Obama: “GOP Wants To Deny Health Insurance To 30 Million”

By William Teach August 10, 2013 – 8:39 am

Alas, I did not hear or watch Obama’s press conference, because I was doing something American’s in growing numbers aren’t, thanks to Obama’s policies, including ObamaCare: working a full time job

(Daily Caller) President Barack Obama took his budget-crisis rhetoric out for a drive Friday, rolling right over the much-publicized call by three GOP Senators to stop Obamacare by shutting down the federal government in October.

“My friends in the other party have made preventing [30 million] people from getting heath care their Holy Grail,” Obama told friendly reporters at an afternoon press conference in the White House.

“The one unifying principle the Republican Party has is making sure that 30 million people don’t have health-care,” he said, portraying the three GOP Senators as representative of the GOP.

The one unifying principal for Obama is to make sure that people who have jobs are limited to less than 30 hours a week, thanks to Obamacare. Well, for those who actually have a job, and haven’t dropped out of the jobs market in despair. All to provide substandard health care in which an unelected board decides which health care options are worthwhile, instead of the decision being made by doctors and patients. Oh, also the principal that Obama prefers conflict and strife.

Threatening to shut down government “is hard to understand as an agenda that is going to strengthen our middle class… [and] there’s not even a pretext now they’re going to replace it with something better,” Obama said.

Republican Sens. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee and and Marco Rubio are calling on the GOP to stop funding the federal government after September unless Obama agrees to shut down his signature accomplishment, Obamacare.

The middle class has suffered more under Obama than under any president since FDR, and there is no relief in sight, and the GOP has made its intentions on replace many times. It’s been online for years. I guess it’s too difficult for Obama to do a web-search.

As for all the GOP, if only. Most Republican Senators are against any sort of plan to shut down the government to stop Obamacare, which is still heavily unpopular with the American people. At the heart of it, even good Republicans like Tom Coburn are still in the “we need to be nice” mode. They fail to realize that you fight fire with fire.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Obama: “GOP Wants To Deny Health Insurance To 30 Million” »

Posted in Barry Obama, Healthcare, Unhinged Tools | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Elysium Is Really Somewhat Conservative

By William Teach August 9, 2013 – 2:24 pm

Many have been chiming in about what a far left socialist/communist propaganda film Elysium is. Consider

(Examiner) Is Hollywood promoting socialism with its new sci-fi movie “Elysium?” That’s the charge being made by some, according to a report published Wednesday at Fox News.

An article at Newsmax, for example, calls it “Matt Damon’s sci-fi socialism,” and describes it further as a “heavy-handed political propaganda flick.”

According to Fox, Variety described it as one of the “more openly socialist political agendas of any Hollywood movie in memory, beating the drum loudly not just for universal healthcare, but for open borders, unconditional amnesty and the abolition of class distinctions as well.” (WT-there are lots of links in the excerpt at Examiner. Writing this on Droid)

Damon and director Neill Blomkamp are saying “no, no, there’s no message!” Which is a bunch of mule fritters (BTW, I love District 9. Good scifi wrapped around a subtle message, in this case apartheid, which scifi often does).

But, let’s consider that this is actually kind of conservative. Glenn Beck was talking about this movie earlier in the day, thinking it was more like Communism (big shots with lots and an underclass in destitude). But, really, what’s left of the earth is basically Detroit once they realize that all those promises can’t be kept.

Squalor, crime, murder, rape, starvation, society having fallen apart. This is Detroit on a planetary scale, while the big shot Liberals live the highlife and avoid the results of their policies. When all the promises fail, this is the end result of Liberal World.

Matt Damon’s character? A conservative. A guy who sees problems and sets out to do something about it through action, not bloviation and spreading awareness and speeches.

I always find it interesting to see the way left side Hollywood treats the poor in movies. They’re always dirty, shabby, starving, stupid, and unable to take care of themselves without crime. Without Government these people are a mess.

Seriously, liberals apparently can’t even bathe themselves without Government. But, notice who the people who do well are: conservatives. They’re out there planting food gardens, fishing, helping others, working together, surviving. Hell, bathing. Wearing decent clothes. They aren’t trying to catch rats to eat. They aren’t depending on Someone Else to take care of them.

Movies like Elysium show the end result of liberal policies designed to help the poor and middle class. Not a pretty picture.

Movies like Elysium also show a profound lack of respect for anyone other than The Rich. It’s no wonder a hero comes along, in this case Matt Damon, to do something, because he or she are tired of all the whining and stench from unwashed liberals.

Read: Elysium Is Really Somewhat Conservative »

Posted in Conservativism, Film, Liberal World, Uncategorized | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 9, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrid fossil fueled vehicle that requires homes to be built on stilts because the sea will rise up hundreds of feet overnight, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Watts Up With That?, with a post on Alaskan “climate refugees”.

Double shot: The Jawa Report notes that Jesus loves Kate Upton.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Good Grief: Rebranding Hotcoldwetdry As A Public Health Issue

By William Teach August 9, 2013 – 10:52 am

Is it any wonder that Steve King (R-IA) stated that climate change is a religion? Warmists constantly change their tune in order to protect it

(Time) But what if climate change were instead about an increase in childhood asthma, or a surge in infectious diseases, or even an influx of heat-induced heart attacks? Would that hold more resonance for the average citizen of the world? That’s what some climate change experts are hoping, as they steer the conversation about global warming toward the public health issues it raises. Last week, the journal Science  featured a special issue on climate change and included a study on the complex yet growing connection between global warming and infectious diseases.

The Warmists have been pushing these same notions for decades, yet they never actually seem to come to pass.

The hope is that seeing climate change as a health issue will spur more people into pushing for environmental reforms, but that’s still a big ‘if.’ “My biggest concern is that like many things in prevention, people might want to put it off,” says Benjamin. “We don’t have 20 years to wait like the tobacco campaign. Every year we wait puts us behind the eight ball, and I think it’s important to move that message.”

Any sort of rebranding is simply an attempt to scare people, just like the recent attempts which included trotting out “biodiversity”, “sustainability”, and “extreme weather”. Yet, Warmists still refuse to practice what they preach.

Speaking of Steve King, here’s Think Progress

Despite the fact that 97 percent of scientists agree that climate change is real, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) is insistent that it is “not science” and that environmentalists are missing the potential upsides.

If the first paragraph of your article mentions consensus (and an utterly discredited study, at that), rather than actual science, yeah, it’s a cult.

Read: Good Grief: Rebranding Hotcoldwetdry As A Public Health Issue »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Report States Keystone KL Will Have No Impact On Greenhouse Gas Emissions

By William Teach August 9, 2013 – 8:37 am

So far, every environmental and global warming study has found Keystone XL to be not an issue. Here’s another one

(The Hill) The Keystone XL oil sands pipeline “will not have any impact” on greenhouse gas emissions, a report released by prominent energy industry consulting group IHS CERA said Thursday.

The report said that’s because Canada’s oil sands, which are more carbon-rich than conventional oil, will come out of the ground with or without Keystone.

“In the absence of Keystone XL, we would expect similar volumes of heavy Canadian oil sands to be produced. Industry would turn to alternative pipeline projects and rail for oil sands transportation,” the report said.

IHS CERA said it prepared the report in response to President Obama’s June statement that he’d oppose the controversial Canada-to-Texas pipeline if it “significantly exacerbates” carbon pollution.

Part of the reason is that, as noted, the tar-sands oil is coming out one way or another. The question is “who gets it?” Oil Sands Fact Check notes

As IHS CERA points out, there are two key reasons that Keystone XL will not significantly impact the climate: 1) heavy crude oil will be refined in the U.S. Gulf Coast (USGC) refineries regardless – but without Keystone XL, much of that crude will be imported from Venezuela instead of Canada and 2) Canadian oil sands will be transported via rail or other pipelines with or without Keystone XL.

The report also notes that the #1 recipient of a negative Keystone XL decision will be Venezuela.

With the release of this important study, it’s worth pointing out that the Keystone XL debate has never really been about whether the pipeline would significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions – it won’t.  It has always been about off-oil proponents using Keystone XL as a “symbol” to pursue their agendas.

And don’t take our word for it.  Just this week, a Nature article featured several climate experts conceding that point.

  • David Keith, a Canadian climate scientist at Harvard said, “The extreme statements — that this is ‘game over’ for the planet — are clearly not intellectually true…”
  • David Victor, a climate-policy expert at the University of California explained, “As a serious strategy for dealing with climate, blocking Keystone is a waste of time. But as a strategy for arousing passion, it is dynamite.”
  • Ken Caldeira, climate researcher at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California put it this way: “I don’t believe that whether the pipeline is built or not will have any detectable climate effect.”

The opposition to Keystone XL has always been about typical unhinged hatred of fossil fuels by the Warmists, who were looking to gin up yet another fake issue to keep the Warmist masses engaged as the climate refuses to cooperate with computer models, going up a statistically insignificant 0.14F since 1997 and just 0.28F since 1990. Yet, these same Warmists are going off to the anti-Keystone rallies in their own fossil fueled vehicles and/or taking fossil fueled flights.

Read: Report States Keystone KL Will Have No Impact On Greenhouse Gas Emissions »

Posted in Energy, Environment, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama To Hold Rare Press Conference Friday Afternoon

By William Teach August 9, 2013 – 8:13 am

Where he’ll pull his typical schtick and bloviate on questions for 5-10 minutes without actually answering any tough questions

(ABC News) The news conference scheduled for 3 p.m. EDT also comes a day before Obama leaves Washington for a nine-day vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.

First question: “why were you so late to your own announced PC”? I’m placing my bet on 3:22 for when he shows up. What’s your guess?

The Hill offers 10 questions for the PC, which include:

  • How significant is the Middle East terror threat, and what does it mean for U.S. progress in the fight against al Qaeda? (I’d refer you to the DoD for that answer)
  • What can the United States do about Edward Snowden, and are you concerned about more leaks? (wags finger at Putin)
  • Has the White House been forthcoming about the extent and scope of the National Security Agency surveillance? (I’d refer you to the NSA for the answer)
  • Should the Washington Redskins change their team name? (he’d love this puff question, and would expound on it at length)

How about this one from Hill reader weinermobile

How about … “Please explain to us why Congress and staffers are now exempt from some of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act?”

And from PopTheLid

Can you provide us an update on Benghazi and bringing the murderers of American citizens to justice.

Politico also offers 6 questions , none of which include notions such as

  • Why are you taking yet another super expensive 1%er vacation in the middle of economic stagnation where many Americans can’t even afford to take a week off work, much less even a staycation?
  • What have you done to stop the abuses by the IRS, which is, in case you didn’t know, a federal agency under your command, which is supposedly still targeting Conservative groups?
  • When you refer to “phony scandals”, which ones are you referring to?
  • Since you think Benghazi is a “phony scandal”, would you be willing to meet with the mother of Sean Smith, killed during the action? Have you even called her?
  • Do you have any actual new and actionable ideas for the economy, rather than just speeches?
  • Why is the implementation of your signature legislation, Obamacare, such a miserable failure, and will you sign up on the exchange yourself? Follow up: why are costs spiraling out of control? Follow up: why can’t we keep our health plans and doctors after your saying over and over that we could?
  • What’s up with the growing Democrat opposition to “death panels”? Oh, and would you care to apologize to Sarah Palin for all the grief you and Dems gave her over this?

What questions would you ask?

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Obama To Hold Rare Press Conference Friday Afternoon »

Posted in Current Affairs, Democrats | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Slate Will No Longer Refer To Washington Redskins As Redskins

By William Teach August 8, 2013 – 5:14 pm

You know, because everyone looking for Redskins football coverage automatically goes to Slate first (and because having solved every world problem, Slate can now deal with this)

This is the last Slate article that will refer to the Washington NFL team as the Redskins.

I wasn’t aware of the first Slate article, because I’d generally go to CBS Sports, ESPN, or dozens of other sites regarding sports. Not that I’d look up Redskins news in the first place.  So, I’m generally not bummed, because I refer to them as the Deadskins. BTW, this article is by David Plotz, the editor of Slate.

I’m a lifelong fan of the team, and Snyder and his players should be justly proud of the way their team bridges black and white Washington

Well, if you find the name so racist/bigoted, you’d move on to a different team. Also, it’s funny how Plotz Blames Snyder, when the name goes back to 1937, and Snyder wasn’t born till 1964.

So while the name Redskins is only a bit offensive, it’s extremely tacky and dated—like an old aunt who still talks about “colored people” or limps her wrist to suggest someone’s gay.

Wait, I’m confused: I thought it was mega-huge offensive and people should be offended just to see the logo, and so bad that Slate will no longer use the name?

And what should replace Redskins? A D.C. city councilmember cleverly proposed “Redtails,” the nickname of the Tuskegee Airmen. It nods at the city’s African-American heritage, and would allow Snyder to keep a feather in the logo. If he doesn’t like that, he could call them the Snyders, a name that would sate even his ego. But here’s my choice: If the team’s star quarterback works out as well as Snyder hopes, there’s a perfect name that would allow the team to keep the feathers and the ferocity: the Washington Griffins.

I still prefer Deadskins. Or, how about “It’s OK, little buckaroos, there’s always next year?” But, I think that might be taken by the Cowgirls, er, boys.

Interestingly, Slate has no problem when Democrats, including (NMP) Obama, slur Conservatives.

Read: Bummer: Slate Will No Longer Refer To Washington Redskins As Redskins »

Posted in Liberal World, Sports | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 8, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a drought world being overtaken by 500 feet of rising seas, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny, with a post that cracks Obama’s czars

Read: If All You See… »

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

Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations By Time Period

By William Teach August 8, 2013 – 11:09 am

Tom Nelson says “not to miss this”

He’s right. I’ve cut the chart in two below the fold so we can look at it in a larger format

Read More »

Read: Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations By Time Period »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming, Science | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Tom Harkin Proclaims Some Unknown Southern Senator Called Obama “Exotic”

By William Teach August 8, 2013 – 9:00 am

Harkin’s apparently attempting to earn his race card, despite being whiter than 2 week old floater (if that’s too gross, just think whiter than cotton), along with pumping up the liberal base

(Des Moines Register) U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin provided some behind-the-scenes insight into the partisan animosity that continues to follow Barack Obama in his second term as president.

Harkin, a Democrat, met Wednesday morning with the Des Moines Register’s editorial board. Responding to a question from a columnist about why Republicans seemed determined to see Obama fail, he described a scene from the closed-door meeting among senators that took place last month in the Old Senate Chambers.

During that July 15 meeting – which concerned filibuster rules and included no press and no staff – one senator suggested his constituents still couldn’t identify with Obama.

“I’m not naming any names, but one senator got up from a southern state and said, ‘Well, you’ve got to understand that to my people down here, Obama seems like’ – he thought for a second and he said – ‘like he’s exotic.’”

A spokeswoman for Harkin declined to offer further detail on the exchange, noting that it occurred in a closed-door meeting with only senators present.

He’s not naming names, we’re just supposed to take his word for it that this actually occurred. And his spokeswoman won’t give further details, because it was behind closed doors, even though Tom was giddy enough to throw out this supposed racist tidbit, which is giving liberals, like at The Political Carnival, The Raw Story, comments in the story and at The Daily Caller, the race-baiting vapors

We kind of laughed at that – what’s that mean? Exotic? That he’s just exotic, that he doesn’t share our values and that kind of thing. It was kind of a strange comment.

Let’s see: born in Hawaii, father Kenyan, raised partially in Indonesia, then in Hawaii, and now is a guy who shares few values with roughly half the country, a half which Obama continuously demonizes and denigrates. I’m pretty sure no liberal actually gets to that paragraph before going off in moonbat rage.

Read: Tom Harkin Proclaims Some Unknown Southern Senator Called Obama “Exotic” »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats | Comments Off on Tom Harkin Proclaims Some Unknown Southern Senator Called Obama “Exotic” | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove