Poll: Most Non-Liberal Americans Against Unilateral Presidential Decrees

By William Teach February 14, 2014 – 3:00 pm

Unsurprisingly, Democrats/Liberals/Progressives really love how Obama simply makes the law as he sees fit

(Fox News) According to a just-released Fox News national poll, most voters don’t think the country’s system of government was designed for the president to act unilaterally, and a majority disapproves of Obama bypassing Congress. (poll results here)

The new poll finds that 74 percent think the president using executive orders to get around Congress is not how things are supposed to work in our country.  That includes 54 percent of Democrats.

Large majorities of independents (80 percent) and Republicans (93 percent) believe it goes against our system for the president to act independently to advance his policies.

The writing is kind of unclear. The question was “Barack Obama said he will take action to advance his policy goals with or without Congress, and that he’ll use executive orders to get around Congress. Do you think this is the way our government is supposed to work, or not?” It is a yes or no answer. 40% of Dems think this is the way government is supposed to work

Even when asked to set aside their views on how the government is supposed to work, by a wide 60-37 percent margin voters still disapprove of Obama going around Congress.

Almost all Republicans disapprove of Obama acting without lawmakers (90 percent), as do two-thirds of independents (66 percent).

Democrats approve by a 66-31 percent margin.

So, when we set aside that Constitution thingy, 66% of Dems approve. They should remember that they will not always control the Executive Branch.

BTW, other findings include 58% thinking the worst is still to come regarding the economy. 60% think Los Federales policies have increased income inequality. 65% of Independents disapprove of Obama’s job performance.

Read: Poll: Most Non-Liberal Americans Against Unilateral Presidential Decrees »

Posted in Barry Obama | Comments Off on Poll: Most Non-Liberal Americans Against Unilateral Presidential Decrees | Trackback URL

If All You See…

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

…is lots of warmth created snow, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Legal Insurrection, with a post on Occupy styled fashion.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sea Rise And Ocean Temperatures

By William Teach February 14, 2014 – 11:19 am

Two papers of note, both via The Hockey Schtick

New paper finds NE Atlantic Ocean was warmer during the Medieval Warm Period

A 1000-year sea surface temperature history of the NE Atlantic and Nordic Seas

Using ten proxy sea surface temperature (SST) records – six from the Norwegian Margin, three from the North Icelandic Shelf and one from the Scottish Margin – Cunningham et al. prepared a 1,000-year SST record spanning the period from AD 1000 to 2000, which revealed, in their words, “the ‘Medieval Climate Anomaly’ warming was most pronounced before AD 1200, with a long-term cooling trend apparent after AD 1250.” And what did the new record reveal about the uniqueness – or not! – of the region’s late-20th-century Current Warm Period? The twenty researchers report “in recent decades temperatures have been similar to those inferred for the ‘Medieval Climate Anomaly’.” However, their graphical representations (three versions of them) of the one-thousand-year period clearly indicate the peak warmth of the Current Warm Period has actually been a couple tenths of a degree C less than the earlier Medieval Warm Period.

As has been found to be the case in so many land-based assessments of the relative warmth of the Medieval and Current Warm Periods, there is nothing unusual, unnatural, or unprecedented about Earth’s current level of warmth … although it could be thought to be somewhat unusual in that, even with the 120-ppm increase in the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration that occurred over the last 1000 years, it is still not as hot now as it was back in the Medieval Warm Period.

Well, that’s strange, isn’t it? It almost seems like some other forces other than fossil fuels are in play, especially since 95% of the Warmist models have failed.

New paper finds 20th century sea level rise was only 4.3 inches in S Hemisphere, 7.9 inches N Hemisphere

A paper published today in Geophysical Research Letters “challenges the widely accepted value of global sea level rise for the 20th century” and finds sea levels rose in the southern hemisphere at only about half the rate of the northern hemisphere. According to the authors, sea levels rose [relative to land] only 7.9 inches in the northern hemisphere and 4.3 inches over the entire 20th century.

Essentially, that would mean that sea rise in the Southern Hemisphere is well below the average for the last 7,000 years, which is the time period generally used for reference due to the massive rise from the end of the last glacial age leveling off. The average is 6-8 inches per century. Which means the rise for the Northern Hemisphere is well within the average. But, that average encompasses the warm and cool periods during the Holocene. During a warm period one would expect higher numbers, and low to negative numbers during cool periods. That’s how one derives an average.

Read: Sea Rise And Ocean Temperatures »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | Comments Off on Sea Rise And Ocean Temperatures | Trackback URL

NY Mayor DeBlasio Learns The Price Of Keeping Schools Open During School

By William Teach February 14, 2014 – 8:19 am

Perhaps keeping the schools open in Wisconsin during a massive snow storm would be OK (well, not really, not in today’s litigious and uber-safety conscious society. Perhaps 20-30 years ago), but NYC? Not so much. Hey, you voted for this hard-core Leftists, New Yorkers, so this is on you

(USA Today) As New Yorkers struggled to make their way around slushy streets, Mayor Bill de Blasio’s decision to keep New York City’s schools open Thursday drew criticism and praise. Some said the conditions made it difficult for kids to travel while others backed his stance saying kids needed to be in be school.

“I think it’s kind of crazy,” said David Martino, 28, who was visiting New York from Oakland, Calif. “For those who have to find their own way to school, it’s really dangerous. You could walk to school today and show up from your waist down soaked. And then, you’re stuck in school for the rest of the day drenched. That’s uncomfortable and it’s not sanitary.”

De Blasio countered complaints during a news conference.

“So many families depend on their schools as a place for their kids to be during the day, a safe place — a place where they are not only are taught, they get nutrition and they are safe from the elements,” he said.

“So many families have to go to work, the members of these families have to go to work, they do not have a choice, and they need a safe option for their kids. So as long as we know our kids can get to school safely, and we know we can operate our schools effectively, we make that decision.”

Some note that the schools are not baby-sitter services. Most schools seemed to have low attendance, and there was very little in the way of reading, writing, test taking, nor education occurring.

Over at the NY Times, an interesting point is made

With six snowstorms in six weeks, Mr. de Blasio has been drawing short straws in an unforgiving city, and he pointed out on Thursday that city schools have been closed for snow only 11 times in nearly 40 years.

Then again, the city received 9.5 inches of snow in Central Park, which might not be heavy for North Dakota, but is for NYC. The forecast was exactly correct for the snow, sleet, and freezing rain. And schools across New York state, New Jersey, and Connecticut were, in fact, closed.

Why would DeBlasio do this? Many of his allies and supporters said the policy was “misguided”. We could probably guess. As a hardcore Leftist, he does see the school system as a babysitter service, one which can conveniently indoctrinate kids. We can also assume that he’s an idiot for going with this policy, which probably didn’t sit too well with teachers who would have loved a snow day themselves.

BTW, in the latter part of the NY Times article we learn

In his State of the City address, Mr. de Blasio announced a plan for municipal identification cards that was greeted warmly by (illegal) immigrant residents and their advocates, who thanked the mayor for bringing New York in line with other major cities, like Los Angeles and San Francisco, that use similar systems.

So, wait, I thought identification cards were Bad, at least when it comes to requiring ID to perform the Constitutionally sacred ideal of voting?

Read: NY Mayor DeBlasio Learns The Price Of Keeping Schools Open During School »

Posted in Barking Moonbats | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Uber-Liberal 9th Circuit Affirms Right To Carry

By William Teach February 14, 2014 – 7:54 am

A win for the good guys, the folks who could end up using their gun to defend themselves and others

(Reuters) A federal appeals court on Thursday struck down a requirement by San Diego County that residents show “good cause” to carry a concealed firearm, a ruling that could force local governments across California to revisit the way they license handguns.

A three-member panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, acting on a 2009 lawsuit, ruled in a 2-1 decision that San Diego County’s restrictions amounted to an unconstitutional infringement on citizens’ Second Amendment rights to bear arms.

Coupled with a California state law that largely bans the open carrying of firearms in public, San Diego County’s “good cause” rules on concealed weapons effectively bar residents from carrying a gun altogether, the panel said.

“In California, the only way that the typical, responsible, law-abiding citizen can carry a weapon in public for the lawful purpose of self-defense is with a concealed carry permit. And, in San Diego County, that option has been taken off the table,” Justice Thomas O’Scannlain wrote in the 77-page opinion for the majority.

To carry, one had to complete a training course (a good idea), show that they had good moral fiber, and show that they had “good cause” to carry. Those last two, especially the “good cause”, made it difficult to impossible for people to obtain the permit in California. San Diego County refused to accept self defense or personal safety as valid reasons. Which, of course, are the main two reasons. They had to demonstrate special need (like they were a big donor to Democrats) or special risk (like they’re a Hollywood actor) to obtain the permit. No more, thanks to the ruling.

“The 9th Circuit confirmed that the government no longer gets to pick and choose which law-abiding citizens may exercise their constitutional right to carry a firearm for self-defense,” said attorney Chuck Michel, who represented the plaintiffs challenging San Diego’s restrictions in the case.

“This is a landmark ruling for the state of California. No longer will criminals have the security of knowing that their victims are defenseless in public,” Michel said.

Eugene Volokh digs deep into the decisions, and notes that this also affects open-carry. Essentially, the California law banned both, especially the heavier restrictions in San Diego County.

I think the Ninth Circuit majority’s analysis is correct on this, and the dissent’s is mistaken. The dissent keeps stressing that the case should be about whether the California ban on concealed carry is constitutional, and that Heller says that the concealed carry ban is indeed constitutional. But the California ban on concealed carry is part of a general scheme that bans the great bulk of all carrying in public for self-defense (unless one has a permit that the police may choose not to grant). It is this general scheme that violates the Second Amendment, even if a ban on concealed carry that left people free to carry openly would not do so.

Make sure to read the whole thing.

Elsewhere, we learn that an aide to NY Governor Cuomo, whose state restricts people from bringing guns to work, a law Cuomo pushed for and signed, was caught carrying a gun at work (and waiving it around irresponsibly), and *surprise!* received a waiver.

And in Connecticut, citizens are refusing to register their guns per the draconian law. Some estimates put registration as low as 15%.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Uber-Liberal 9th Circuit Affirms Right To Carry »

Posted in 2nd Amendment | Comments Off on Uber-Liberal 9th Circuit Affirms Right To Carry | Trackback URL

Raleigh Snow Meme

By William Teach February 13, 2014 – 7:56 pm

So, looks like the car fire on Glenwood Ave. here in Raleigh during the snow storm has created a little meme.

I’ve seen this at The Chive, Caveman Circus, and lots of other sites. But, if they’re going to do a fire meme, how could they forget this?

Seriously, how could everyone forget about House Fire Girl?

I actually didn’t take any photos. Kinda forgot as I was Living The Moment.

FYI, for those wondering where that is on a map, that is Hwy 70 just east of 540, looking west-bound. And a nasty hill to try and get up and down on a day like yesterday.

Read: Raleigh Snow Meme »

Posted in Like, Gnarly, Dude | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, How’s That Obamacare Consumer Choice Thing Working Out?

By William Teach February 13, 2014 – 3:11 pm

About as well as one would expect for legislation written by Democrats and pushed by a president with no experience running a business (via Hot Air)

(WSJ) Consumers in 515 counties, spread across 15 states, have only one insurer selling coverage through the online marketplaces, the Journal found. In more than 80% of those counties, the sole insurer is a local Blue Cross & Blue Shield plan. Residents of wealthier, more populated counties in the U.S. receive lower-priced choices than those living in counties with a single insurer.

The average price for a 50-year-old American to obtain the cheapest midlevel “silver plan” through HealthCare.gov—the marketplace operated by the federal government—was $406 in counties with one health insurer, the Journal found. In counties with four insurers, the average price of the cheapest comparable silver plan was $329.

The price differences reflect the strategy of insurers to pick markets where they believe they can turn a profit—and avoid areas of high unemployment and a concentration of unhealthy residents they deem more risky.

As Ed Morrisey points out

So, in many cases, the number of insurers competing in many states’ individual insurance markets via ObamaCare is actually less than the number of carriers that sold individual policies pre-ObamaCare. …Winning?

He also pulls this pithy Obama quote

“My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. That’s how the market works. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75 percent of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90 percent is controlled by just one company. And without competition, the price of insurance goes up and quality goes down.”

So, according to Obama, his signature legislation has failed in attempting to keep prices down and quality up.

Read: Say, How’s That Obamacare Consumer Choice Thing Working Out? »

Posted in Healthcare | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 13, 2014 – 1:00 pm

…is a petroleum warmed world where the sea will rise up and kill all the butterflies, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Fire Andrea Mitchell, with a post on press freedom rankings.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Strange: Philly Is Setting Snow Records

By William Teach February 13, 2014 – 11:53 am

Back on the 21nd of January, Philadelphia set a record with 13.5 inches of snow, crushing the 1917 record by 3.4 inches.

The snow total (see chart) set a record for Jan. 21, crushing the previous mark of 3.4 inches, set in 1917. And, it set a record as the third snowfall of six inches or more before Feb. 1 – something that had never happened before, according to the National Weather Service. The total was the 10th-highest one-day snowfall ever in Philadelphia.

Well, here comes the current storm

(NBC Philly) At Philadelphia International Airport, the official reading location for Philadelphia, 8.8 inches of snow piled up in just a few hours. With that accumulation, the city shattered a 130-year-old record. More snowstorms have delivered 6 inches of snow or more this winter than ever before, Hurricane says. This is also the fifth snowiest winter of all time for the city.

While listening to the boob tube, I also heard that this is the first time in records history, and Philly’s records go back pretty far, where Philly has had 4 storms of 9+ inches in one winter. Let’s branch out, shall we?

(PIX11) Fybish, 77, wants Thursday’s storm to hit the New York area as hard as possible, because that would increase the season’s mounting snowfall totals.  In fact, average snowfall in New York during the entire winter season is 28.3 inches.  The average for this point in the season is about 20 inches.  So far this season, though, New York City is well above that, at 41.5 inches, and Thursday’s storm is sure to raise that amount noticeably.

The Tri-state area is closing in on the number of winter storms, though apparently still far from the actual snow total. Still, it’s strange that they’re seeing so much snow when snow is supposed to be a thing of the past.

Detroit shattered their January snowfall total. Seattle saw record snow on Saturday. Chicago is closing in on their record snowfall. New Jersey is closing in on snow records, and was extremely cold during January. Records abound.

What does this mean? Is this proof of the coming ice age? Not necessarily. It could happen. We could have another 40-late 1970’s type of cooling. It could be precursor to one of the cool periods that have occurred during the Holocene. The warmth switch could flip back on soon and we get another spike in global temperatures, as happens during a warm Holocene warm period. Regardless, this is more proof that the Warmist computer models and unhinged anti-science prognostications are garbage.

Read: Strange: Philly Is Setting Snow Records »

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

Church Of England Goes Medieval On Fight Climate Change Witchcraft

By William Teach February 13, 2014 – 10:08 am

Remember the time when people blew out of England to escape from the dominance of the Church of England? Remember how the Framers of the Constitution added a phrase to the Bill Of Rights to make sure no church would work hand in hand with The Government, because of how the Church Of England worked with the government? Well, that same church has chimed in on the issue of “climate change”. Which is not that strange, considering “climate change” is more of a religion than a science

(UK Guardian) The Church of England has said that it will, as a last resort, pull its investments from companies that fail to do enough to fight the “great demon” of climate change and ignore the church’s theological, moral and social priorities.

Demons. You darned witches driving fossil fueled vehicles. Tsk, tsk.

Although the church’s Ethical Investment Advisory Group (EIAG) has resisted calls for the church to pull its money from fossil fuel companies, insisting that engagement is the best way to effect change, its deputy chairman told the General Synod that it was considering “all options” when it came to developing future investment policy.

“Make no mistake, we reserve the final option of disinvesting from those particular companies who resist change,” said the Rev Canon Professor Richard Burridge, adding that the church had sold its £3.8m stake in the controversial mining company Vedanta four years ago following concerns about its human rights record.

But he added that while the EIAG recognised that climate change was a huge ethical investment issue, swift disinvestment from fossil fuel companies was not the answer.

“Pointing the finger at the extractive industries gets us off the hook and avoids the fundamental problem which is our selfishness and our way of life, which has been fuelled by plentiful, cheap energy and more and more people around the world wanting that,” he said.

So, when will the Church of England disconnect their power from the grid and only use “alternatives” like solar and wind? When will the leaders give up their own fossil fueled travel? Canon Giles Goddard of Southwark diocese proposed the divestment, and stated

“Climate change is a moral issue because the rich world has disproportionately contributed to it and the poor world is disproportionately suffering. Poor communities are least equipped to deal with the impacts.”

When Warmists start yammering on about “moral issues”, they know they are losing the debate.

Steven Croft, the bishop of Sheffield, described the threat of climate change as “a giant evil; a great demon of our day”, adding: “Its power is fed by greed, blindness and complacency in the present generation, and we know that this giant wreaks havoc though the immense power of the weather systems, which are themselves unpredictable.”

Uh huh. The cult has been joined by a church to fight the demons.

He said the church had a “critical role” to play in lobbying politicians on climate change in order to bring about manifesto commitments to reach the target of an 80% reduction in UK greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

I suspect that the Church Of England will lose quite a few people once they start preaching in church about “climate change”. People do not want politics in church. Especially dubious ones based on junk science.

Read: Church Of England Goes Medieval On Fight Climate Change Witchcraft »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Collapsing Science, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 9 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove