Democrat Governor Candidate In Maryland Slurs Veteran Opponent

By William Teach April 22, 2014 – 9:43 am

It’s not the first time a Democrat has insulted military members and veterans, and it certainly won’t be the last. Democrats, not all of them, mind you, but a goodly chunk show a disdain for the military. What is interesting is that a) this is Blue on Blue, and b) how the attack is phrased

(WBAL-TV) A veterans group is demanding an apology from Attorney General Doug Gansler, a Democratic candidate for governor.

The group says Gansler made a disparaging remark about Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown’s service in Iraq.

Gansler said he doesn’t consider what Col. Anthony Brown did in Iraq a “real job.” Gansler made the remarks during a candidates forum Monday in Bethesda before the Tech Council of Maryland, the state’s largest technology and life science trade association.

In reference to Brown, without directly mentioning his name, Gansler said, “You know, I’m running against somebody who has never managed anybody, never run anything. You know his ads are about how he was a lawyer in Iraq, and that’s all fine and good but this is a real job.”

Except for the part about being a military veteran, that could have been describing Obama. Obama “never managed anybody, never run anything.” The same could be said of Joe Biden, should he choose to run in 2016. Brown, being a Colonel, was certainly in charge of people, he certainly ran things.

In response, Jon Soltz, an Iraq war veteran and chairman of Vote Vets Political Action Committee, said, “Doug Gansler needs to stop smearing those of us who served in Iraq as not having had a ‘real job.’ It’s a horrible insult to all those men and women who put their lives on the line, and especially those who died, in service to this country. Additionally, Mr. Gansler, if he chooses to attack an Iraq War Veteran, ought to at least admit that the person he is attacking has been serving as Maryland’s Lieutenant Governor. This kind of slime ball politics is what turns people off to our democratic process, so Mr. Gansler is doing no favors for Maryland or our democratic electoral system by playing in the gutter like this.”

A case can certainly be made for incompetence considering the lowly state of the Maryland Obamacare exchange. Yet, how involved was Brown as Md Lieutenant Gov? Regardless, the Lt. Gov. of Maryland does have many, many official duties as described in the Maryland Constitution, along with those delegated by the Governor.

Regardless, this is exactly the type of “slime ball politics” we expect from Democrats, even Blue on Blue. This is what they do.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Democrat Governor Candidate In Maryland Slurs Veteran Opponent »

Posted in Democrats | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Happy Earth Day! It’s A Shame Warmists Won’t Sacrifice For Their Beliefs

By William Teach April 22, 2014 – 8:56 am

Regardless of the roots of Earth Day, where some proclaim it was a far, far left “holiday” designed to promote communism, the ideals of a healthy environment, clean air, clean water, clean land, saving nature, are worthy goals. Unfortunately, like most real environmental issues, the “climate change” wankers have hijacked the day. But, that’s not what is being lamented in this USA Today article

Tuesday, as we observe another Earth Day, there is broad public support for cleaner air and water, and as a nation we have taken dramatic steps to improve the environment.

The coming challenge is what to do about climate change, which a nearly unanimous collection of scientists says is real and potentially calamitous if we don’t act now to reduce greenhouse gases.

“Climate change” has nothing to do with the environment: there has always been changes within the environment, and the Earth has survived. Things change. Here’s the big point

Yet, the American public – in fact, the global public – seems unmoved by the threats, and some deniers still cling to positions that echo the DAR’s attack on the environmental movement back in 1970.

Indeed, a Gallup Poll in March found that only about a third of the American public worry “a great deal” about climate change and global warming.

That finding reinforces two attitudes that have not changed over the past four decades:

First of all, we aren’t motivated to do anything about environmental problems until they are staring us in the face. Only when our foul air caused breathing problems, and water became too polluted to drink or wade into, did we spend the money for federal, state and local governments to tackle the problems.

Second, the vast majority of us won’t sacrifice our high-consumption lifestyles, put jobs at risk or pay a high price to protect the environment. Give up our big SUVs? Pay higher gas taxes? Spend more time in the dark?

Even “green” consumers who ride bikes are part of the problem if they are always connected to the Internet. Various studies estimate it increases our electricity consumption by 10% to 20% (and it’s dirty coal that generates most electricity). Then there are the pollutants emitted by the giant data storage centers.

Obviously, the solution is for Warmists to practice what they preach, to give up their fossil fuels, make their lives “carbon neutral”, right? Er, no

If we are to save ourselves and our planet from ourselves, the answer now – as back in 1970 – is the same: science and technology. Better purification systems have cleaned our water and air. Car exhaust emissions are down because of catalytic converters and engineering changes that make vehicles more fuel efficient. Light bulbs are more energy-efficient.

Is anyone surprised in the least that Owen Ullman, who was there right at the beginning of Earth Day back in 1970, refuses to recommend that Warmists practice what they preach? What I recommend is that Warmists stop linking real environmental issues to this idiotic political issue of “climate change”. Unless they are will to walk the talk.

I did get a chuckle out of Mr. Ullman lamenting the use of the Internet, considering that the vast majority of people who read the article will do so on the Internet, rather than the dead tree edition.

PS: For any who might think I’m full of it regarding the graphic, no. I do all I can to be environmentally friendly. I’m not perfect, but I do work hard to keep the air, water, and land clean.

Read: Happy Earth Day! It’s A Shame Warmists Won’t Sacrifice For Their Beliefs »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Environment | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

MHP: Democrats Should Tell Those Who Lost Their Plans To “Deal With It”

By William Teach April 22, 2014 – 8:25 am

I think this is an excellent campaign slogan for Democrats (video available at the DC and Hot Air)

(Daily Caller) Republicans, she argued, “go into a fallen-down, blighted house, slap some granite countertops while ignoring real problems, and declare their work the best thing ever! They have swagger.”

“And then you have the people who will do the more substantial, structural changes,” she continued, referring to Democrats. “They’ll redo the wiring or reinforce the foundation. But they won’t do anything to actively or aggressively court buyers or advertise their work. Try as they might, they can’t make the house look good.”

Harris-Perry’s solution? Get in voters’ faces about your policies — even those viewed as failures, like Obamacare.

“They’re not even owning it,” she lamented. “No confidence, no swagger, no ‘Yeah, you can’t keep your crappy plans. Just deal with that!’”

“President Obama certainly has that swagger,”she added, noting that other Democrats would do well to follow Obama’s lead.

I’d wonder if MHP was still celebrating 4/20, but, then, this is the way she, along with most Democrats on MSNBC, act.

In fact, Democrats, in particular Obama, tried the “you can’t keep your crappy plans” schtick last year, yammering on about “substandard plans”, blaming the insurers, and, then, unilaterally changing the law so that people could keep those “crappy” plans. It all went over like a lead balloon filled with helium.

Meanwhile, Washington state is passing regulations to deal with crappy plans. Alas, these are not the pre-Obamacare crappy plans, but the Obamacare crappy plans

Washington state plans to approve a new rule this week to limit insurers’ ability to create narrow networks as a means of cutting costs, thanks to backlash over the limited health plans available in the wake of Obamacare regulations.

In response to the outcry over narrow networks, Washington Insurance Commissioner Mike Kriedler wants to limit insurers’ ability to narrow their networks, potentially making rising premiums one of the only means of recourse that insurers have left.

“Both qualified health plans and health plans offered outside of the exchange must have networks that at a minimum ensure access to covered services without unreasonable delay and address the specific needs of the populations served,” reads a proposed rule from the office of the insurance commissioner.

Those outside the Exchanges tend to have decent networks. People get what they pay for. Within the Exchanges the networks are narrowed due to cost burdens thanks to Obamacare. As it is, few insurers participate within the Exchanges. This could cause more to abandon the Exchanges as their costs escalate due to Government rules.

More: The Lonely Conservative notes

She started out kind of strong, comparing elections to house flipping. She said Republicans would take a blighted house and put in some granite counter tops, crown molding and new floors to make it look pretty. Democrats, on the other hand, would leave it looking ugly but do structural repairs and plumbing. I would argue that Democrats would overpay union contractors to replace all of the old plumbing with new copper, then leave the doors wide open for copper thieves. But I digress.

And after leaving the doors open, Dems would blame Republicans.

Read: MHP: Democrats Should Tell Those Who Lost Their Plans To “Deal With It” »

Posted in Beyond Moonbat, Healthcare | Comments Off on MHP: Democrats Should Tell Those Who Lost Their Plans To “Deal With It” | Trackback URL

Excuse #11: Surface Heat Doesn’t Matter

By William Teach April 21, 2014 – 5:06 pm

photo clip_image004_zps40929c76.png

Warmists are finally acknowledging what Skeptics have known: there has been no statistically significant warming in over 17 years, closing in on 18 years. They’ve trotted out lots of excuses: this one is a conglomeration of several, with a twist that makes it #11 (doing this from my Droid, so I can’t ‘shop it at the moment) (via Climate Depot)

(UK Guardian) Has global warming come to a halt? For the last decade or so the average global surface temperature has stabilising at around 0.5°C above the long-term average. Can we all relax and assume global warming isn’t going to be so bad after all?
 
Unfortunately not. Instead we appear to be measuring the wrong thing. Doug McNeall and Matthew Palmer, both from the Met Office Hadley Centre in Exeter, have analysed climate simulations (WT: and we all know how well the simulations have worked so far) and shown that both ocean heat content and net radiation (at the top of the atmosphere) continue to rise, while surface temperature goes in fits and starts. “In my view net radiation is the most fundamental measure of global warming since it directly represents the accumulation of excess solar energy in the Earth system,” says Palmer, whose findings are published in the journal Environmental Research Letters.
 
So why aren’t surface temperatures keeping pace with ocean heat content and net radiation? The answer, according to a recent study in the journal Nature Climate Change, may be some unusually strong trade winds in the Pacific Ocean, which have buried the surface heat deep underwater, reducing the amount of heat flowing back into the atmosphere. Once the trade winds relax again that heat will likely be released and surface temperatures will bounce up again. In the meantime we’d be wise to keep a closer eye on ocean heat content (using the Argo array of ocean profiling floats) and net radiation (using satellites). Like it or not Earth’s future is looking hot.

So, don’t look at the surface temps where life lives, where Warmists have been telling us it’s getting super duper hot, look at it where it’s magically disappearing. But will one day return with a vengeance in The Future. I can’t imagine why Warmists get upset when we say “climate change” is a cult.

Read: Excuse #11: Surface Heat Doesn’t Matter »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 26 Comments | Trackback URL

Japan Today Hits Obama For Leaving Michelle Home

By William Teach April 21, 2014 – 3:24 pm

Here’s Obama’s “smart power” in action

(Japan Today) When President Barack Obama travels abroad, sometimes it’s not enough for just the leader of the free world to show up. People in other countries want the first lady, too.

But Michelle Obama won’t join her husband when he heads to Asia next week, and her absence is likely to sting, especially in image-conscious Japan. It’s the first of four countries on Obama’s travel schedule and one of two that are welcoming him with official state visits.

“If Mrs Obama could have come, it would have been better. But the most important thing is that President Obama accepted this is a state visit,” said Matake Kamiya, a professor of international relations at the National Defense University in Yokosuka, near Tokyo. “From an expert point of view, it’s sort of worrisome why Mrs Obama isn’t coming.”

The fact that Mrs Obama recently spent a week in China with her mother, Marian Robinson, and daughters Malia and Sasha is sure to be noted in Japan, a close U.S. ally and China rival. But the first lady’s communications director, Maria Cristina Gonzalez Noguera, said it was not expected that Mrs Obama would join the president on a return trip to Asia so soon.

Her taking a big taxpayer funded vacation, er, cultural exchange trip to China then blowing off Japan will surely not sit well as Obama attempt to make some inroads in a region he has laregly ignored during his time in office. I think most can understand the need for her to stay home with the kids, but when people get into politics, and especially run for POTUS, they understand that there are certain duties, and one of them is that spouces should be on big trips like this.

Read: Japan Today Hits Obama For Leaving Michelle Home »

Posted in Barry Obama | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 21, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…are wonderful trees helping to suck evil carbon pollution from the atmosphere, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Lady Liberty 1885, with a post on cursing for Clay Aiken.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Warmists Fiona Stanley Says Skepticism Is Like “Child Abuse”

By William Teach April 21, 2014 – 10:58 am

Via Jo Nova, who notes

It’s another pious scientist. Sigh.

Why do good researchers sometimes throw their professional standards to the wind (or in this case, just blow them right up?)

Fiona Stanley has done great work in the prevention of spina bifida with folic acid, and with indigenous health problems. The new big state funded hospital in WA is named after her, and she’s another Australian of the Year. (Is that award the worst thing that can befall a good scientist? Post hoc, they seem to think the world wants to know their personal feelings on topics they know nothing about.) Cue Professor Fiona Stanley who assumes all fields of science “work” even though she herself says climate science is politicized.

Unfortunately, the good doctor Stanley has gone to Bat Guano Crazy World, which most Warmists visit, and often move to

(The West Australian) Speaking before a special address to doctors and medical students yesterday, the Telethon Kids Institute patron said climate change was the biggest global health issue of this century and she worried that sceptics were taking over the debate.

Because science requires conformity.

“I’m not a climate change expert but I do trust the incredible scientific evidence, although no science is ever perfect,” she said.

Evidence based on flawed models, hyperbole, prognostication, scary stories, and artificially changed data. Science!

“To expect science to be able to predict something as complex as what is going to happen on this planet, given human activity and other things, is extraordinarily challenging and I think it is pathetic of people to criticise the imprecise nature of the science.”

Yet, the Warmist sciencetists are predicting doom and gloom, assuming that it is all so easy, because of Mankind’s CO2 output.

“It’s like child abuse and neglect, we don’t actually know if it’s on the rise but all the risk factors for it are on the rise,” she said. “The way we are living on this planet is unsustainable, and that’s why I’m worried for my children, and my grandchildren and their children.

Good grief. This is plainly silly, but the real point is to say “shut up, skeptics”, much like Leftist cries of racism, sexism, etc. Which dovetails into what else she said

“My frustration is that when these issues become politicised, we need science more than anything, and yet scientists are being denigrated.”

The issue became politicized when Leftists started using the “science” to push their far left political agenda. Interesting that she has no problem denigrating people who do not agree with the science and the scientists, most of whom do not even have degrees in climate science, or even meteorology, to use a Warmist talking point. And, it is meant to tell skeptics to shut up.

Professor Stanley said people could do their bit by eating less meat, driving cars less and using public transport more.

I wonder if she is doing this herself? Jo Nova discusses this all in terms of being a religion, and that bit is like saying Rosaries.

Read: Warmists Fiona Stanley Says Skepticism Is Like “Child Abuse” »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

California Proposes Ban On Judges Linked To Boy Scouts

By William Teach April 21, 2014 – 7:42 am

You know, because tolerance. But, in Liberal World tolerance is a one way street, and you will be made to care. And comply. Free association and free thought are Not Allowed

(Daily Caller) California is proposing to ban members of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) from serving as judges because the Boy Scouts do not allow gay troop leaders, The Daily Caller has learned.

In a move with major legal implications, The California Supreme Court Advisory Committee on The Code of Judicial Ethics has proposed to classify the Boy Scouts as practicing “invidious discrimination” against gays, which would end the group’s exemption to anti-discriminatory ethics rules and would prohibit judges from being affiliated with the group.

The committee is, in fact, a government entity, and is essentially determining that the Boy Scouts are a “hate group” for refusing to allow inclusion of gay men, as that lifestyle goes against what the BSA stands for. Furthermore, there is always the concern, fair or not, about gay pedophiles spending lots of time with young boys, especially on camping trips.

“This proposed amendment has as its overtly-stated purpose the branding of the BSA as an organization whose members must be assumed to be biased and thus unfit for the bench. The Committee states that ‘eliminating the exemption… would enhance public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary,’” Catherine Short of the pro-life group Life Legal Defense Foundation said.

“On the contrary, by promoting a hierarchy of politically-favored ‘victim’ status through pointlessly impugning the integrity of members of a venerable American institution, the proposed Amendment will communicate to the public that judges are being told by the California Supreme Court what to think, whom they may associate with, and what are permissible opinions to hold, and that only those who toe the line will be allowed to sit on the bench. The public can hardly expect impartiality from the judiciary in such a climate of intolerance,” Short wrote.

Progressives do not care about free thought, freedom of association, Belief, or anything else if it offends them, if it goes against Progressive ideology. Anything offensive is banned.

Read: California Proposes Ban On Judges Linked To Boy Scouts »

Posted in Liberal World | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

David Brooks: Obama Has A Manhood Problem In The Middle East

By William Teach April 21, 2014 – 7:00 am

I predict David Brooks will be forced to give some sort of grovelling apology by the end of the day, possibly before noon, especially when liberals start race-baiting him. The NY Times columnist appeared on Meet The Press, answering a question on the Ukraine situation

(Mediaite) “Basically, since Yalta, we’ve had an assumption that borders are basically going to be borders,” Brooks said about whether the U.S.’s actions on the Russia/Ukraine crisis could impact other territorial disputes. “And once that comes into question, if in Ukraine or Crimea or anywhere else, then all over the world—”

“All bets are off,” Chuck Todd said.

“And let’s face it, Obama, whether deservedly or not, does have a — I’ll say it crudely, but a manhood problem in the Middle East,” Brooks said. “Is he tough enough to stand up to somebody like Assad or Putin? A lot of the rap is unfair, but certainly in the Middle East, there’s an assumption he’s not tough.”

“Internally they fear this,” Todd said. “It’s not just Bob Corker saying it, questioning whether the president is being alpha male — that’s essentially what he’s saying, he’s not alpha dog enough, his rhetoric isn’t tough enough. They agree with the policy decisions, but it’s the rhetoric. Internally, this is a question.”

Far be it for me to defend Brooks, the NY Times’ toke conservative, who is anything but conservative, but he meant manhood rhetorically, in the sense that Obama is entirely too squishy when it comes to things happening in the Middle East. Sure, he loves ordering drone strikes, but one must be tough when it comes to diplomacy, not set red lines than run away. That he needs to lead.

And, really, this applies to most of Obama’s dealings. He projects no strength. Hence one of the reasons he has decreased the standing of the U.S. around the world.

George Soros funded Think Progress hasn’t hit the “raaaaacism” button yet, but they go with

What Brooks and Todd are essentially saying is that Obama isn’t more willing to use or talk about the military option as a foreign policy tool, as much as, perhaps, his predecessor was. The Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol — who championed the war in Iraq and has been calling for one in Iran — is also a proponent of this kind of “manhood” in foreign policy construct. “Real action” in Iran, he said earlier this year, is not using diplomacy to solve the nuclear crisis, it’s a military attack.

What is Obama willing to talk about? Russia is walking all over Obama. Syria’s Basher Assad is walking all over Obama. Obama did threaten “consequences” if the red lines were crossed. He’s threatened consequences regarding Crimea and Ukraine. No one is listening, because no one takes Obama seriously.

It’s a perception of strength. Obama does not have it. He never earned it as POTUS.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: David Brooks: Obama Has A Manhood Problem In The Middle East »

Posted in Barry Obama | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Are You Ready For The USS Gabrielle Giffords?

By William Teach April 20, 2014 – 4:46 pm

No, really

(NY Daily News) Construction of the Navy warship named in honor of former congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords began Wednesday in Mobile, Ala., with the shooting survivor and activist on hand for the ceremonial laying of its keel.

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus announced in 2012 that one of the branch’s futuristic, triple-hulled littoral combat ships would be named for Giffords.

The decision – which drew some flak for honoring a civilian politician — would make her the only living female namesake of a U.S. Navy ship.

During the ceremony Ms. Giffords welded her initials into the keep, with a little help.

Look, I respect the hell out of Ms. Giffords for how far she’s come, how hard she’s fought, in recovery. That said, this is absurd that a combat ship, even one considered small, should be named after a politician who has effectively done nothing get shot. Yes, yes, that sounds nasty. Imagine if a they were attempting to name a ship after Ted Cruz, liberals would be going nuts. She served just 3 terms in Congress. Naming a $460+ million dollar for a living civilian politician when there are lots and lots living and dead military heroes is Bad Idea.

As Politico noted, Naval vessels traditionally bear the names of states or cities or noted Americans, such as former presidents John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and Theodore Roosevelt. Others have been named for notable leaders like former senator and astronaut John Glenn or naval titans like former Adm. Hyman Rickover. Yet we’re naming a combat ship after a politician. Bad precedent.

When even ultra-squishy Doug Mataconis, a “conservative” who seems to spend lots of time bashing Conservatives, isn’t sure naming the ship after Giffords is appropriate, it probably isn’t.

Read: Are You Ready For The USS Gabrielle Giffords? »

Posted in Democrats | 25 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove