If All You See…

…is a horrible waste of non-renewable water to clean an evil fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on a crazy lib-talker threatening to call in fake gun reports.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in the Once And Future Nation of America. Not sure who did this very old school pinup.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. The Other McCain notes that the IRS had a contract with an email backup company
  2. The Hockey Schtick notes that wind power increases costs and CO2 emissions.
  3. The Blogmocracy wonders if we can just start the prosecutions already
  4. 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny notes 24 things supposedly ruined by “climate change”
  5. A View From The Beach discusses windmills and the VA
  6. Amy Ridenour’s National Center Blog wonders who Washington fears the most
  7. Capitalism Is Freedom discusses the privatization of porn
  8. Cold Fury features liberty vs. equality
  9. DaTechGuy explains the stages of Shut Up
  10. Fausta notes who Obama is blaming for increased illegal immigration
  11. Fire Andrea Mitchell compares Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton book sales
  12. Flopping Aces digs deep into the Washington Redskins name issue
  13. The Grumpy Patriot notes the most immoral president
  14. Jihad Watch has more from the Religion Of Peace, advocating for attacks on the US
  15. And last, but not least, Lady Liberty 1885 wonders if Kay Hagan has lost any emails

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 »

“Who respects a church that only echoes the secular world?”

Good question

(The Blaze) The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s official embrace of same-sex marriage at its General Assembly meeting in Detroit, Michigan, Thursday has sparked a wide array of responses. From utter shock and dismay to jubilant rejoicing, observers are divided on the denomination’s decision to bless gay unions.

Consider the response from Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, a conservative Think Tank. Tooley believes the matrimonial amendment, while being touted by some as a progressive step in the right direction, will eventually lead to the denomination’s demise.

“By overturning natural marriage the PCUSA is only accelerating its already fast-paced demise. It will become even smaller, whiter and older,” he said, according to Charisma News. ”Only declining denominations reject historic Christian standards and in nearly every case that rejection reinforces the decline.”

Tooley added, “Who respects a church that only echoes the secular world?”

I’ve long held the position that it should be up to the churches, not The Government, as to whether or not to allow gay marriage. Marriage is a religious institution, not a function of government. I also have no problem with civil unions, since that is a function of government, and, really, this is America, the land of the free, and Classical Liberalism (the backbone of American Conservatism) deems that if it isn’t harming me, if it’s not directly harming me in any way negatively, why should I care? Yet, just because I think it should be left up to the churches, doesn’t mean I do not think it is wrong to go against Biblical teachings.

It does have to be balanced against the compassion and tolerance of religion, though.

Not all were against this, many were for it. The question is, how many Presbyterians will leave the denomination, both individually and the churches themselves? It’s not official yet, as the 172 regional presbyteries have to approve it next year. So far, though, 428 churches have left the denomination or folded over central theological differences since 2011, many due to to gay marriage and the decision in 2011 to ordain openly gay clergy in same-sex relationships.

Meanwhile

(NY Times) After passionate debate over how best to help break the deadlock between Israel and the Palestinians, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted on Friday at its general convention to divest from three companies that it says supply Israel with equipment used in the occupation of Palestinian territory.

The vote, by a count of 310 to 303, was watched closely in Washington and Jerusalem and by Palestinians as a sign of momentum for a movement to pressure Israel to stop building settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and to end the occupation, with a campaign known as B.D.S., for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions.

The vote was much closer than the gay marriage one, in which 76% of the general assembly voted for gay marriage. We need to put this in context of Progressivism. I’ve been discussing exactly what Progressives do, having mentioned how Progressives are infiltrating and working to change religious (and other) institutions from within. Along with working to restrict religion from without. They move the individual churches and overall denominations towards a more secular world, slowly changing/removing what it means to be a Christian or Jew. Which, by the way, would also mean lower membership within the denominations that become secularized.

With that secularization comes the ability to do things like attack Israel with a divestment campaign. Interestingly, these divestment campaigns never seem to attack the Palestinians, people who send suicide bombers and armed rockets into Israel to attack civilian populations.

Bobby Jindal noted during his address at the annual conference hosted by the Faith and Freedom Coalition

Jindal emphasized that there was a “silent war” on religious liberty being fought in the U.S. — a country that he said was built on that liberty.

“I am tired of the left. They say they’re for tolerance, they say they respect diversity. The reality is this: They respect everybody unless you happen to disagree with them,” he said. “The left is trying to silence us and I’m tired of it, I won’t take it anymore.”

Again, much of that attempt to silence is by infiltrating and working from within. The end game is to marginalize organized religion so that it has almost no impact on anything, as well as removing it from the public domain, creating subservience and adherence to The State. That is the Progressive goal. A nation of pagans. Things like the aforementioned votes are not happening in a vacuum. They are part of the plan/goal. Now, not everything is part of the overall plan/goal: sometimes they just get lucky, along with chalking some results up to simple incompetence and/or idiocy. However, put this in context with what has happened in so many other sectors, and it makes sense.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: “Who respects a church that only echoes the secular world?” »

Climate Change Is A Moral Issue For People Of Faith Or Something

I explained yesterday, to some degree, how Progressives are working to take over all sorts of different sectors (and have taken over lots), one of which is the religious sector. Climate change is simply a politically expedient method to enforce Progressive doctrines. Over the past year or so, we’ve been seeing more and more in regards to linking Faith, ie, religion, with “climate change”. Katherine Hayhoe has big a big pusher of this, and others are following along. Like this, by Sarah King, the chair of the Arizona Ecumenical Council’s Earth Care Commission.

Climate change is a moral issue crucial to people of faith

I have served on the Arizona Ecumenical Council Earth Care Commission as both a committee member and as chairperson for about 15 years. Recently, I was asked to comment on the Environmental Protection Agency’s new carbon rule to curb the growing threat of greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change.

I know this is a controversial topic with some people as the standards could mean that coal-fired generating plants would have to make some expensive technological adaptations and retire some units and expedite transition to clean energy sources such as solar and wind in order to reduce carbon pollution. Ultimately, we must bear these costs, however. I believe that if I am going to be true to the mandate I have as a practicing Christian, I have no choice but to come down on the side of these new protections.

Let me explain. Christians (full disclosure — I am of the United Methodist persuasion) have a gospel duty to be good citizens. This is reflected in the 2004 United Methodist Church Book of Resolutions under the heading, “Environmental Justice for a Sustainable Future,” which states: “The scale of human activities has grown so large that it now threatens the planet itself. Global environmental problems have become so vast they are hard to comprehend. The vast majority of scientific evidence suggests that carbon dioxide from fossil fuels has already caused a measurable warming of the globe. Confronted with the massive crisis of the deterioration of God’s creation and faced with the question of the ultimate survival of life, we ask God’s forgiveness for our participation in this destruction.”

We are not the only Christian (or Jewish, or Muslim or Unitarian Universalist, for that matter) religion that understands that WE ARE THE SOURCE OF THE PROBLEM and are calling for action on climate change. This is a concern of many faith communities, and rightly so — because climate change is a moral issue. And when it comes to moral questions, the church is morally bound to weigh in.

She goes on to write that it is “the duty of the church to speak out boldly and forcefully” on climate change because it is “greatest challenge to human survival of our time. I would think it is the job of the churches to preach about the Bible and Jesus. Silly me.

For over 15 years, the Earth Care Commission’s unofficial motto has been: “If we don’t care, who will?” It is time to show that we care.

Which is funny, because the earth has been in a statistically insignificant warming pause for longer than the group has had the unofficial motto.

As time goes on, remember the warning about how Progressives are taking over institutions, in this case religion, for their nefarious fascist purposes. Yet, few Progressives (yup, writing it again) will back their talking points up with action in their own lives.

Read: Climate Change Is A Moral Issue For People Of Faith Or Something »

If All You See…

…is an evil fossil fueled grill, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on an immigration smoking gun.

Read: If All You See… »

Climate Change Is About People, Not Gov’t Or Something

Obviously, that means that people really have to make big changes in their own lives to stop Hotcoldwetdry. Er, no

Climate change is not about the Gov’t, it’s about people – Gordon

A CALL is being made for the community to be more involved in the fight to promote the importance of climate change and the environment.

Speaking with The Gleaner, during a tour of the Wallingford community in St Mary on Monday, president of the Jeffery Town Farmers’ Association, Wordsworth Gordon, said a concerted effort must be made to get persons at the grass-roots level involved in the decision-making process.

Gordon makes no recommendation that The People do anything other than the tired old trope of “spreading awareness”. I’ve wrote it before and I’ll write it again: why should anyone believe what Warmists are pushing when they aren’t willing to make changes in their own lives to become “carbon neutral”? Elsewhere, Lorraine Chow offers the top 5 ways to fight global warming. Kudos for using the phrase “global warming”. Of course, she fails to note that there hasn’t been any statistically significant warming in 17 years and 9 months, and something else is missing. These are the top 5 ways, ranked from least effective to most, per some study

  • Stimulate the growth of algae in the ocean.
  • Create more shade with solar reflectors in outer space or artificially increase the earth’s cloud cover
  • Confine carbon by converting CO2 into liquid form and pumping it underground.
  • Sequester carbon by leaving it up to Mother Nature’s all-natural CO2 suckers: Plants.
  • Cut emissions.

She ends with

Now if we could only get everyone — regardless of political affiliation — on board

Notice that Warmists are never willing to Do Something themselves unless everyone is forced to abide by their religious tenants.

Read: Climate Change Is About People, Not Gov’t Or Something »

Jon Stewart Knows The Best Way To Turn Skeptics Into Climate Change Alarmists

Does it involve providing actual scientific evidence rather than hysterical talking points and failed computer models? Of course not

(The Wire) On Wednesday, four former Republican Environmental Protection Agency administrators testified before Congress in an attempt to convince current Congressional Republicans on the threat of climate change. On last night’s episode of The Daily Show, Jon Stewart explained why that won’t work.

“People are always complaining that the Republican party ignores so-called climate change science, but there’s a reason why they refuse to listen to alarmists,” Stewart said. “Republicans aren’t going to fall for liberal lies anymore, which is why [Wednesday] they finally got to hear the facts from some of their own.”

We’ll come back to those 4 former Republican EPA heads in a bit.

But not even that convinced skeptical Republicans. According to Stewart, there’s only one way left to convince the GOP in Congress of the dangers of climate change: “Republican lawmakers won’t listen to Al Gore, they won’t listen to Neil deGrasse Tyson, they won’t listen to Bill Nye the Science Guy, now they won’t even listen to members of their own party. There is really only one solution to get Republicans to do something about climate change.

“Barack Obama must become a global warming denier.”

Of course, it’s so simple!!!!!! Alas, Jon, that would not work, because this isn’t about who believes it, but about the reality that the vast majority of “climate change” is natural, not man-made. So it wouldn’t change any Skeptic minds. Do you hear conservatives complaining about Obama drone striking and sending special ops teams to whack Islamic jihadis overseas? Nope. We agree with the policies. Not that Obama would switch, because “climate change is not about any environmental concerns, but about pushing Big Government policies. But, really, this is the way the “news” media works today, ala Stewart

Back to the four Republicans who had held the post of EPA head, how’d that go?

Ah, the old 97 per cent consensus. To illustrate the point, the Democrats had invited as their witnesses four former heads of the Environmental Protection Agency, who all happen to be Republicans and yet who all support the “consensus”. They were the Honorable Christine Todd Whitman, the Honorable William K Reilly, the Honorable William D Ruckelshaus, and the Honorable Lee M Thomas – a couple of years in the hyper-regulatory bureaucracy apparently sufficing to earn one a prenominal honorific for life.

Still, in the end they turned out to be pretty Honorable. Click the video below, and note the moment 1 minute and 20 seconds in, when Senator Jeff Sessions says:

The President on November 14th 2012 said, ‘The temperature around the globe is increasing faster than was predicted, even ten years ago.’ And then on May 29th last year he also said – quote – ‘We also know that the climate is warming faster than anybody anticipated five or ten years ago.’ Close quote.

So I would ask each of our former Administrators if any of you agree that that’s an accurate statement on the climate. So if you do, raise your hand.

Guess how many raised their hands? Do you want to watch the video at the link, or would you like the answer? If we apply Common Core math, we take a ten and regroup it as ten ones, we increase the variables, we double plus one, color the number 1 as blue, and finally come to the conclusion that no math is necessary because none raised their hands.

Read: Jon Stewart Knows The Best Way To Turn Skeptics Into Climate Change Alarmists »

Obama Pivots To Economy. Sort Of. More Like Campaigning

There are lots of important things, well, really, Important Things, going on in the country and world right now. The VA scandal. Illegals streaming across the border like we’ve never seen. Iraq in meltdown. Benghazi. The IRS scandal. Heck, Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi being held in a Mexican jail (an issue which Obama failed to discuss with Mexican President Peña Nieto during their phone call). The overall generally crummy condition of the economy. Here’s what PBO goes for (video here)

Weekly Address: Bringing our Workplace Policies into the 21st Century

Hi, everybody. As President, my top priority is rebuilding an economy where everybody who works hard has the chance to get ahead.

That’s what I’ll spend some time talking about on Monday, at the White House Summit on Working Families. We’re bringing together business leaders and workers to talk about the challenges that working parents face every day, and how we can address them together.

What he means is he’ll be lecturing the very people who might have some ideas about the economy, you know, people who have actually run a business, worked a real job, rather than been a “community organizer” and a president who has failed to meet with his jobs council (which has shut down). This is a campaign appearance for him.

Take paid family leave. Many jobs don’t offer adequate leave to care for a new baby or an ailing parent, so workers can’t afford to be there when their family needs them the most. That’s wrong. And it puts us way behind the times….

Oh, OK, it’s “behind the time”, so it must be wrong. A very deep, rational, economic excuse.

Childcare is another challenge. Most working families I know can’t afford thousands a year for childcare…

Well, fortunately, in Obama’s economy one or both of the parents are unemployed, so they have time to take care of the kid(s).

Then there’s the issue of flexibility – the ability to take a few hours off for a parent-teacher conference or to work from home when your kid is sick. Most workers want it, but not enough of them have it…

So, what’s he going to do about this? Will he attempt to force companies to provide flexibility, child care, paid family leave, things that most offer in one form or fashion? Or, is this simply a way to gin up some partisan issues?

Family leave. Childcare. Flexibility. These aren’t frills – they’re basic needs. They shouldn’t be bonuses – they should be the bottom line.

The good news is, some businesses are embracing family-friendly policies, because they know it’s key to attracting and retaining talented employees.

Yeah, they were embracing these policies decades ago. Of course, in the Obama economy companies can offer what they want, because so many are out of work, and none of what Obama will lecture about will help one person obtain a job.

We know from our history that our economy grows best from the middle-out; that our country does better when everybody participates; when everyone’s talents are put to use; when we all have a fair shot. That’s the America I believe in. That’s the America I’ll keep fighting for every day. Thanks, and have a great weekend. Fore!

If “we all know that”, then why has the economy been in stagnation since the official end of the recession in July 2009? A recent NBC/WSJ poll found that 57% still think we’re in a recession. Wages are stagnant. And Obama is sorta pivoting to issues which won’t help in the jobs market one iota.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama Pivots To Economy. Sort Of. More Like Campaigning »

When Is Too Much Too Much?

In a follow up to a follow up, Bob Belvedere at The Camp Of The Saints writes (see my original posts here to here)

Beck reminds me of those who would gather in a church or meeting house while their village was being attacked and who would produce only wails and lamentations while the marauders set fire to the clapboards.

Begin the fight for what is Right and the Light Of God will follow.

I’ve probably mentioned few times over the almost 10 years (come July) that I’ve been blogging that so much of what the left does is death by a 1,000 papercuts. Every day there seems to be something else. Sometimes it’s simply a distraction, sometimes it’s a big issue. Consider the kid from the post regarding the school blocking access to certain websites, like the NRA, the Vatican, and the state GOP. In the past, when Lefties got caught, the would say “sorry, our bad, that was a mistake, someone went to far, we’ll fix it.” And fix it they did. Immediately. They might try it again, later. Nowadays, it’s different

When they get caught now we hear about putting together a study, investigating the issue, or some nonsense, that can take years. We see stonewalling. We’re told it’s a fake issue. That it’s a distraction from the issues that Americans care about. The issue goes on for so long that it loses power. It becomes irrelevant, or simply the norm. Look at the IRS issue. Benghazi. Fast and Furious.

Progressives rarely go for the Big Kill. They are quite content dinking and dunking. Something else I’ve mentioned before is how much they control. The majority of the education system. The Lawyers guild. AMA. AARP. Labor unions. Entertainment. Sports figures follow the progressive lead, because they can monetarily afford to pretend. The government bureaucracies. And so many more. Let’s not forget about the majority of the news media, which allows them to shape public opinion.

Right now they’re going after the military and religious organizations. The major focus seems to be on LGBT “rights” and/or gay marriage. I’m sure there are plenty of gays who will serve with distinction, valor, and patriotism in the military. It’s not about politics for those folks. How many, though, are joining to make a point, and push the service towards their point of view? How many Leftists are doing the same, joining an organization they have historically despised for 40+ years in order to make it something else? How many are getting themselves deep within the religious organizations in order to push them away from their original purpose, and towards a Progressive paradise, away from morality and meaning? Away from the Bible and God? Progressives have been doing all they can to remove religion from public and government places. Well, certain religions. They seem fine with Islam. Perhaps they silently realize that Islamist will blow shit up if Progressives try their schtick with them.

We’re already seeing clergy pushing Leftist notions and joining together with gay marriage advocates. We have private business owners being dragged into Thought Crimes court for refusing to bake wedding cakes for gay marriages. You have the Redskins having their trademark being yanked because it is apparently “hate speech”, racist, bigoted, mean. What of other nasty things that are trademarked? Why are they being ignored. Pick a target. Isolate it. Destroy it.

There are so many assaults on our freedom, on common sense, on religion, on more and more it really is hard to fight back verbally, in the courts, without violence. And that’s what they want. Create conditions where it doesn’t seem reasonable to use force. And, really, do we want to use force? No. That is certainly the last resort. Of course, it would be rather easy, since liberals say guns are bad, and they surely gave up their own, right? Right? I wonder what the Colonists private thoughts were on violent revolution?

At one point we could count on the military and law enforcement being on the side of The People and the Constitution. Can you truly say that today? Do you have a little bit of doubt in your mind about the ability to believe that they would stand with the People? That will grow as Progressives take over the military and police. There are enough squishy Republicans out there that opposition becomes difficult. They will join Democrats in demonizing Conservatives, Tea Party members, Libertarians, patriots, as extremists, as people going to far. They’ll yammer on about reaching out to solve our differences, about tolerance. And the tide of progressivism rolls on.

You look at many of the other tyrannical movements of the 20th century. The fascism of the Nazi Party burned bright, rising fast, then blowing out. The Soviet Union started fast, but took 70 years to go down. The Chinese, though, have been good at looking at the long term, changing tactics, attempting to do things slowly and without violence. Much like the Muslim Brotherhood, which uses the existing systems to push their Islamism, changing the systems from within.

We see brazen violations of the law and constitution by elected officials and government employees and entities. Yet, rarely is anything done. We see our freedoms and morality being cut just a little bit every day. When does it become too much?

Oh, you think we can count on the judiciary? Good luck with that. There are more than enough judges, even Republican ones, who are more interested in advancing progressive ideology than following the Constitution and the Law.

Again, I’ll refer you to Thy Kingdom Fall by Austin Dragon, which lays this death by a 1000 cuts, whereby the religious fight back when it is too late. Now over to a post at protein wisdom, via Bob

Just because you don’t sport epaulettes and a mustache and speak from balconies doesn’t mean you can’t be every bit the fascist as the more cartoonish versions we’ve all become so accustomed to. And those who are willing to burn books would, I have no doubt under the right concentration of circumstances, find a way to rationalize burning the people who wrote them.

It can happen here. And in fact, it is. My advice? Open your eyes.

How many times have I and others highlighted this happening within the Warmist movement? The shutting down of debate, the bannings, the book burnings, the calls for censorship, news outlets refusing to publish comments and/or articles critical of anthropogenic global warming/climate change, getting Skeptics fired? This is just a microcosm of the way Progressives act, and they do it out in most other disciplines that they get their hands on

On a related noted, when it comes to Glenn Beck, I do not hate him. I do not dislike him. I’m not picking on him. Those are a few of the phrases I’ve received in email, castigating me for “attacking” Beck. What we have here is a substantive policy divergence. I might have the same divergence with Hannity and Rush, and other Conservative talkers. I rarely get to listen to other nationally syndicated talkers other than Beck, due to my work schedule. Todd Schnitt tends to be the syndicated host I listen to 2nd most, since he is on at 9pm here in Raleigh, so I’ll catch an hour to hour and a half a week.

We are allowed to have differences of opinion. There are surely issues that I agree more with John and Jeffrey than Conservatives. I don’t always agree with Gumball, Guitar, and others. Conservatives do not walk in lockstep. I work the 12-9 shift 2-3 times a week. I’ll listen to Beck  for an hour at the gym, while taking a shower, and on the way to work (except when he gets weepy, starts a too deep monologue, and a few other annoyances). Days off I will catch him if I go to gym in morning, otherwise Rush or Hannity for an hour. Sometimes I’ll flip over to iHeart radio for some metal. If I hated Beck, would I listen to him?

Regardless, Beck wants to take the use of force off the table. He railed against that same notion when it came to Iran. Why would we want to remove the notion of the use of force when it comes to saving our country? When is too much too much?

Read: When Is Too Much Too Much? »

If All You See…

…is the flag of the world’s most evil carbon polluting nations, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Black & Right, with a post on finding WMD in Iraq that supposedly didn’t exist.

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove