If All You See…Memorial Day Edition…

By William Teach May 27, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is the flag that has watched over so many brave men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice, you might just be a patriot

The blog of the day is Powerline, with a post on Memorial Day. Also, happy 11th Blogoversary to Powerline.

Read More »

Read: If All You See…Memorial Day Edition… »

Posted in Holidays, If All You See | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

“The 4 Species of Climate-Change Denial”

By William Teach May 27, 2013 – 11:17 am

Some late morning amusement from another Warmist, Forbes’ Todd Essig

The 4 Species of Climate-Change Denial: Lessons From Comparing Republican Decision-Making Cowardice To Angelina Jolie

Starts out with name calling. Check

But before describing what I saw I want to be clear about something; there is a strong consensus among climate scientists about human-caused climate change. That is fact, not opinion. Furthermore, the fact is that events like Hurricane Sandy and the Moore tornado are more likely and likely more severe, and will be increasingly so. And finally, the fact is that facts don’t change minds.

That “97%” consensus “study” has already been beaten like a rented mule. Consensus is not science, and the study is based exactly on opinion, in other words, of the roughly 32% of the papers which took an opinion, 97% mentioned anthropogenic causation. Hell, my stuff, were they papers, would be in that category, as I believe Man plays a small role, mostly through agriculture, landfills (global) and through the land use/urban heat island effect.

The tornado meme has been beaten up, too. And calling it climate change shows a predilection for politics, not science. Anyhow

1. Lost in the scientific weeds

They grab a fact, a factoid, or an isolated data point consistent with their group identity and then categorically assert that this scientifically proves—it absolutely proves!—that human-caused climate is the greatest hoax ever perpetuated. They ignore all those pesky peer reviews and concerns with methodological rigor. They know best. I mean, really, why bother with the actual science with which you,  your group, and your political leaders disagree?

That’s funny, because it is the Warmist side which has taken to saying that cold, snow, ice, no spring in Europe, etc, are caused by too much warming. Oh, and that the warming is hiding in the deep oceans.

2. Trashing scientists

They move up a level of abstraction. Instead of trashing the science they trash the community of scientists. Consensus is irrelevant because scientists are weak, craven, and dishonest. For them, scientists are just a bunch of liars and cheats who will say anything to get a grant. This group cites evidence of scientific wrongdoing that never happened and ignores the results of any contrary investigation.

Oh, we trash the “science”, but this is interesting considering Essig started out with the “denier” crap. Warmists constanly start out by saying anyone who doesn’t agree with their notions are in the pay of Big Oil and Big Coal, and want to kill granny and kids and all life…you know the hit parade.

3. Backwards policy prescriptions

This species requires both significant imagination and a radical suspension of logic. They start by pointing to dire, horrific, civilization altering consequences of policies that take climate-change seriously. And then, with a startling display of illogic, turn around to say that because the policy is unacceptable all this talk about climate-change must be nothing more than total crap.

Huh what? Warmists are the ones calling for doom and gloom somewhere in the far future when their pronouncements will not be remembered.

4. Name calling

Don’t mean to shock you but there are people who think name calling moves things forward. Among other things, I was accused of huffing glue and of being a pagan believer in “ecotheism.” Let me assure you that neither is true. The former would unacceptably interfere with running and biking while the latter implies a religious commitment beyond the grasp of my secular soul.

Says the guy, again, who started out by calling us deniers.

He ends thusly

The only question is on the basis of what will you act: cowardly leadership or scientific consensus? Just like Jolie had to make choices based on probabilities so too do our policy makers. It remains to be seen whether they will have the courage to make data-based decisions or continue hiding in the cowardice of science-denial. And as the leaders go, so too will many followers.

Right. So politics, not science.

Read: “The 4 Species of Climate-Change Denial” »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Collapsing Science, Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Dionne: It’s Not Easy Being Obama

By William Teach May 27, 2013 – 8:35 am

You know why? Because all you people who criticize him are raaaaacists, per the Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne. Let’s skip all the way to the end to find out how simply awesome Obama is

He’s an anti-ideological leader in an ideological age, a middle-of-the-road liberal skeptical of the demands placed on a movement leader, a politician often disdainful of the tasks that politics asks him to perform. He wants to invite the nation to reason together with him when nearly half the country thinks his premises and theirs are utterly at odds. Doing so is unlikely to get any easier. But being Barack Obama, he’ll keep trying.

Can’t you just feel the orgasmic writing of Dionne? But, hey, you people!

You wonder if President Obama sometimes finds himself singing a variant on Kermit the Frog’s anthem about the burdens of being green: It’s not easy being Barack Obama.

This is not simply or even primarily a matter of color, although the president’s racial background has been a source of both opportunity and trial. As the first African American in the White House, he has won an unprecedented level of support among black Americans and the goodwill of enough white Americans to build a national majority.

Yet it’s undeniable that racism lurks beneath so many of the preposterously false charges against him — that this son of Hawaii wasn’t really born in the United States, that he is a secret Muslim who “hates America,” that he’s animated by a “Kenyan, anti-colonial” worldview. Among African Americans, his persistent emphasis on responsible fatherhood, a key theme of his recent commencement address at Morehouse College, is sometimes cast as a way of pandering to white prejudice by hectoring a community to which he owes a large and still-unpaid political debt.

And those groups who were targeted by the IRS? Well, they attack Obama because of race, and are now blaming Obama for the targeting because of race. Heck, they probably attack Obama for spending so much time campaigning and playing golf because of race. The fact that he’s a terrible leader, a hyper-partisan, working to change America to something more akin to Greece has no bearing on it. But, he reaches out to Republicans with Grand Bargains, Dionne writes. He can’t be partisan! Yet, each time Obama finds a way to blow up the bargains (hence the reason Democrats do not want Obama involved in amnesty at this time) and uses that as a pretext to attack Republicans. Almost like it is planned.

Anyway, if you attack Obama, you’re a racist, per Dionne. Liberals never get tired of playing the race card, and, quite frankly, we should expect to see more of this line of thought feeling as more scandals occur.

Read: Dionne: It’s Not Easy Being Obama »

Posted in Barry Obama, Obamanuts | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Dick Durbin: Should Bloggers And Tweeters Be Shielded Like Journalists?

By William Teach May 27, 2013 – 8:12 am

Loathsome Senator Dick Durbin (D-Il), who at one time compared the military members at Guantanamo Bay detention facility to Nazis, isn’t quite ready to call for a special council regarding the DOJ’s investigations into journalists, as he said during an appearance on Fox News Sunday. And

(Daily Caller) “But here is the bottom line — the media shield law, which I am prepared to support, and I know Sen. Graham supports, still leaves an unanswered question, which I have raised many times: What is a journalist today in 2013? We know it’s someone that works for Fox or AP, but does it include a blogger? Does it include someone who is tweeting? Are these people journalists and entitled to constitutional protection? We need to ask 21st century questions about a provision that was written over 200 years ago.”

It’s not up to Durbin and his cohorts to define who is and who isn’t covered by the 1st Amendment protections of the Press Clause, and Dick should note that it doesn’t says “journalist”, but “the Press”, which at the time meant any person who felt like publishing any news and/or opinions. Interestingly, Alexander Hamilton (and others) thought there was no need for the 1st Amendment to mention the press (it’s well worth reading the entire article)

Why for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretence for claiming that power. They might urge with a semblance of reason, that the constitution ought not to be charged with the absurdity of providing against the abuse of an authority, which was not given, and that the provision against restraining the liberty of the press afforded a clear implication, that a power to prescribe proper regulations concerning it, was intended to be vested in the national government. (This argument lead to adopting the Ninth Amendment.)

There’s a big doubleshot, in that Hamilton saw that the government was given no power to restrict, but that there would be some who would seek to take advantage of the Press clause. Ironically, without that clause, there would be no way to cry out for civil rights, since the federal government ignores the 9th and 10th Amendments.

The purpose of both the speech and press clauses is not to be able to publish the dirty highlights of a Justin Bieber party or Lindsay Lohan’s latest run ins with the law and rehab, but to be able to publish material critical of the government. This grew out of the restrictive policies of the British government towards religion and the press

Freedom of speech and of the press served one purpose in America: To remove the fear of the common law doctrine of seditious libel so citizens could freely speak or publish without license their grievances against public policy or conduct of public officials. One of the distasteful things found under the common law was the government practice of criminalizing or shielding itself through requiring license to publish of any criticism it felt made people dissatisfied with their government or government established religion.

Seditious libel (or criminal libel as it was sometimes called) was generally defined as “the intentional publication, without lawful excuse or justification, of written blame of any public man, or of the law, or of any institution established by law.” (Stephen, History of the Criminal Law)

It’s not up to Dick Durbin and his cohorts to define who is covered by a shield law: they’re protected by the Constitution, and they have no power to define under the Constitution. One last quote from Benjamin Franklin

Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.

Freedom of the Press is an extension of Freedom of Speech, meant specifically for the written word. We see what happens when the government starts codifying speech, say, at the IRS.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Dick Durbin: Should Bloggers And Tweeters Be Shielded Like Journalists? »

Posted in 1st Amendment, Constitution, Democrats | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Watcha Reading?

By William Teach May 26, 2013 – 5:14 pm

Finally finished Outside Context Problem, a very long book, 543 pages. As I wrote last week “It’s not the greatest writing style (not that I could do better), a bit sophomoric, but the overall concept is excellent, as are the characters, the plot, and the buildup.” An invasion from aliens, the United States has gone done. There are two follow ups, haven’t started them yet, though I will read them.

Started on Clone Hunter by Victor Methos. What if Humans started mass cloning? And then used the clones as slaves? For hard labor, fighting, and sex? And treated them like toys that could be broken and replaced? What if one rebelled?

I’ve also been slowly reading The Mad, Mad, Mad World Of Climatism. I’ll provide a write up once I finally finish, but, let me say that this should be the one book that every Warmist, and those on the fences, should read. Heck, even if you do not buy into “climate change”, you should read it. The facts and figures, along with the history, of “climate change” is put in an excellent format that anyone can easily understand.

Read: Watcha Reading? »

Posted in Books | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Politico Wonders Where Obama’s Hotcoldwetdry Agenda Is

By William Teach May 26, 2013 – 2:48 pm

Perhaps they should ask why he has the highest “Carbon Footprint” in the world and uses lots and lots of fossil fuels to travel all around the country for campaign style speeches, not too mention huge motorcades so he can play golf

Where’s President Obama’s climate agenda?

Why don’t we ask the thriving businesses known as Solyndra, A123, SunPower, Evergreen Solar, Fisker, First Solar, and so many others?

President Barack Obama began his second term with a ringing pledge to tackle climate change — saying that “the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations.”

Four months later, everyone’s still waiting.

Instead of taking bold steps, Obama’s environmental regulators are dodging questions about how they intend to rein in the nation’s largest sources of greenhouse gases. They missed a major deadline last month for rolling out rules for future power plants, prompting environmental groups and several states to threaten lawsuits. And the EPA has insisted to Congress that it’s not even working on regulations for the next piece of the carbon puzzle — the nation’s vast fleet of existing power plants.

Perhaps Obama realizes that the world has seen a miniscule 0.28F increase since 1990, per the Met Office, and just 0.14F since 1997. Statistically insignificant. I do find it amusing that The Politico’s Erica Martinson and Jennifer Epstein would write this article when the majority of the country is at or below average temperatures, and the East is way below, having seen snow Saturday night. Europe is still waiting for Spring.

“President Obama is absolutely committed to tackling climate change,” said Carol Browner, Obama’s former top energy and climate adviser, who is now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. “This is a legacy issue for him that he really believes in.”

What he’s not committed to is getting his own hands dirty. That’s for Other People to do.

What is his climate change strategy? Regulation, regulation, regulation. Oh, and a stagnant economy, which sees lower “emissions”.

Read: Politico Wonders Where Obama’s Hotcoldwetdry Agenda Is »

Posted in Barry Obama, Global Warming | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 26, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a wonderful field (far from your home) that would be perfect for solar receptors, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Atlas Shrugs, with a post comparing jihad victims at Ft. Hood with Lee Rigby

Read: If All You See… »

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

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach May 26, 2013 – 10:59 am

Happy Sunday! A great day to remember all the military members who made the ultimate sacrifice in the protection of the once and future nation of the United States. This pinup is by Al Buell, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Gateway Pundit points out that police ticketed torched cars in Sweden during the riots
  2. Vox Popoli discusses the anti-free speech British government
  3. American Perspective discusses the California farmer’s revolution
  4. Bookworm Room has some interesting thoughts on the beheading attack
  5. Cold Fury revisits the Gibson guitar issues
  6. Doug Ross merges Arrested Development with Democrats
  7. Fire Andrea Mitchell has slimy Democrats
  8. Flopping Aces features extreme global warming (snow) in Vermont
  9. House of Eratosthenes has the words most abused by liberals
  10. Jammie Wearing Fool has the latest from loathsome Nanny Bloomberg
  11. Maggie’s Notebook features Sammy the Shark, apparently trained by the Mossad
  12. Michelle Malkin highlights Obamacare waiver seeking
  13. Political Realities discusses the marriage of the media and Obama
  14. Darleen Click (protein wisdom) shows media confusion regarding the American flags after the tornado (and congrats on the new granddaughter!)
  15. And last, but not least, Public Secrets has an Obama irony alert

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

745pm: Late additions and updates

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

NY Times: Obama Admin Cast Wide Net In Leaker Cases

By William Teach May 26, 2013 – 9:14 am

How big a net? This big

(NY Times) Even before the F.B.I. conducted 550 interviews of officials and seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters in a leak investigation connected to a 2012 article about a Yemen bomb plot, agents had sought the same reporters’ sources for two other articles about terrorism.

In a separate case last year, F.B.I. agents asked the White House, the Defense Department and intelligence agencies for phone and e-mail logs showing exchanges with a New York Times reporter writing about computer attacks on Iran. Agents grilled officials about their contacts with him, two people familiar with the investigation said.

And agents tracing the leak of a highly classified C.I.A. report on North Korea to a Fox News reporter pulled electronic archives showing which officials had gained access to the report and had contact with the reporter on the day of the leak.

The emerging details of these and other cases show just how wide a net the Obama administration has cast in its investigations into disclosures of government secrets, querying hundreds of officials across the federal government and even some of their foreign counterparts.

So there’s a new revelation, that they went after a NY Times reporter. And these are only the ones we know about. Interestingly, there are no searches (that we know about) involving those who leaked material that makes the Obama admin look good, such as with the Osama Bin Laden raid.

Some officials are now declining to take calls from certain reporters, concerned that any contact may lead to investigation. Some complain of being taken from their offices to endure uncomfortable questioning. And the government officials typically must pay for lawyers themselves, unlike reporters for large news organizations whose companies provide legal representation.

What all this does is create a chill on media contact. Government employees will clam up even when there is no threat. And it will make the Press worried that The Government will come after them if they publish a story. This is intimidation. Let’s not forget how the Obama admin treats many reporters which are critical and publish unflattering stories. Sharyl Attkinson is the poster child for how the Obama admin abuses reporters. The O admin is saying “toe the line, do what we tell you, or we’re coming after you”, which may not violate the letter of the 1st Amendment, but surely violates the spirit.

The question for The Press now is “do you continue to act mostly like little lapdogs, or do you all refuse to be intimidated and finally decide to do you job in keeping government honest?”

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: NY Times: Obama Admin Cast Wide Net In Leaker Cases »

Posted in 1st Amendment, Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Now That CO2 Has Passed 400ppm, We Should All Stockpile Cyanide Or Something

By William Teach May 25, 2013 – 5:45 pm

Because, you know, doom (even though that 400ppm thing didn’t happen the other week) (via Tom Nelson)

(Spanner Films) You’ve probably heard the appalling news that, for the first time in human history, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has just passed 400 parts per million. (Eh? Scientific America’s explanation here).  It’s been 2.5 million years since CO2 was last at this level – at which point, temperatures were 2 to 3 degrees C higher, the Arctic was ice-free, global weather patterns were completely different, sea levels were up to 40 metres higher and humans did not live on the planet.

Mankind was around 2.5 million years ago. I do find it weird that it was a lot warmer despite the same CO2 concentration: might there have been something else driving the climate, like, oh, I don’t know, the nuclear furnace in the sky?

Which means that we are heading for an even worse scenario than the one we depicted in The Age of Stupid: Africa uninhabitable, continental Europe mostly desert, Australia’s agricultural system destroyed, hundreds of major cities underwater, hundreds of millions of people dead and many more on the move. Possibly within my lifetime (born 1972, hoping to live to 2062), but almost certainly within my daughter Eva’s (born 2012, hoping to live to 2102).

Hysteria much? I’m going to stop there and go to the ultimate excerpt, as there is just way, way too much unhingedness to post it all. Make sure to read it, as it ends with

Should we stockpile cyanide? You think I’m exaggerating, but a close friend of mine, who has four children, said she plans to kill herself and them when it comes to it.

Read: Now That CO2 Has Passed 400ppm, We Should All Stockpile Cyanide Or Something »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Beyond Moonbat, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove