President Peace Prize’s Syrian Strike Resolution Already Not Going So Well

By William Teach September 2, 2013 – 8:40 am

Darned Republicans, already making a hash of Something President Nobel Peace Prize wants in order to use America’s war making devices

(Politico) President Barack Obama faces a clear uphill battle in swaying skeptical lawmakers of the merits of military action in Syria, as top officials were dispatched to Capitol Hill Sunday to make the administration’s case.

In response to concern from a swath of lawmakers, Senate Democratic aides are drafting new language for an authorization of military force in Syria, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said Sunday.

The administration’s proposal is too open-ended — a complaint many lawmakers aired Sunday — Leahy said after leaving the classified briefing. The current version wouldn’t garner his support, but he indicated that a more tightly written draft might.

Aides to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) are overseeing the revisions to the authorization of force measure, which seek to narrow the scope for any U.S. military mission in Syria, Democratic sources said.

Those Republicans, always saying “no”….oh. Well, I bet there are a few Republicans who don’t appreciate the open ended resolution, and some like John McCain want even more in terms of attacks. The resolution is expected to be changed in the Republican controlled House, as well. And the White House is apparently on some sort of charm offensive

On Sunday, a senior administration official said their strategy in selling the Hill on military action “will be to flood the zone.” The official noted that President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough all made calls on Sunday to individual lawmakers and would again hit the phone lines on Monday. On the Labor Day holiday, a conference call was also planned for House Democrats with administration officials.

So much for concentrating on the economy during every waking moment. Time to kiss that pivot fully goodbye.

On Sunday members of President McBombypants, who won a Nobel Peace Prize, made the case for the strikes. That didn’t go so well

“I sense pretty much zero support for boots on the ground and in fact a great deal of skepticism for limited strikes,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) told reporters. “There are profoundly unanswered questions about effectiveness, about what happens next.”

He added: “I’m a long way from being a yes vote on even a narrow resolution.”

Rep. Hines is speaking for a great deal of Congress Critters, both GOP and Democrat. I suppose one question that could be asked will be “how many Democrats will vote in favor of any resolution simply because Obama is in office, rather than with their constituents and beliefs, and how many Republicans will vote against simply because it is Obama in office, rather than on their beliefs and any evidence?”

The second question should be “how soon till Team Obama uses the issue to attack Republicans?”, making this yet another in wedge issue.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: President Peace Prize’s Syrian Strike Resolution Already Not Going So Well »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmist Wonders Why Free Market Hasn’t Solved Hotcoldwetdry Yet

By William Teach September 1, 2013 – 3:57 pm

Probably because most companies are content to simply patronize those who believe in “climate change”, but not really Do Something. Which goes the same for Warmists like Al Gore, who do not want the “problem” solved, because they make a boatload of cash off the issue, as well as prestige and power. This comes from DeSmog Canada at the HuffPo

Why Hasn’t the Free Market Solved Climate Change?

One of the great mysteries of contemporary capitalism is the fact that as a system it appears absolutely incapable of responding to the crisis of climate change. Why can’t a system that made the automobile into an accessible mass consumer good provide us with clean and efficient mass transit, or at the very least electric cars? Why are we still burning coal, the energy source that drove the Industrial Revolution over 200 years ago? Where are all the new green enterprises leading the way into a low-carbon future?

It’s no mystery: only a small number of people are demanding expensive replacements for existing energy and travel methods, which lead to higher prices for everything else. People also do not want massive government control of our lives.

From Joseph Schumpeter’s description of “creative destruction” to the fabled entrepreneurial powers of innovators like Steve Jobs, we’re accustomed to thinking that capitalism provides the social and economic framework that best nurtures human creativity and fosters technological innovation.

But with atmospheric concentrations of CO2 sailing past 400ppm and scientists warning of a global environmental catastrophe caused by the breaching of the nine planetary boundaries, the forces of the market are curiously silent.

First, the free market is doing what the free market does: take advantage of what people want. And they saw the utter disaster of government intervention in trying to push “green”. They really do not want to waste their money.

Second, the atmospheric CO2 concentration never did make it to 400ppm. Furthermore, it sure isn’t sailing past, having dropped from almost 400ppm to 394.30ppm as of July 2013. Yet, the Earth is still seeing a 15+ year pause in warming, and 2013 has been pretty cool for much of the world.

Let’s skip to the end, because the rest is a rambling mess of nothingness

Developing new green technology, hiring workers and investing in new productive facilities involves a real risk: it may not be as profitable as purely speculative investments. With derivatives and the implicit backing of government removing the fear of failure for the world’s biggest corporations, there simply isn’t an economic incentive to make investment decisions that would help to avert climate catastrophe.

In other words, all this tech the Warmists want (but refuse to put their own money into), is super risky, and not worth it. Especially since the “science” of “climate change” is extremely suspect, to put it mildly.

Read: Warmist Wonders Why Free Market Hasn’t Solved Hotcoldwetdry Yet »

Posted in Economy, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach September 1, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a never-ending rain due to people celebrating Labor Day with evil meat and CO2 infused beer, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is American Power, wondering about the racial profiling of Syrians across America.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach September 1, 2013 – 9:47 am

 

Happy Sunday! Another day to ruminate about the once and future nation of America. This pinup is by Gil Elvgren, with a wee bit of help, in honor of Obama playing golf after discussing making war on Syria.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Raised On Hoecakes finds more legal silliness, and makes good use of Grumpy Cat
  2. The People’s Cube is worried about global warming in Colorado
  3. Public Secrets covers the man of the people
  4. Political Clown Parade has Field Marshall Von Unicorn
  5. Nice Deb has an interesting poll on voter ID
  6. Moonbattery notes that the Brits are financing their own destruction
  7. Legal Insurrection covers white baiting gone wild
  8. Jammie Wearing Fools highlights who’s baiting Obama on Facebook
  9. Gay Patriot has Liberal Logic
  10. Gates Of Vienna stalks the elusive Islamaphobe
  11. Doug Ross goes nuclear
  12. American Power notes the hypocrisy of the Pelosi
  13. The Daley Gator has 11 ways Obama is way worse than Bush
  14. Coyote Blog introduces the person who wants to run your life
  15. And last, but not least, The Hockey Schtick notes that the new IPCC report is already toast

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 outwhat I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts

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.

The posts do take a long time, so, if you want to send me your links for Rule 5 babeage or links, use ye olde email in the header bar (remove the NOSPAM part). Preferably, create the html link so I can copy and paste how you want it to read.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Heh! Britain Has Helped Obama Rediscover The Constitution

By William Teach September 1, 2013 – 9:18 am

Something a bit humorous from The Telegraph’s Tim Stanley

Obama and Syria: Britain has helped Obama rediscover the Constitution. No need to thank us, America

This afternoon, President Obama was 35 minutes late to deliver his statement on Syria to the media. Well, he likes to keep his fans waiting.

But when he did show up, the Prez put in a remarkable performance. Yes, Obama does believe Assad has used chemical weapons against his own people and, yes, he does want to do something about it. But rather than take immediate action, he’s going to seek Congress’ approval first. In the course of his statement, he name checked Britain and its own parliamentary vote on Thursday. So we basically taught Obama to respect his own constitution. No need to thank us, America.

Mr. Stanley goes on to note interpretations on why Obama did this, including making sure Congress, especially Republicans, get blamed either way. Because this isn’t really about Obama respecting the Constitution, which would be a first, but about trying to dig his way out of the red line comments and warhawk rhetoric of the previous week, while making sure he can score some political points against Congressional Republicans. Meanwhile, at the NY TImes

President Pulls Lawmakers Into Box He Made

The headline is all you need to know.

Charles Krauthammer is slamming Obama as amateur hour. Not sure what Charles is seeing, every hour is amateur hour for Team Obama. And Ben Smith is getting the vapors and a bit of bromance over Obama giving power back to Congress. He features this tweet

That should tell us everything we need to know, chiefly that Obama is turning this into a domestic fight, rather than a real concern about “national security” and “moral imperatives.”

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Heh! Britain Has Helped Obama Rediscover The Constitution »

Posted in Barry Obama, Politics | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Hmm, Now Presidenty McBombypants Will Seek Congressional Approval

By William Teach August 31, 2013 – 5:31 pm

After making everyone watch an empty podium for over half an hour (O was probably waiting for halftime) and before hitting the links, PMBP decided to send the Syrian issue over to Congress for a vote

President Obama said Saturday that the United States has decided to use military force against Syria, calling last week’s alleged chemical weapons attack there “an attack on human dignity,” but said he would seek congressional authorization for an attack.

The announcement puts off an imminent cruise missile strike, a prospect that had put the region on edge and stoked intense debate in the United States, where many dread getting dragged into a new war. It is not clear what the Obama administration would do if Congress declines to authorize a military operation.

This can be read a couple ways. We can look at it and say “he wants to make sure that this is approved by lawmakers”, yet, that doesn’t fit the pattern with Obama over the past 4+ years. Realistically, it’s more like he’s trying to dig himself out of the “red line” hole he dug, pushing the issue out further and further till “squirrel!!!” Also

And

Which goes with

That’s his normal pattern. If he has good evidence, let’s see it. I’d have no problem with giving a good beating to Assad. None of this limited “here’s exactly where we’re going to strike” stuff. If you’re deploying the US military, make the beating hurt.

Read: Hmm, Now Presidenty McBombypants Will Seek Congressional Approval »

Posted in Barry Obama | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 31, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil plastic bottle that’s evil not because they make a mess of the environment, but because of CO2, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Capital Preservation, which picks up an interesting slip of the tongue by Obama.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Putin Triple Dog Dares President McBombypants To Pony Up Evidence On Syria

By William Teach August 31, 2013 – 11:32 am

Thanks to Purp at Ace of Spades for the President McBombypants thing (hey, remember when Obama and Democrats derided McCain for bomb bomb bomb Iran, which is well on their way to making nuclear weapons?). Niles Gardner notes that Obama is an embarrassment and an amateur on the international stage, having really built no alliances, no political friendships, other than with French President Francois Hollande. He compares and contrasts President George W. Bush to Mr. Obama, and sees that Bush took the time to forge alliances and friendships. Now, Bush may have been constantly derided, but there is no doubt Bush knew what he was doing, and was able to work with foreign leaders, build alliances and friendships with them, and, just as importantly, cause fear in unfriendly nations. Remember how Libya gave up on their weapons programs and terrorism? Bush knew about How Things Work on the international stage. Obama still thinks like an empowered community organizer, and is neither respected nor feared.

(Telegraph) The Russian President told journalists that if Barack Obama had evidence Bashar al-Assad’s forces had the chemical weapons and launched the attack, Washington should present it to the UN weapons inspectors and the Security Council.

Speaking after the US released its intelligence report, Mr Putin said: “I am convinced that it (the chemical attack) is nothing more than a provocation by those who want to drag other countries into the Syrian conflict, and who want to win the support of powerful members of the international arena, especially the United States.”

He rejected American intercepts of Syrian communications as evidence, saying that they cannot be used to take “fundamental decisions” such as using military force on Syria.

Mr Putin said the US President, as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, should remember the impact any US attack would have on Syrian civilians.

Kinda strange when Putin is the voice of reason, wouldn’t you say? Of course, this is part of the typical international game between States. Unfortunately, Putin is playing chess, Obama is playing solitaire. Obviously, Putin and Russia have a stake in what happens, with Syria being a partial client of the Russian state, but, this is also simply a swipe at the weakness of Obama on the international stage, which, unfortunately, makes America look weak.

Read: Putin Triple Dog Dares President McBombypants To Pony Up Evidence On Syria »

Posted in Barry Obama | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Nature Suggests Treating “High Carbon Lifestyles” Like Drug Addiction

By William Teach August 31, 2013 – 9:18 am

I have to wonder how much CO2 was generated by putting this article on the Internet, what with all the energy required (via The Hockey Schtick)

(Nature) Lessons from addiction may help to transform our high-carbon lifestyle.

It is often said that those of us who live in affluent, developed counties are ‘addicted’ to our high-carbon lifestyles, which depend on profligate use of energy and material resources. Think of central heating, air conditioning, our reluctance to wean ourselves off international air travel — whether for business or pleasure — and the amount of meat that we consume in our diets.

Yet, as is my constant refrain, those who believe most in anthropogenic “climate change” barely do more than token changes in their own lives. They might replace a lightbulb or two (in lamps they rarely use) with CFLs or LEDs. But, especially when we look at all the leaders of “climate change” hysteria, and those in government and NGO’s who push this, they actually have increased “carbon footprints”.

But it would stretch credulity to push the comparison too far; obviously cars are not ‘habit forming’ in the sense that cigarettes are, and certainly do not have the addictive characteristics of certain hard drugs. The habit-forming effects of drugs such as nicotine and heroin are mediated by specific receptors in the brain. But it is of course meaningless to talk of a specific ‘brain receptor’ activated by exposure to a car advert. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to posit that our responses to brands in general, the preferences we develop and the behaviours that we subsequently exhibit as consumers (and more generally as citizens), have a neurobiological basis. This does not at all imply that such preferences and behaviours are deterministically ‘fixed’, in the sense that they can be modified by learning and experience, or even pharmacologically. If we are sufficiently concerned about the environmental impact of travel, we can by our own volition choose to run an electric car rather than a gas-guzzler.

This seems to be a starting premise of the intriguing new research field of ‘neuroconservation’, which despite its name has nothing to do with conserving neurons. Rather, as explained by Elisabeth Jeffries (page 776), one of its aims is to study how the brain responds to nature. A working hypothesis is that the way we come to value and appreciate the natural world may involve some of the same brain regions and ‘reward’ pathways involved in addiction. If that turns out to be the case, which is far from certain, it follows that understanding addiction — both at a neurological and psychological level — might potentially help to devise strategies for shifting people’s attitudes in relation to environmental issues such as climate change, thereby promoting climate-friendly behaviours.

It boils down to the notion that Warmists want to essentially brainwash everyone (else) to be “green”, and green doesn’t mean being a good steward of nature, which doesn’t give a damn about your CO2 output, but by reducing your own “carbon footprint” on the alter of a political leaning. If Warmists refuse to cure their own addictions to, well, just about everything, because almost everything is considered Bad For Climate Change, why should anyone else care?

Read: Nature Suggests Treating “High Carbon Lifestyles” Like Drug Addiction »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Oh, Good, NY Times Blames UN And Congress, Saying They’ve Abdicated Their Role On Syria

By William Teach August 31, 2013 – 8:57 am

Interesting. Polls range from 50% to 80% saying Americans do not want to military strikes on Syria. And 80% want Congressional approval. Yet, Mr. Obama has stated that he’s not going to bother with more than a few meetings and briefings, nothing heavy nor involved, nor is he going to seek a vote, like PM David Cameron attempted (and lost) in Britain. Nor is he really going to bother with the United Nations. Obviously, this means that the problem here is not Obama’s go it alone, unilateral, “I’m doing what I want to do” attitude, but Someone Else

Absent on Syria

As President Obama moves toward unilateral military action in response to a chemical weapons attack in Syria that killed more than 1,400 people, he is doing so without legal justification and without the backing of two key institutions, Congress and the United Nations Security Council. Both have abdicated their roles in dealing with this crisis.

Except hundreds of Congressional members have stated that Obama should seek Congressional approval. A bipartisan coalition. It’s Mr. Obama’s job to seek that approval, and he’s already stated he doesn’t want a vote. I wonder what the NY Times editorial board would write if the House came back and voted against any action in Syria? Obama’s the one who ran his mouth, and I doubt if he’d even get many Democrats to support strikes.

But, then the editorial goes off the rails. I wonder if there were two sets of people writing it. The editorial notes that the admin has only pushed a “moral rationale” for strikes (say, what about all those being killed in Darfur? Or the thousands of Christians being slaughtered in Egypt?)

But no administration official has formally asserted a legal basis — absent a vote of Congress or the Security Council — for military strikes.

We’re still waiting for exactly why this affects U.S. national security. Apparently, so is Obama, since he still hasn’t made up his mind. Perhaps he’s still trying to find a way to Blame Republicans in the event things go tits up during the strikes or afterwards because of the strikes.

Congress spends a lot of time jealously guarding its powers, especially when it comes to Republicans thwarting Mr. Obama’s agenda. But apart from complaining, asking questions and getting briefed by administration officials, most senators and representatives seem content to leave this exceedingly difficult decision to President Obama. They should have returned to Washington from summer vacation to debate and vote on the Syria issue. Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain suffered a defeat when Parliament on Thursday voted to oppose involvement in a military operation, but at least the British lawmakers had to step up and take a stand.

Cameron called them for a vote. And the Times seems to want to Blame Republicans, while forgetting that the Senate is controlled by Democrats. Harry Reid is in no hurry to bring the Senate back.

Of course, Mr. Obama has not asked Congress to authorize military action. He brushed off this responsibility, required under the War Powers Resolution, when he used military force in the Libya operation, but in that case he did have Security Council approval.

Um, wait, so the entire premise of the story, that Congress and the UN (notice that the article barely mentions the UN to this point, they do briefly mention it in a following paragraph) are MIA, is bunk, because Obama is blowing off Congress (and the UN), and going all Imperial President? Hmph. How about that?

Mr. Obama’s approach on Syria now seems wholly at odds with the strong position he took in 2007 when, as a candidate for president, he told The Boston Globe: “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

But, you know, Congress is a bunch of meanies who might not endorse this military action which would write a check for Obama’s “red lines” mouth.

Not only is Mr. Obama lacking the Security Council’s support, he has not obtained the backing of other organizations that could provide international legitimacy, such as NATO. In Libya in 2011, the Arab League supported the NATO air campaign, but it has not requested American military action in Syria, even though it publicly blamed Mr. Assad for the attack and called for accountability.

Nor has Mr. Obama bothered asking.

Mr. Obama’s ability to muster broad backing for immediate action was harmed by the British vote, leaving only France promising cooperation. Even in the best of circumstances, military action could go wrong in so many ways; the lack of strong domestic and international support will make it even more difficult.

I guess it’s also the Brit’s fault. Despite Obama not bothering to reach out and build any sort of coalition. Like most things, I suspect that Obama just expected to give a speech, make a pronouncement, and things would fall in place with everyone joining up. Funny how things work differently in the Real World, as opposed to Community Organizer World.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Oh, Good, NY Times Blames UN And Congress, Saying They’ve Abdicated Their Role On Syria »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs, Wonky Media | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove