Obama has been riding the bench with a groin pull in Single A, then does those other things when he gets a crack every once in a while.

His attorney general, Eric Holder, said Sunday that the threat of undetectable explosives from Syria is “more frightening than anything” he has experienced in office. And the Wall Street Journal ran a front-page article Monday reporting that “the breadth of global instability now unfolding hasn’t been seen since the late 1970s” and that “U.S. global power seems increasingly tenuous.”

The Journal’s catalogue of woes — civil wars in Iraq and Syria, hostilities between Israel and the Palestinians, an electoral crisis in Afghanistan, tension with Russia over Ukraine, floundering nuclear negotiations with Iran and renewed Chinese expansionism — didn’t include the current crisis on the United States’ Southern border.

Could things get any worse? Well, maybe if the president’s chief spokesman claimed that Obama was bringing “tranquility” to the globe — which is what White House press secretary Josh Earnest did at his daily briefing Monday afternoon.

After noting the same info as the CNS article, Milbank writes

Tranquility? Where, in Iceland?

Well, other than a few choice expletives, all those countries golf courses Obama visits are pretty tranquil.

Read: Obama’s Made The World More Tranquil Or Something »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Barry Obama | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Simon: Sure, Parents Should Send Their Kids Alone To The USA

By William Teach July 15, 2014 – 8:06 am

And, it’s giving Obama gray hairs or something. Here’s Politico’s far left opinion guy, Roger Simon

More Gray Hairs For Obama

No matter how much you love your children, if you were a parent in Honduras, you might be tempted to ship them to the United States.

According to the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, Honduras has the highest homicide rate in the world. In 2012, Honduras had 90.4 homicides per 100,000 people. The United States had 4.8, Canada had 1.6 and Mexico had 21.5.

Honduras is also very poor. Unemployment is high, and there is less development than even in Haiti. There are also gangs that recruit, enslave and murder children.

So if you were a Honduran parent and smugglers offered you a chance to get your child to the United States, you might take it, assuming you could gather the money to pay.

There’s another interesting article trending at Memeorandum along with Simon’s:

Mom Jailed Because She Let Her 9-Year-Old Daughter Play in the Park Unsupervised

Here are the facts: Debra Harrell works at McDonald’s in North Augusta, South Carolina. For most of the summer, her daughter had stayed there with her, playing on a laptop that Harrell had scrounged up the money to purchase. (McDonald’s has free WiFi.) Sadly, the Harrell home was robbed and the laptop stolen, so the girl asked her mother if she could be dropped off at the park to play instead.

Harrell said yes. She gave her daughter a cell phone. The girl went to the park—a place so popular that at any given time there are about 40 kids frolicking—two days in a row. There were swings, a “splash pad,” and shade. On her third day at the park, an adult asked the girl where her mother was. At work, the daughter replied.

The shocked adult called the cops. Authorities declared the girl “abandoned” and proceeded to arrest the mother.

In Honduras, it’s fine to send your kids off with coyotes, drug runners, and cartel members to head on the over 2,000 mile trip. In America, if you leave your kids alone, The State will come and arrest you and give your kid to Social Services. Heck of a contrast, wouldn’t you say?

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Simon: Sure, Parents Should Send Their Kids Alone To The USA »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Liberal World | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Look To Waste Money To Save Seniors And Poor From Slight Increase In Temperature

By William Teach July 14, 2014 – 8:19 pm

Because they care or something. Just not enough to give up their own fossil fueled lifestyles

(NJ.com) Climate change in New Jersey isn’t just a threat to the owner of a beach house down the Shore. In many ways, it’s even more pressing for people who live nowhere near the coast.

These are the elderly, the poor and the disabled. They’re among the most vulnerable to the damaging effects of global warming, according to a recent series of reports by the New Jersey Climate Change Alliance.

The rest of the opinion piece is lots of whining about people being threatened by Hotcoldwetdry, and, surprise, attacks on Chris Christie. There are no solutions offered, just that we should spend oodles of taxpayer cash studying the issue. This is Warmist World.

Read: Warmists Look To Waste Money To Save Seniors And Poor From Slight Increase In Temperature »

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

Speaker Boehner, Governors Should “Borrow” Obama’s Immigration Power

By William Teach July 14, 2014 – 2:53 pm

Mr. Obama, and his minions, have said time and time again that if Congress, meaning Republicans in the House and Senate, refuse to give him what he wants that he’ll “borrow” the power. In many cases he’s done just that (unconstitutionally). And refuses to return it. Speaker John Boehner and State governors, particularly those with border states, should reciprocate.

President Lincoln once wrote to General McClellan, in regards to the General seemingly not wanting to engage the Confederacy troops

My Dear McClellan:

If you are not using the army, I should like to borrow it for a short while.

Yours respectfully,

Abraham Lincoln

Something similar should be sent to Obama, as the GOP House passes legislation strengthening the border, providing authorization and funding for all manners of troops and law enforcement.

Furthermore, Governors like Rick Perry and Jan Brewer should send the similar letters to Obama, and deploy their state National Guards to the border. They can call out the NG for other reasons, such as for storm aftermaths, why not to protect the border, stopping illegals and, rather than capturing and (possibly) deporting after months and years of hearings, simply refusing to allow them to cross the border.

Governors in states which are receiving the illegals should tell Obama they are appropriating… temporarily, of course… the power to take all the illegals and stick them on planes outbound to the illegal’s home countries. No Notices To Appear. No long immigration court hearings. Take each one, give them 5 minutes, send them on their way (unless they were part of being trafficked for the sex slave trade).

The House should immediately pass simple legislation criminalizing illegals, authorizing 5 minute hearings and immediate deportation when an illegal is caught. Unlike Mexico, we should not jail them, but get them the hell out of our nation.

The House should pass legislation, not a resolution, mind you, that requires that DHS finish the border fence. Governors should deploy assets to finish the fences in their home states, since Obama doesn’t seem willing to do so. Hey, the fence around the White House seems to work. Obama thought fences would work during the Shutdown.

If Obama refuses to use his power, to properly perform his duties under law and the Constitution, those powers and duties should be borrowed. We’ll get back to you later on returning them. Hoist. Petard.

Read: Speaker Boehner, Governors Should “Borrow” Obama’s Immigration Power »

Posted in Barry Obama, Illegal Immigration | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 14, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is wind made worse by the release of carbon pollution from Other People’s motor vehicles, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on Obama officials living in an alternate reality.

Someone challenged me to do a week long series on wind.

Read: If All You See… »

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

What’s The Real Climate Change Consensus?

By William Teach July 14, 2014 – 11:00 am

Christopher Monckton writes

During my valedictorian keynote at the conference, I appointed the lovely Diane Bast as my independent adjudicatrix. She read out six successive questions to the audience, one by one. I invited anyone who would answer “No” to that question to raise a hand. According to the adjudicatrix, not a single hand was raised in response to any of the questions.

These were the six questions.

1. Does climate change?

2. Has the atmospheric concentration of CO2 increased since the late 1950s?

3. Is Man likely to have contributed to the measured increase in CO2 concentration since the late 1950s?

4. Other things being equal, is it likely that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will cause some global warming?

5. Is it likely that there has been some global warming since the late 1950s?

6. Is it likely that Man’s emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases have contributed to the measured global warming since 1950?

At a conference of 600 “climate change deniers”, then, not one delegate denied that climate changes. Likewise, not one denied that we have contributed to global warming since 1950.

You can count me in that 100%. I’d answer “yes” on every question. At that point, though, the science needs to come in to play. As I wrote the other week

5. The argument is about what has caused the Modern Warm Period warming.
6. And, finally, the Earth has warmed around 1.4F, but what has caused this to occur? This is the crux of the debate.

It’s not about warming. It’s not about whether greenhouse gases have contributed. It’s about how much. Warmists say mostly/solely. Most Skeptics, or, as we’re now known, Climate Optimists, say that the contributions from CO2 and other greenhouse gases are minimal. Some Climate Optimists say the contributions have been bigger, but are no danger. Regardless, if Warmists thought the danger was so great they’d change their own behavior, starting with giving up their own fossil fueled travel, instead of agitating and demanding that Other People pay the price for the Warmist’s beliefs.

Read: What’s The Real Climate Change Consensus? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Not Providing Abortifacients Is Un-Christian Or Something

By William Teach July 14, 2014 – 8:55 am

If a Conservative blogger wants to find a crazy story for a Monday morning, there are a few great places to go. The Democratic Underground. The Daily Kos. And, better, yet, the NY Times, the self proclaimed “Paper Of Record”. Here’s Kathryn Pogin on the opinion pages

Discrimination is Un-Christian, Too

Much to the chagrin of women’s rights advocates, Hobby Lobby has won its legal battle — but claims of “victory” for religious freedom must be emended. Make no mistake: This is no victory for the freedom to exercise Christian principles. Though employers like Hobby Lobby are now free to deny women access to contraceptives through their employer-subsidized health plans on the basis of religious objection, they will be violating their own purported Christian principles if they do. While Christians are not compelled by their faith to engage in religious practices that impose upon the freedoms of others, they are compelled — by their belief that all persons, men and women, are created in the image of God — to oppose discrimination.

Whoa! Those are some serious mental gyrations to come to the conclusion that not offering abortifacients is discrimination. And, like most Liberals, she has completely misinterpreted both Hobby Lobby’s stance and the Supreme Court verdict. This is not about contraception, but abortifacients. Fortunately, Kathryn goes on to tell us that, yes, this is about abortifacients

Some corporations that have objected to the contraceptive requirements of the Affordable Care Act, like Hobby Lobby, claim that they do not wish to discriminate against women by denying them access to contraceptives generally, and that their opposition is merely to abortion. However, their understanding of which medications act as abortifacients rests on an outdated understanding of medical science and is at odds with the facts of the matter. Use of these contraceptive methods is not tantamount to abortion, and moreover, providing women with access to safe, reliable contraceptives for free drastically reduces the actual abortion rate.

First, Hobby Lobby and others haven’t said one word about “discrimination”. Second, what exactly is the Plan B pill other than an abortifacient? Third, she starts mixing contraceptives and abortifacients up again at the end.

The more pressing question religious corporations should ask themselves is whether denying women comprehensive health care while providing it to men, and so failing to respect women’s inherent dignity and equality, is consistent with their religious values. Since the Supreme Court focused on the practical effects at stake (that is, whether women would be able to obtain coverage elsewhere, and thus by a less restrictive means) rather than on the expressive function of the law, Hobby Lobby is now free to discriminate in its provision of health care. But the question remains, why would it want to?

Huh? Where are corporations offering services to men that they do not offer to women? In fact, women typically have much higher use benefits than men, though men pay for the same services. Men typically have no need for gynecological or maternity care. Nor mammograms. Nor others. Yet, we pay it within our premiums. Much of the opinion piece is regarding the typical Liberal trope that Someone Else should be responsible for paying for contraception/abortifacients. This is the result of several weeks of navel gazing in order to come up with a rationale to assault the SCOTUS decision, Hobby Lobby, and other organizations with religious leanings.

Read: Not Providing Abortifacients Is Un-Christian Or Something »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Team Obama Tries To Rally Governors Support For Housing Illegals

By William Teach July 14, 2014 – 8:31 am

Not Obama, of course. He had more important things to do, like rest up after playing another round of golf and watching the World Cup, just chilling on a sunny Sunday. Instead of acting as POTUS, leading, engaging, he sent the head of the HHS

(Fox News) State governors from both parties have reacted cooly to efforts by the Obama administration to gain their support for placing thousands of unaccompanied Central American children with friends or family members.

Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Matthews Burwell met privately with dozens of governors Sunday at the National Governors Association summer meeting in Nashville. According to those who attended the meeting, the governors expressed particular concerns about the costs to states, including that of providing public education for the children. Burwell left the meeting through a side door without talking to reporters.

“Our citizens already feel burdened by all kinds of challenges. They don’t want to see another burden come into their state,” said Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat. “However we deal with the humanitarian aspects of this, we’ve got to do it in the most cost-effective way possible.”

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad were among the most vocal Republican critics. They seized on the administration’s plans to place the children with friends or family members without checking on their immigration status.

I guess this is better than what they had been doing, namely, secretly flying these illegals across the country to the Bay State with no notification to the state. It plainly shows Obama’s disengagement on the issue that he couldn’t be bothered to appear himself. But, I supposed without a pool table and some good barbecue he felt there was no chance for a photo-op. I doubt he’s realizes that he’d be about as welcome as a turd at a pool party.

Neither Burwell’s agency nor immigration officials check the immigration status of relatives who take custody of the immigrant children.

Of course, there is a pesky law which requires that the children be temporarily placed with relatives or friends with legal status.

Both Diane Feinstein and Rep. Mike Rogers are quoted in the article noting that there are measures that Obama can take without Congressional approval nor changes to the 2008 re-authorization of a human trafficking law.

At the end of the day, Obama is doing what he does best: duck the hard issues. Spread the blame. Get other people to take responsibility. And then complain, whine, and Blamestorm so he can campaign.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Team Obama Tries To Rally Governors Support For Housing Illegals »

Posted in Barry Obama, Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on Team Obama Tries To Rally Governors Support For Housing Illegals | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove