The Lonely Conservative On Regionalism

By William Teach July 31, 2013 – 11:42 am

From the Lonely Conservative: “Regionalism – Coming Soon To A Town Near You, Or Maybe Your Town”

Normally this would be something I’d write extensively on, linked in to “climate change”, but slammed at work, so head over and read the whole thing.

Read: The Lonely Conservative On Regionalism »

Posted in Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Appeals Court Rules Nanny Bloomberg’s Big Sugary Drink Ban Unconstitutional

By William Teach July 31, 2013 – 7:03 am

Could this be the first domino in rolling back Nanny State laws and regulations thanks to judicial precedent, or is that a bit of wishful thinking?

(Reuters) New York City’s plan to ban large sugary drinks from restaurants and other eateries was an illegal overreach of executive power, a state appeals court ruled on Tuesday, upholding a lower court decision in March that struck down the law.

The law, which would have prohibited those businesses from selling sodas and other sugary beverages larger than 16 ounces, “violated the state principle of separation of powers,” the First Department of the state Supreme Court’s Appellate Division said in a unanimous decision.

Well, I was hoping more for a “what the hell were you thinking, trying to control the lives of citizens in such a manner!”, but, this is good enough. Not that I plan on rushing into NYC to buy a big sugary drink anytime soon. Or, really, ever. But, it’s nice that the choice is mine, not some government hack acting as a parent or caregiver to the citizens. The ruling is mostly about something like the ban having to go through the legislative process, not the “Mayor gets a burr under his bumm and decides he’ll do something” process.

Mary Katherine Hamm notes

In other words, when the elected legislature is “unwilling to act” in a way an executive or administrative board wishes it would, it’s not all right to “take whatever administrative steps that I can in order to do right by the American people.”

Hmm, that debate sounds familiar….

Obviously, Bloomberg is a bit pissy over this

Since New York City’s ground-breaking limit on the portion size of sugary beverages was prevented from going into effect on March 12th, more than 2,000 New Yorkers have died from the effects of diabetes. Also during that time, the American Medical Association determined that obesity is a disease and the New England Journal of Medicine released a study showing the deadly, and irreversible, health impacts of obesity and Type 2 diabetes – both of which are disproportionately linked to sugary drink consumption. Today’s decision is a temporary setback, and we plan to appeal this decision as we continue the fight against the obesity epidemic.”

Perhaps Mike should be more concerned with crime, pollution, alcoholism, and drugs, but, Big Gulps are obviously more dangerous in his mind.

Neither the NYC city council nor NY State General Assembly was able to pass any sort of law regarding the big sugary drinks, so expect Mike to whine about this for a while. And remember that Obama does the same thing.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Appeals Court Rules Nanny Bloomberg’s Big Sugary Drink Ban Unconstitutional »

Posted in Democrats, Liberal World, Nanny State | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

How To Talk To A Liberal About “Climate Change”

By William Teach July 30, 2013 – 5:05 pm

In a word

Don’t

Especially if they are Progressives. They are all rigid, myopic ideologues bound by talking points without critical adult thinking. It’s exceedingly rare that any will ever change their minds, as most are close-minded and interested in political advantage and instituting their far left dogma of big fascistic government (for Other People), not science.

Sure, the conversations can be fun as you reduce them to quivering masses of moonbattery, to the point they stomp off. Some are better than others, yet the majority are unhinged, and you’re wasting your breathe and time.

Have you noticed that few of my “climate change” posts are aimed at changing minds? A good chunk are simply derogatory towards Warmists (really, I don’t bother with most issues. I used to attempt to sway minds, as did other conservatives, but that ended years ago). Well, they are aimed at middle ground thinkers to a degree.

On a few occasions there can be debate, as witnessed here recently. But, ask a Warmist why they don’t walk the talk and it goes goofy.

Anyhow, this can all be summed up by the saying “don’t try to teach a pig to dance. You waste your time and annoy the pig.”

Where did all this come from? Well, Geoff Dembicki at Salon tries the old “how to talk to a conservative about Hotcoldwetdry”

Our climate change debate is stuck in a “left-wing ghetto.” That was one provocative conclusion reached during a high-level panel of politicians, environmental thinkers, journalists and business people in London, England.

“[Twenty] years of ‘awareness raising,’ grandiose pleas to save the planet, lots of talk about sacrifice, apocalyptic messages and photos of polar bears,” a recent summary report explained, “have trapped climate change in a niche that it urgently needs to break out of.”

Perhaps that’s because you folks are chicken little’s who refuse to practice what you preach, and all your “solutions” revolve around Big Government, taxation, and control of citizens and the private economy.

I’ll skip through lots of the silliness, including a mention of the much discredited “97% consensus” meme, getting to how “social scientist”, ie, community organizers with an agenda to push, think they can get Conservatives to buy into their far left Progressive beliefs

1. We’re all a bit irrational…Yet getting conservatives concerned about global warming means liberals need to first recognize their own moral biases, and how the climate arguments they make can reinforce them. (In other words, Liberals are emotional messes arguing from some sort of misguided moral position, and need to act like adults)

2. Information is rarely neutral…“Once someone connects a position on an issue to their cultural identity,” Hoffman said, “to try and get them to accept something that contradicts that identity is really challenging.” (Liberals believe that everything causes Hotcoldwetdry, Conservatives immediately reject most notions of AGW)

3. Too much fear will backfire…One tactic used again and again by climate change campaigners is fear: alarm the public enough about rising sea levels, extended droughts and infectious diseases, and surely it will be convinced to take action on the issue. (all the Warmists do is fear-monger.)

One fascinating study, conducted in part by Stanford University’s Robb Willer, suggested when people’s belief in a just world is challenged by dire climate predictions, they become less determined to shrink their carbon footprint. (and, humorously, Warmists are the worst offenders)

4. Messengers can trump messages…Knowing that left and right-wing people approach morality from different perspectives, filter facts through separate emotions and aren’t motivated equally by fear, how can a climate change campaigner hope to be heard across the divide? Perhaps by handing the microphone to someone else. (but most they hand the microphone to who are Republicans will be ignored. Because they’re idiots to buy into the “climate change” narrative)

5. ‘Green’ has its limits…But in order to convince opinion leaders outside the so-called “left-wing ghetto” that global warming is an urgent issue, campaigners need to speak a different language. And that might mean not invoking “green” values at all. (they’re not talking about being realistic, but about language changes, such as “Farmers worry about “diminished crop yields.”” Despite crop yields growing by leaps and bounds. Or the way global warming was changed to “we’re all f*cking doomed because you drive a fossil fueled vehicle…now I have to pick up the kids in the Suburban after the climate change rally”)

In the end, Liberals and Conservatives do tend to agree on certain things: we do want to move towards alternative energy sources. Most conservatives have no problem with solar, wind, hydrothermal, and others. We disagree with how to get there. We agree in conserving the planet. How we get there is the bone of contention. We agree on clean air, water, and land. We don’t agree that a trace gas necessary for life will make the earth a polluted wasteland. And we don’t agree that the solutions should be massive fascistic government.

Warmists keep trying to find ways to “talk” to people about their beliefs. But, that’s all they do. They themselves are hypocrites. Would you listen to a guy who’s obesely overweight saying that everyone should cut back on their calories?

Read: How To Talk To A Liberal About “Climate Change” »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Climahypocrites, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Don’t Forget, Warming Really Isn’t About The Surface Temperature

By William Teach July 30, 2013 – 3:15 pm

Especially when the surface temperature isn’t cooperating with the Warmist computer models. Here’s super far left Ryan Cooper at super far left Washington Monthly

The news around climate sensitivity has driven our contrarian population to new heights of glib smugness, and that’s saying something. Up today is Walter Russell Mead, doing his level best to make me pop a cranial blood vessel.

Scientists are theorizing about why surface warming has slowed, and Mead concludes that climate science is all hokum. (Seriously, that’s only a slight exaggeration.)

Two points, before I move on:

1) Once again, global warming is not determined wholly by observed surface temperatures. In fact, it’s rather the opposite. Over 90 percent of the heat captured by increased CO2 concentration ends up in the oceans. This probably has something to do with the staircase behavior of surface temperature, as heat gets alternately sucked up and dumped out of the earth’s enormous mass of water.

That first point is part of the latest fable from The New Climate Deniers that really cropped up this year as a way to protect their cult. First it was “the heat is hiding in the deep oceans!!!!” Now they’ve added on “the surface temperature doesn’t really matter!!!!” Of course, when it’s hot out, then the surface temperature matters to them. This is not science, it’s politics and cult like behavior.

2) Complexity can be misleading. It’s true that the climate is extraordinarily complicated—weather patterns were one of the first examples of chaos theory. Climate scientists argue all the time about whether their models are correctly tuned in all the details (whether this monsoon will get stronger or weaker at a higher temperature, that kind of thing). But the logic of climate change depends on some fairly simple physics. The complexity of the system’s reaction to a very simple force is not some saving grace.

I though I’d throw that in, and not that the simple force is not the implied CO2, but the Sun, which has always been the prime driver of Earth’s climate. From there, you throw in land patterns (some of which are anthropogenic), solar rays from deep space, natural earth forces, and gravity (the Sun, moon, and even the other planets). Scientists don’t really know what causes El Nino and La Nina patterns. Meteorologists are thought to be awesome when they get the weather right about 30% of the time. Yet, we’re supposed to listen to Warmist scientists who tell us what will positively happen 50-100 years out, despite all their computer models failing.

Anyhow, just remember that all that heat is doing a Where’s Waldo in the deep oceans. Because the sea surface temperatures sure aren’t cooperating.

Read: Don’t Forget, Warming Really Isn’t About The Surface Temperature »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 30, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a gorgeous country field that would be perfect for a wind farm, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is This ain’t Hell…, with a feel good story.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Most Influential Blog Award

By William Teach July 30, 2013 – 9:15 am

Hey, a good old fashioned meme! It’s been years and years since we had one of these. I loved them. This one’s via Proof at Proof Positive, who got it from Chris Wysocki over at Pretty Fly for a Jersey Guy.

There is no voting, no stuffing the ballot box, no campaigning. It’s just a way to bring recognition to other blogs and bloggers that are out there.

Which means, as Ed McMahon used to say, I already may a winner!

Here are the rules:

  1. Display the award logo on your blog.
  2. Link back to the person who nominated you
  3. Answer 7 questions decided up by your nominator
  4. Nominate ( no limit of nominations ) other bloggers for this award and link back to them.
  5. Notify those bloggers of the award requirements.

Proof’s questions

1. What do you like most about me? (Just seeing if you were paying attention!)

The real #1. Education is important if we are going to preserve the Republic past this generation. Do you think home schooling or private schools better prepare the next generation for life? I really do not know much about home schooling except what I have read and one of my employees homeschooling his kids, who I will say seemed very bright, well adjusted, and respectful. I do know about private school, having attended a boarding school. I learned quite a bit, but, I will say we were kinda isolated from the real world. It prepared you for college, and, quite frankly, I know a lot of people who went hog wild at college. But, considering the state of public education, private or charter makes a hell of a lot of sense.

2. Boxers, briefs, thong or commando? (Hey! Gotta keep this from getting too heavy! You should have seen my first list of questions!) Actually, boxer briefs. Briefs annoy me cause they pinch on the legs, especially when it’s hot and sweaty. Boxers? I personally do not care for them riding up the crack of my butt (you’re welcome for that visual!) when they get sweaty. And I work outside a lot. I’ll never understand how women can wear thongs.

3. What was the best thing you’ve ever written and why? I wish I could answer that with a specific post, but, I’ve written over 14,500 posts. Many are ones like the If All You See… ones, or photo essays, or simple posts. Most tend to be old school blogging, find an article, do some excerpting, add some opinion and facts. Some are actually articles. I know I have one buried somewhere about what a conservative stands for (similar to one I wrote for Blogs for McCain, though I can only access it using the Wayback Machine on my Droid), and some really good ones on “climate change” here and there. Perhaps the best might be one that I didn’t really write. It is the Guardian Story. It is mostly just the full article from the UK Guardian where Charlie Brooker was hoping Bush 43 would be assassinated if he won re-election. Why am I proud of that? Well, it was making the rounds at the time, and for some reason I said “I’m going to save the whole thing to a text file.” And when the Guardian took the article down, I post the whole thing. I might have been the only one at the time.

Shortly thereafter I received a take down request via email from the Guardian. I replied by telling them if they put it back up I’d reduce my post to an excerpt. Then a more threatening email. I replied the same. Then a much more threatening one, to which I replied that how can they ask me to take down a post with a full excerpt on an article that no longer existed? Having only been blogging for a few months, I think that took some balls.

Then there’s a post (forget which one) on Islamic terrorists which got me a legitimate death threat from an Islamic group, which the FBI took seriously, and recommending I not discuss and damned sure not blog about.

Also, consider that I have been doing my Patriotic Pinup posts since 5/4/2005. Every Sunday since that day. I’ve expanded them from just a pinup to including the Fine 15 and Rule 5 linkage. I dare say it might be the longest running weekly meme in the blogosphere.

4. What was the most popular thing you’ve ever written? (Not necessarily the same as #3) The Guardian Story. It might not be a lot to some, but I got around 20-25k hits in a few hours as I got linked by Instapundit and a few other Big Folks in the Blogosphere at the time.

There’s also a couple that have gotten a lot of hits over the years, unfortunately, e-referrer is down at the moment.

5. What’s your favorite book or movie and why? Asking books is asking a lot. I read A LOT! Always have. If I had to really choose one, it would be Starship Troopers, considering I’ve probably read it at least 15-20 times. Heinlein has always been a favorite. Read many of his books many times. There are other books that are awesome too, but, the messages of ST sneak up on you, a very American Conservative book, with themes of earning your way, why we fight, limited government, and others, all wrapped around a fun and well written scifi book.

Movie would have to be Star Wars: A New Hope. Nuff said. Though there are many I truly love. The first Pirate’s Of The Caribbean. Revenge of the Sith (if they had just added about 5 more minutes people might have understood why Anakin turned to the dark side so easily, as was shown in the novel). Abbott and Costello’s “The Time Of Their Lives”. Any old school monster/horror movie.

6. How old were you when you realized that government was not the solution? Probably in mid-20’s. I just never paid that much attention to politics during college. Interestingly, I voted for Clinton in 1996 and Gore in 2000. I’ve always believe government has a role, and in some cases can be the solution. There are some things government can do that the private sector can’t. Such as national security. Unfortunately, even where it is a job that government should do, they often do it for themselves, not for the citizenry. Graft, incompetence, malfeasance, etc.

7. If you could change any law or practice in the USA, what would it be and why? Hmm. I’d love to give the police the power to ticket drivers for being idiots and jerks, particularly since I tend to hit big driving chokepoints with lots of jackasses every day going to and from work.

More realistic, though I wasn’t kidding above, I’d change the law so that most of the burden for illegal aliens would be on employers and such, to the point that no employer would dare hire an illegal knowingly/by accident, no school would allow anyone to attend who was not supposed to be in the country (mostly those who overstay their visas), no one would rent to illegals. If a company wants to hire a legal foreign worker, they would be responsible for keeping track of their immigration status, and providing health insurance. Schools would be tasked with the same. This would seriously reduce the amount of illegals, if they couldn’t work or go to school. The penalties would be severe, both criminally and civilly. Illegals who get busted don’t care. Business owners, hiring managers, school officials, they’d care.

My questions:

  1. Why did you start blogging?
  2. What is your opinion regarding anthropogenic global warming, ie, “climate change”?
  3. If you could go anywhere right now, where would it be?
  4. Do you think there is any hope of restoring the United States to a constitutional republic in your lifetime?
  5. If you could stand up in front of the elected GOP leadership, what would you tell them?
  6. What do you do during your free time (other than blogging, of course)?
  7. What are you most proud of?

I’m going to tag

There are many, many, many others I’d like to tag, but I think that’s enough so it can spread.

Read: Most Influential Blog Award »

Posted in Weblogs | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

WRAL Declares McCrory Broke Abortion Promise

By William Teach July 30, 2013 – 8:17 am

WRAL also highlights that they are a station of abortion fanatics

McCrory signs abortion, gun rights changes into law

Gov. Pat McCrory signed 18 bills Monday, including two of the more controversial of the recently ended legislative session – those dealing with gun rights and abortion clinics.

Supporters of Senate Bill 353, including the governor, have said it is about raising safety standards among the doctors and clinics that perform abortions.

Abortion-rights advocates say that provisions of the law, such as excluding abortion coverage from health plans offered to city and county employees, would further limit the availability of and access to the procedure statewide. They argue that, in signing the measure, McCrory is breaking a campaign promise not to allow any further limits on abortion rights.

Hmm, so the baby killers make a statement that McCrory broke his promise, and, unshockingly, the abortion fanatics at WRAL deemed it so

Abortion law breaks McCrory promise

During an Oct. 24, 2012, debate, WRAL News reporter Laura Leslie asked soon-to-be Gov. Pat McCrory the following: “If you are elected governor, what further restrictions on abortion would you agree to sign?”

McCrory’s one-word reply: “None.”

So when McCrory signed a package of changes to the state’s abortion laws Monday, did he break that campaign pledge? (snip)

Given the absolute nature of his promise, by signing Senate Bill 353, he broke that promise.

So, requiring the Department of Health and Human Services to use the ambulatory surgical rules as a guide “while not unduly restricting access” to abortion, creating safer conditions for women who are going to have a procedure that involves yanking a fetus from out of the uterus (for Liberals, the uterus is located inside a woman’s body), is somehow putting restrictions on abortion? This doesn’t stop women from getting abortions.

WRAL goes on to note

  • The bill allows any health care provider to opt out of providing care related to an abortion. This could lead to a shortage of personnel available during certain procedures.  (yet, this is not a legislative restriction. Women can still get abortions)
  • The bill forbids health plans offered through the exchanges set up by the Affordable Care Act from offering abortion coverage. While this does not restrict the availability of the procedure, it does limit the ability of women to acquire coverage that might pay for the procedure. (so, it doesn’t restrict. If women want an abortion, they can pay for it. Of course, NC has no plans to set up an Exchange in the first place. Los Federales might, and this says that no taxpayer money will go to abortions)
  • The bill forbids cities and counties from offering health plans that cover abortion procedures. Taken together, the two insurance provisions would make it more difficult for low-income women to seek abortions. (again, there is no restriction. Women can still get them)

Let’s face it, the abortion fanatics refuse to allow any restrictions or regulations. They’re totally against even parental consent and/or notification (for others. When it’s their own child, you can bet they want notification/consent). They are even against restricting the ability of an unrelated person taking a minor child across state lines to have an abortion. But what McCrory signed does not restrict abortion, it just provides a few common sense regulations.

BTW, remember when WRAL was tracking Bev Perdues broken promises? Or even tracking Bev Perdue? Yeah, me neither.

Read: WRAL Declares McCrory Broke Abortion Promise »

Posted in NC News | Comments Off on WRAL Declares McCrory Broke Abortion Promise | Trackback URL

It’s Kinda Hard For The House To Vote On Senate Amnesty Bill When Harry Reid Won’t Send It Over

By William Teach July 30, 2013 – 7:54 am

I wonder why?

(Washington Times) The immigration bill passed the Senate more than a month ago but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is refusing to send the bill to the House — just one of the hurdles that has sapped momentum and dimmed the chances for an immigration deal this year.

The White House on Monday held onto an optimistic outlook.

“I won’t deny that we would be perfectly happy for the House of Representatives to pass that bipartisan legislation today and have a signing ceremony at the end of the week. I don’t anticipate that’s going to happen,” deputy press secretary Josh Earnest said. “But I do think that there’s pretty strong momentum built up behind this piece of legislation.”

Has anyone alerted Reid and Earnest that the House can’t vote on Bills they haven’t received? Well, legally and Constitutionally. I’m sure Democrats don’t care about that notion.

House GOP leadership offices said they haven’t spoken with Mr. Reid about the holdup, but some lawmakers say he is trying to avoid the embarrassment of a defeat.

Boehner said it wouldn’t get a vote. There’s also concern because it is potentially unconstitutional, since it raises revenue. But, consider, if Reid sent it over, Democrats and Obama could demagogue the GOP for refusing to give it an up or down vote (they’re kinda doing it anyway). So why refuse to send it to the House? Perhaps Reid is worried that it will get a vote that defeats the Bill, with many Democrats voting against it. Many House Dems are against the border provisions.

Seeking to rebuild support, the White House said Mr. Obama will use August, when Congress is out of town, to push for an immigration deal.

“I think that momentum is only building. And we’ll see how House Republicans respond to that pressure,” Mr. Earnest said.

Obama can’t demagogue, or at least as much, if the House had already voted on it. The least Republicans could do would be to make sure everyone knows that Reid refuses to send the Bill over to the House.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: It’s Kinda Hard For The House To Vote On Senate Amnesty Bill When Harry Reid Won’t Send It Over »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Bummer: NC Blowing Off “Climate Change”

By William Teach July 29, 2013 – 3:51 pm

Democrats are pissed, but, hey, they lost the General Assembly because people were tired of Dem policies, among others

(News And Record) After initiating some of the country’s earliest state-sponsored research and response to climate change, the legislature has all but dropped the issue. The state agency that once identified climate change adaptation as a key goal says it’s no longer a focus.

Virtually all of the Hotcoldwetdry actions, studies, committees, etc have been axed. The giant 2008 study with almost 50 recommendations (higher taxes, more control of people and businesses, lots of pork and kickbacks to Dem campaign contributors) has been completely ignored. Awesome!

I love this part

“They’ve messed with Jordan Lake rules, said local governments can’t enact anything stricter than federal standards. They eliminated buffer requirements, weakened water standards, repealed clean-energy codes for commercial buildings,” Harrison said. “It runs the gamut. These are wide-reaching public health and environmental rollbacks.”

Wait, I thought Dems didn’t like when states enacted legislation that is stronger than federal? Wasn’t Arizona sued over that very thing?

Anyhow, the Warmists are all concerned about Bad Weather, which had never occurred in North Carolina before.

And, yeah, Dems are still whining about NC losing its “progressive” cred. Elections have consequences.

Read: Bummer: NC Blowing Off “Climate Change” »

Posted in Global Warming, NC News | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach July 29, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is horrible CO2 infused beer, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Greenie Watch, with a post on Warmists feeling that too many CO2 created lobsters being a bad thing.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove