Team Obama “Surprised” By Bergdahl Reaction

By William Teach June 5, 2014 – 8:12 am

One does have to wonder what was going through the heads of Obama and the people working for him regarding the prisoner swap that released 5 hardcore Islamists, high ranking members of the Taliban, in exchange for a soldier who deserted, and possibly gave aid and comfort to the enemy. Defense and CIA were overruled, and told to suck it up, in favor of politics. There were numerous investigations into what Bergdahl did. The people who served with him were less than enthused over the big deal made of his release. His release was met with crickets when announced to troops involved. Obama violated the law, a law he signed. Yet, somehow, they’re surprised

(The Hill) The White House has been caught off guard by the negative reaction to the deal that freed Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the last American prisoner of war in Afghanistan.

It has been particularly surprised by criticism of Bergdahl, who is accused of walking away from his unit shortly before being abducted by the Taliban.

The surprise helps explain why the administration has struggled to respond to the criticism, which appears to have caught officials flat-footed.

Political observers say the White House miscalculations were highlighted by the decision to have President Obama appear alongside Bergdahl’s parents in a Saturday night address at the Rose Garden address.

“They put too positive a spin on what is a very ambiguous set of circumstances,” Southern Methodist University professor Cal Jillson said.

“A big part of the WH stew on this is typical photo op hubris,” said Boston University political strategist Tobe Berkovitz. “Instead of just bringing Bergdahl back, they had to do the full kissy-huggy announcement with mom and dad figuring this good news would push the VA mess off the front page.”

Team Obama always seems to be surprised by the negative reactions to what they do. Perhaps they’ll say Obama read about it in the newspaper? More than likely, they did what they normally do, live in the moment, thinking this would be some great victory for Obama, without considering the reality of Bergdahl being a deserter, and possibly a traitor.

The administration believed any criticism of the deal would be overshadowed by a positive story: the freeing of a U.S. soldier after five years of captivity in Afghanistan, just as the war there is drawing to an end.

It expected some criticism over the release of the Guantanamo prisons, and it also expected lawmakers would be angered they weren’t informed of the deal in advance. But it didn’t see the criticism of Berghdahl himself coming.

In other words, they live in a fantasy bubble world, making decisions in the moment, failing to realize that the military, and the American People, are not fond of deserters, and possibly traitors. And now Team Obama is in spin mode, trying to defend the decision, and going on the attack. They surely figured that this would be happy time, and overshadow the VA scandal, leading into Obama’s super-awesome “carbon” scheme, allowing weeks of campaign messaging. Instead, now Team Obama has stepped into a big steaming pile, and his “carbon” scheme has virtually disappeared. And the VA scandal is still around.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Team Obama “Surprised” By Bergdahl Reaction »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 10 Comments | Trackback URL

Isn’t It Cool How California Is Flooded By Inland Seas?

By William Teach June 4, 2014 – 3:52 pm

That was the Pentagon prognostication. A decade ago

(Washington Times) Ten years ago, the Pentagon paid for a climate study that put forth many scary scenarios.

Consultants told the military that, by now, California would be flooded by inland seas, The Hague would be unlivable, polar ice would be mostly gone in summer, and global temperatures would rise at an accelerated rate as high as 0.5 degrees a year.

None of that has happened.

Surprise…..er, well, not really, for those of us who do not like in Warmist World.

Via The Lonely Conservative, who notes “Climate alarmists have been predicting doom and gloom for decades now. Politicians use those predictions as excuses to spend billions of dollars and enact policies that harm the economy.”

Read: Isn’t It Cool How California Is Flooded By Inland Seas? »

Posted in Uncategorized | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 4, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a world being flooded by the collapse of every glacier because Someone Else drove a fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on liberalism being an ideology for the terminally stupid.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

White House Accuses Soldiers Complaining About Bergdahl Of “Swift Boating”

By William Teach June 4, 2014 – 10:33 am

Let’s be clear on one thing: this is Chuck Todd, appearing on The Today Show, reporting this, so take it with a grain of salt. But, having seen the way Team Obama has acted over the past 5+ years, would anyone be surprised if this was dead on? via The Weekly Standard’s Mark Hemingway

Every [White House] aide I’ve talked to said they expected there to be controversy involving the decision to release five members of the Taliban from Gitmo, and the fact that this would then escalate that debate, which has been simmering for a good five years, which is what to do with those detainees, how do you release them, where do you release them. They did not expect this backlash on Bergdahl himself. I’ve had a few aides describe it to me as we didn’t know that they were going to swift boat Bergdahl. And that’s a reference to that political fight back in 2004 over John Kerry’s military service, so there’s some fighting words there.

Here’s something to note: while those aids are attempting to portray this as something negative, as Kerry supporters did in 2004, the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth were 100% correct about John Kerry. Regardless, this would show a profound lack of care about our military.

Colonel Ralph Peters writes at National Review

The president, too, appears stunned. He has so little understanding of (or interest in) the values and traditions of our troops that he and his advisers really believed that those in uniform would erupt into public joy at the news of Bergdahl’s release — as D.C. frat kids did when Osama bin Laden’s death was trumpeted.

Both President Obama and Ms. Rice seem to think that the crime of desertion in wartime is kind of like skipping class. They have no idea of how great a sin desertion in the face of the enemy is to those in our military. The only worse sin is to side actively with the enemy and kill your brothers in arms. This is not sleeping in on Monday morning and ducking Gender Studies 101.

This shows further in the lack of caring by Obama regarding the VA scandal. Obama immediately met with Bergdahl’s father. What about the parents of those who have died thanks to the VA problems? Has he even visited a VA facility since the scandal broke?

 

Read: White House Accuses Soldiers Complaining About Bergdahl Of “Swift Boating” »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: Alameda County Passes Sales Tax Increase To Fund Illegal Alien Health Care

By William Teach June 4, 2014 – 9:02 am

I actually think this idea is sensational: it means more illegals will stream into Alameda County, California. I think most California counties should pass the same measures, so that illegals tend to go there, rather than to the states that are trying to stop the flow of illegals

(Reuters) Voters in California’s Alameda County passed a measure on Tuesday that is expected to raise $100 million a year for health clinics for illegal immigrants, who are excluded from state programs and the federal Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare.

On May 23 a measure to include illegal immigrants in the state’s Medi-Cal program for the poor to residents who are undocumented stalled in the state senate, and immigration reform proposals have also stalled in U.S. Congress for the past year.

The measure extends a 0.5 percent sales tax to fund the clinics to 2034 from 2019.

“Our elected officials, our constituents, and our health authority see healthcare as a basic human right, to be provided regardless of immigration status,” Alex Briscoe, Director of the Alameda County Health Care Services Agency, said.

The sales tax in Alameda County, which includes Berkley and part of Oakland, is already 9% overall (a few incorporated cities have even higher tax rates). 7.5% is the state tax, 1.5% is Alameda’s tax. So, these liberal fools just voted to increase their county imposed tax by 33% to pay for illegals, who clog up their health systems, forcing citizens to wait longer and see emergency rooms and clinics close. Also, clog up their judicial system and jails. Commit crimes. Take positions at schools that could have gone to US citizens. Turn neighborhoods into slums. But, hey, this is what these fools want. I wonder when they will complain about not being able to afford stuff because of the taxes they pass? Because more illegals will head to Alameda County.

Meanwhile

(Fox News) President Obama on Monday described a surge in unaccompanied immigrant children caught trying to cross the Mexican border as an “urgent humanitarian situation,” as the White House asked Congress for an extra $1.4 billion in federal money to cope. Obama said the U.S. will temporarily house the children at two military bases.

In its new estimates, the government said as many as 60,000 children, mostly from Central America, could be caught this year trying to cross the Mexican border illegally, costing the U.S. more than $2.28 billion to house, feed and transport the children to shelters or reunite them with relatives already living in the United States. The new estimate is about $1.4 billion more than the government asked for in Obama’s budget request sent to Congress earlier this year.

This is what happens when the government coddles illegals instead of attempting to stop them. And lax policies will incent more illegals to come.

Read: Good News: Alameda County Passes Sales Tax Increase To Fund Illegal Alien Health Care »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Liberal World | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Can You Guess What You’ll Need To Attend EPA “Climate Change” Hearings?

By William Teach June 4, 2014 – 8:26 am

The EPA apparently doesn’t want Black people to attend

(The Blaze) Democrats have argued for the past few years that voter ID laws are being used by Republicans to create obstacles to voting by minorities, the elderly and others.

But on Monday, the Obama administration said it would require anyone who wants to attend critical environmental hearings later this summer to show a photo ID. The rule raises the question of whether everyone will have a fair shot of attending these hearings, which have the potential to shape environmental policy for the next few decades.

The Environmental Protection Agency on Monday announced a proposed regulation aimed at curbing carbon emissions from power plants by 30 percent by 2030, and said it would hold four hearings on its controversial proposal in July.

The EPA said photo IDs would be needed to attend these hearings because they will be held in government buildings.

“Because these hearings are being held at U.S. government facilities, individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared to show valid picture identification to the security staff in order to gain access to the meeting room,” the regulation states. The rule doesn’t define what a valid ID is, but the term is generally understood to mean a passport, driver’s license, military or other form of government identification card.

Racism! Discrimination! An attempt to suppress our right to vote express our Free Speech rights!

The “government facilities” talking point is a cute one, and states under assault for passing ID requirements (remember, it’s only certain ones, typically those who tend to vote GOP or could be swing states that Dems rail against. They don’t bother with other states with voter ID laws) to vote should should simply have all votes at government facilities. Heck, in my area quite a few early voting places are government property. I usually end up going to a school in Knightdale to early vote. Let’s have all voting on government property.

Anyhow, racism! Discrimination!

I will say, I doubt any of the conspiracy talk about using this to deny Skeptics access is real. That would require competence on the part of the federal government. Besides, there are way too many of us to stop.

The EPA has other rules about how participants are supposed to behave during the hearings, including: ”No large signs will be allowed in the building, cameras may only be used outside of the building and demonstrations will not be allowed on federal property for security reasons.”

In other words, they do not want their words recorded by citizens, and, more importantly, they want to deny citizens their 1st Amendment Rights to protest peaceably and ask for redress of grievance.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Can You Guess What You’ll Need To Attend EPA “Climate Change” Hearings? »

Posted in Current Affairs, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Strange: A Liberal Really Hates Paying Taxes She Voted For

By William Teach June 3, 2014 – 6:20 pm

This goes perfectly with the notion of Someone Else

(MyStatesman) “I’m at the breaking point,” said Gretchen Gardner, an Austin artist who bought a 1930s bungalow in the Bouldin neighborhood just south of downtown in 1991 and has watched her property tax bill soar to $8,500 this year.

“It’s not because I don’t like paying taxes,” said Gardner, who attended both meetings. “I have voted for every park, every library, all the school improvements, for light rail, for anything that will make this city better. But now I can’t afford to live here anymore. I’ll protest my appraisal notice, but that’s not enough. Someone needs to step in and address the big picture.”

You have to love when liberal policies that liberals support beat liberals with the Carolina Reaper covered Cluebat Of Destiny. This reminds me of the lady who said she wholeheartedly supported Obamacare, she just didn’t think she would have to pay for it.

This comes via Mary Katherine Hamm, who writes

I’m really just bringing this to your attention for this quote alone. Voting and paying are different endeavors entirely. Often, when one has to pay for the things one has voted to fund, that decision becomes less flippant. This is a comment, less on the specifics of Texas’ or Austin’s tax system than the blaring disconnect between liberals in Austin who are voting for higher taxes and the actual paying of the taxes. Which, as it turns out, is painful, discouraging, and can be a detriment to the fabric of the city.

And they keep bringing their big government big tax policies from other areas they’ve ruined, as Grouchy Old Cripple notes.

BTW, this fits perfectly with the notion of Warmists not wanting to pay the price for their “climate change” prescriptions. But, then, most Warmists are Lefties, and have the same notions on taxes. They’re super-mega-awesome!!!! Until the same liberals have to pay for them.

Read: Strange: A Liberal Really Hates Paying Taxes She Voted For »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Liberal World | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach June 3, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil dog causing droughtflood, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on another great moment in zero tolerance

Read: If All You See… »

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

Oops: Washington Post Notices The Dearth Of Landfalling Major Hurricanes

By William Teach June 3, 2014 – 10:47 am

Also, that Sandy was not a hurricane at landfall (via Steven Goddard)

(Washington Post) The U.S. has been extraordinarily fortunate lately: we have not been witness to the fury of a major hurricane (category 3 or higher) landfall since October 2005 when Wilma hit southwest Florida as a Category 3 storm. (Other countries have not had such good fortune these past few years. )

Since the hyper-active 2005 season, the U.S. has had just six Category 1 and 2 hurricane landfalls: Humberto (TX), Ike (TX), Gustav (LA), Dolly (TX), Irene (NC), and Isaac (LA).  Sandy was not technically a hurricane at its NJ landfall, and if it were, it would have been a Category 1 storm.

They provide this handy dandy graphic

A couple points. First, technically, the WP is wrong. The US hasn’t quite hit the longest period on record, which stretched 3,316 days, from August 11, 1860 to September 8, 1869. Set your calendar for November 22nd, 2014, which will break the record. The WP writer, Brian McNoldy, started with 1900, rather than further back.

Second, Irene was not a hurricane during either US landfall. This was further noted by Warmist Kerry Emanual in the NY Times. Isaac was barely a hurricane at landfall, and it could be argued that the storm was below hurricane strength, which would mean that the last US landfalling hurricane was Ike in October 2008.

Brian does note something important:

…just a single landfall at a vulnerable location can be a major disaster.

Even during an inactive season, a single storm can leave its mark on history (think Andrew in 1992)

To add to that, even a tropical storm can do massive damage. Hurricane Sandy was a tropical storm when it rolled through the Raleigh area in 1996, and was very destructive. Sandy was extra-tropical at landfall, combining with a strong cold front. That said, the point of this exercise is to note that the Warmists hysteria after the big 2005 season, that the year was what the “new normal” would be, was a bunch of mule fritters. When activity dried up, Warmists claimed that there wouldn’t be as many storms, but they’d be more powerful. Along came Sandy, and they said that would be the new normal. Nope. And they’re also claiming that global warming/climate change (meaning man caused) reduces Atlantic hurricane activity by increasing wind shear, something they started heavily bringing up over the last few years.

In reality, it’s all/mostly part of the natural cycles.

Read: Oops: Washington Post Notices The Dearth Of Landfalling Major Hurricanes »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Telling High Schoolers No Short Shorts Is Body Shaming Or Something

By William Teach June 3, 2014 – 8:15 am

I’m sure almost every high school boy would agree that teenage high school girls should be allowed to wear extremely revealing clothing in school

(Global News) It all started when Grade 11 student Lindsey Stocker was singled out by Beaconsfield High School officials for the length of her shorts.

“I was in violation for showing my legs,” she said.

Last week, Stocker had decided to wear a pair of shorts, the length of which two vice-principals decided was unacceptable during a tour of the school.

This was determined during a “finger-length test,” where school officials apparently asked students to stand up with their arms at their sides. If the girls’ fingers hung past the length of their shorts, the shorts were considered too short for school.

“It was in front of my entire class,” Stocker said. “I felt attacked, it was humiliating.”

Now, if you look at the photo at the link, the shorts aren’t really that short. But, the rules are the rules. This is where it dives into idiocy

She said that she had been affected by the recent massacre in California, where 22-year-old Elliot Rodger opened fire on a group of students after publishing a manifesto, in which he laid out his plans to exact revenge for being rejected by women.

“He didn’t pull that out of nowhere… There are girls everyday, girls in my grade, that go through, not fun things.”

To link not being allowed to wear skimpy shorts to class to Rodgers is idiotic. She also trotted out the “rape culture” meme. All because the little snowflake was told to adhere to school policy.

https://twitter.com/RelatableQuote/statuses/470267238503956481

A couple points. First, it’s Canada. How hot can it be? Second, she knew the rules. Third, let’s face an uncomfortable truth: high school boys love seeing women wearing skimpy clothing. They are obsessed by sex. It doesn’t mean they’ll act on it, it doesn’t mean a girl who wears skimpy clothing is a “slut”, it’s not an invitation to rape. But, it damned sure is a distraction for boys (OK, really, any woman in skimpy/sexy/tight clothing is a distraction for men, age appropriate). Our eyes and brains are wired that way as part of evolution. Get over it.

Furthermore, another uncomfortable truth is that young women will wear this type of clothing to be noticed by boys! Shocking, eh? Again, it doesn’t mean they are looking for sexual contact (despite liberals pushing young women to be sexual creatures), nor to be raped. Does anyone actually think Lindsay didn’t want the boys to look at her legs?

Perhaps culture shouldn’t push young women to be hyper-sexual. There have always been dress codes. The purpose of being at school is to learn. This little special snowflake is “challenging the dress code”, because it is All About Her. Just like so many are being taught. Out of control narcissism.

I’m certainly dating myself, but we didn’t have these problems when I attended high school during the 1980’s. Nor even college.

One final observation: if it’s hot out, aren’t you supposed to wear loose fitting, lightweight, loose woven clothing? Yes. yes you are. In essence, Lindsay, and all the people “defending” her, are pissed off that she got caught breaking the rules, so are doing what they do best: changing the subject.

Read: Telling High Schoolers No Short Shorts Is Body Shaming Or Something »

Posted in Current Affairs | 7 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove