If All You See…

By William Teach April 5, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil can of hairspray, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is American Perspective, with a video of a young girl astounding people with her 2nd Amendment protection speech.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Liberal Suggests U.S. Should Spend Lots More To Create Jobs

By William Teach April 5, 2013 – 12:02 pm

No, really (via Memeorandum, though I did see the opinion piece while perusing the LA Times android app this am)

(LA Times) Why add to the deficit right now? Jobs. Our economic models clearly show that without increased government outlays we’ll be unable to generate enough GDP growth to seriously attack unemployment. If we tried to balance the budget through tax hikes, our still-recovering economy would be hurt. That leaves a temporarily bigger deficit as an important option.

I could probably make a joke about not taking economic advice from someone with a Greek (Dimitri B. Papadimitriou) sounding name, but that would be unfair to all those of Greek descent who understand just how absurd this notion is, not too mention that Obama and the Democrats tried it. Remember that $850 billion Stimulus passed in 2009? How’d that work out? Tons and tons of temporary jobs. Jobs that appeared only on paper. Jobs that were saved (typically union jobs like teachers) but once the federal money (mostly borrowed) dried up, those jobs were on notice because the economy still stunk and the states didn’t have the money. And still don’t in most cases (except the poster child for awesome, North Dakota, due to their growing fossil fuels industry).

As one of the commenters wrote “The man who wrote this is your worst enemy.   He is an advocate for failure.” Without knowing mroe about Dimitri, I can’t position that this is what Progressives want to do, fundamentally change the way government acts within the marketplace. Of course, when they try it, things rarely work out well in the end (see: Greece, Spain, Italy, Ireland, etc). And another comment

Do you want to create jobs? Then lets use an amended version of “separation of church and state” and adopt “separation of government and market place” and you will see an explosion of economic activity. Central planning has never and will never work. Central planning causes harm and any fix causes more harm.

Government is inherently unreliable and inefficient, and consider that so many have no knowledge of how economies work, just how they want them to work. And the more government digs itself into debt, the more the private companies will be concerned and be conservative in what they do. And where will this money come from? It can either be borrowed and/or taken from the private sector in the form of fees and taxes. Then government will waste it (see: Fisker, Solyndra, Abound Solar, the program to install energy efficient window, etc).

Finally, I’d hypothesize that the whole point of the opinion piece is to increase government. That’s what Liberals have been pushing.

Read: Liberal Suggests U.S. Should Spend Lots More To Create Jobs »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Economy | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Meet The New Climate Deniers

By William Teach April 5, 2013 – 8:25 am

I missed this story the other day from Rich Lowry

(NY Post) There are few things sadder than the “climate denier.” He ignores the data and neglects the latest science. His rhetoric and policy proposals are dangerously disconnected from reality. He can’t recalibrate to take account of the latest evidence because, well, he’s a denier.

The new climate deniers are the liberals who, despite their obsession with climate change, have managed to miss the biggest story in climate science, which is that there hasn’t been any global warming for about a decade and a half.

“Over the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar,” The Economist magazine writes. “The world added roughly 100 billion tons of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750.” Yet, no more warming.

The Economist hasn’t exactly been Climate Realists over the years. In fact, their coverage tended to take a rather Alarmist viewpoint. And Lowry points out that the New Climate Deniers are finding all sorts of interesting ways to continue to Believe by blaming all sorts of things for “masking” the warming. Even though these same things, such as aerosols from coal fired plants as James Hansen (not a climate scientist) posits, have been around for a long time and were much worse in the past.

Warmists will not admit that their pet hypothesis is faulty, as are their computer models. Consider this graphic from Real Clear Science

Not particularly scary eh? Warmists tend to use a severely zoomed in chart to attempt to make tenths of a degree of temperature uptick look world ending. A temperature increase of .08C over 15 years is not scary. A temperature increase of .28F since 1990 is likewise not scary. An increase of 1.3F over the last 100+ years is again, not scary. And what you would expect during a mild warming period which came after a cool period.

What Rich misses is that “climate change” caused by Mankind has been a scary talking point since the beginning of the 20th Century, with newspapers getting hysterical time and time again, whether their concern be a planet on fire or a new ice age. They’re like teenage girls having hysterics and turning tiny issues into doooooooom. The modern Warmist isn’t interested in the climate: they’re interested in pushing their far left fascistic policies, so, they will do everything possible to prop up their cult. This is why every weather event, even massive snow, is blamed on “climate change”. Why earthquakes and volcanoes are likewise. Yet, they rarely do more than implement token changes in their own lives, and even come up with intricate reasons why they shouldn’t make changes in their own lives. Your life, yeah, you are supposed to be forced by Government to change that. But not themselves.

More at The Minority Report.

Read: Meet The New Climate Deniers »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

ACLU Concerned Reid Anti-Gun Bill Could Violate Rights

By William Teach April 5, 2013 – 7:59 am

They haven’t seemed particularly concerned with all the other anti-gun laws being passed around the country in the States nor most of the other legislation proposed in the Democrat controlled Senate, but at least they say they have some concerns with one small piece

(Daily Caller) As Senate Democrats struggle to build support for new gun control legislation, the American Civil Liberties Union now says it’s among those who have “serious concerns” about the bill.

Those concerns have the capacity to prove a major setback to Sen. Harry Reid’s current gun bill, which includes language from earlier bills introduced by Sens. Chuck Schumer and Barbara Boxer.

In an exclusive interview with The Daily Caller, a top lobbyist for the ACLU announced that the group thinks Reid’s current gun bill could threaten both privacy rights and civil liberties.

The ACLU’s Chris Calabrese said the ACLU is concerned with the background checks portion of Harry Reid’s gun control push. He and the ACLU (and myself) do not have a problem with doing a background check, but

“The first (problem) is that it treats the records for private purchases very differently than purchases made through licensed sellers. Under existing law, most information regarding an approved purchase is destroyed within 24 hours when a licensed seller does a [National Instant Criminal Background Check System] check now,” Calabrese said, “and almost all of it is destroyed within 90 days.”

The ACLU has concerns about creating a national governmental database and what the government will do with the data. The ACLU thinks the data should be destroyed just like with current background checks. They also note that the bill is vague about who will keep the data, and that it could end up in the hands of multiple other agencies for use for no one knows.

The ACLU’s second “significant concern” with Reid’s legislation is that it too broadly defines the term “transfer,” creating complicated criminal law that law-abiding Americans may unwittingly break.

“[I]t’s certainly a civil liberties concern,” Calabrese told TheDC. “You worry about, in essence, a criminal justice trap where a lawful gun owner who wants to obey the law inadvertently runs afoul of the criminal law.”

They’re also concerned with the creation of a school “tip line”, and how it could be abused and misused. I would hope they are concerned with many other facets of what is being proposed and/or passed, such as fingerprinting gun owners like they are criminals, violations of the 4th Amendment, mental health reporting procedures, violations of privacy, etc. But, the ACLU hasn’t ever seemed particularly interested in protecting the 2nd Amendment. The make it very clear down at the bottom of their webpage what they care about, and 2nd Amendment rights are not included.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: ACLU Concerned Reid Anti-Gun Bill Could Violate Rights »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Bad ACLU | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Scare-monger In Chief Claims Newtown Shooter Used An Automatic Weapon

By William Teach April 4, 2013 – 3:48 pm

Obama lying? Gee, he never does that! (via Ace)

(Weekly Standard) Now, over the next couple of months, we’ve got a couple of issues: gun control. (Applause.) I just came from Denver, where the issue of gun violence is something that has haunted families for way too long, and it is possible for us to create common-sense gun safety measures that respect the traditions of gun ownership in this country and hunters and sportsmen, but also make sure that we don’t have another 20 children in a classroom gunned down by a semiautomatic weapon — by a fully automatic weapon in that case, sadly.

Lest any progressives think the WS is making it up, that comes directly from the official White House transcript. Just in case they try and change it, I do have a screen cap. Of course, he’s playing to his unhinged base, well, at least those who donate lots and lots of money and do not like the plebes having access to weapons.

Read: Scare-monger In Chief Claims Newtown Shooter Used An Automatic Weapon »

Posted in Barry Obama | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 4, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil pool (probably owned by an evil 1%er) wasting non-renewable water, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on North Korean bluster, and even gives Obama positive credit!

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

So, Do Americans Really Give A Damn About “Climate Change”?

By William Teach April 4, 2013 – 11:57 am

Here’s the Washington Post

The global warming conundrum has been on full display over the past 24 hours. Even as one of the nation’s most prominent climate scientists has decided to retire in order to become a full-time activist, a new Pew Research poll suggests public interest and intensity with the issue is waning.

Only 42% say it’s because Someone Else refuses to go carbon neutral (ie, Mankind’s fault). This is up a bit from a few years ago, because people become believers when it gets hot. Europeans aren’t buying it that much after yet another freaking cold winter and no signs of spring.

According to the advocates at Yale, people are concerned

Researchers divided the U.S. population into six categories — alarmed, concerned, cautious, disengaged, doubtful and dismissive — based on their attitudes toward climate change. As of September 2012, the largest audience segment is the concerned group, the 29 percent of Americans who are “moderately certain” climate change is occurring and is human-caused. The smallest audience segment is the dismissive group, the 8 percent of Americans who are certain global warming is not occurring. Between 2010 and 2012, the number of Americans alarmed about global warming increased by 6 percentage points while the number of dismissive Americans decreased by 8 percentage points.

Here’s what Yale sees as global warming

See? Because you drove an SUV you made it hot and cold! Well, mostly hot, to the tune of a whopping .28 degree F rise from 1990-2012. And no global temp change in over 15 years. Dooooom!!!!!!yawn!!!!!!!

Read: So, Do Americans Really Give A Damn About “Climate Change”? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama: “The Politics Of Hotcoldwetdry Are Tough!!!!!”

By William Teach April 4, 2013 – 9:24 am

Well, yes, they are, because most people, even those who are Warmists, aren’t interested in burdensome restrictions on their lives that also dramatically increase costs. Most, when polled, want government to “Do Something”, just not when it effects their pocketbook and own freedom. Surprisingly, there are no polls asking “what have you done in your own life? Have you given up fossil fueled travel? Take 2 minute showers? Only buy local? Unplug appliances when not in use?” And the always fun one “why are you taking constant fossil fueled flights across the country, followed by driving in a gas hog in a big convoy of gas hogs, to give 30 minute speechs?”

(The Hill) President Obama told Democratic donors late Wednesday that he must sharpen his argument for action on climate change and green energy at a time when many families are still struggling financially.

He said, “The politics of this are tough.”

“[T]he thing that I’m going to have to try to work to persuade the American people a little more convincingly on is this notion that there’s a contradiction between our economy and our environment is just a false choice,” Obama said at a San Francisco fundraiser.

Hmm, so he took a fossil fueled flight across the country (with a brief stop over in Denver to whine about gun control, which meant he was able to write most of the trip off as presidential business) to attend a fundraiser where he whined about hotcoldwetdry. And, let’s not forget all the fossil fueled vehicles required to get him to and from the airport.

“If we’re going to deal with climate change in a serious way, then we’ve got to have folks in Congress – even when it’s not politically convenient – to talk about it and advocate for it,” Obama said at the second event.

And more fossil fueled travel in a big convoy of low MPG vehicles to the second event.

This is one of the reasons I went from a Believer to a Climate Realist: the people who advocate for it the most and are in positions to affect regulatory and/or legislative changes are the biggest hypocrites. “Climate change” isn’t about saving the planet from a fever, it’s about more far left government, growing the size of government, and increasing governmental control over people and businesses.

Read: Obama: “The Politics Of Hotcoldwetdry Are Tough!!!!!” »

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

Surprise: Left Wing Ant-Gun Groups Say Gun Crime Worse In States With Least Regulations

By William Teach April 4, 2013 – 8:51 am

While (NMP) Obama is running around the country giving campaign speech after speech, instead of providing leadership and honest discussion, far left Soros funded monkeys make an interesting discovery, which the NY Times was thrilled to repeat

Many states with the weakest gun laws have the worst rates of gun violence, ranking high on numerous indicators, like gun homicides and suicides, firearm deaths of children, and killings of law enforcement officers, according to a report to be issued Wednesday by the liberal Center for American Progress.

Alaska ranked first in overall gun deaths, the report found, with 20.28 deaths per 100,000 people in 2010 — more than twice the national average — followed by Louisiana and Montana, all states that prior analyses have judged to have weak gun laws. Eight of the states with the highest levels of gun violence were among the 25 with the weakest gun laws, the report found.

If you take a look at the map of the states at Think Progress, you’ll be shocked, shocked, I tell you, that quite a few “Blue” states with some of the most draconian gun laws are deemed “the best.” You know, the states that tend to feature the most gang activity, drive by’s, and mass shootings. And what of Chicago, which has extremely strict laws aimed at law abiding citizens? What of people using guns to protect themselves?

(American Power) But I clicked through anyway, and my first objection is that CAP doesn’t define “gun violence.” What kind of gun violence are we talking about? Is gun violence being committed by people who bought firearms legally? Or what? The piece doesn’t say. But it does spout a bunch of scholarly jargon about “regression,” “empirical evidence,” and so forth, so it sounds really awesome!

Good points

(Just One Minute) It will be interesting to peruse the study when it hits the intertubes. The lead tells us that low control states score high on “numerous” indicators, such as “gun homicides and suicides, firearm deaths of children, and killings of law enforcement officers”. Yet I think we will find states like Montana ranking high on just one factor. The suspense mounts!

Tom Maguire dug deep into the study and found some interesting things. Like, that Montana, despite being prominently featured in the Times’ article, isn’t even in the top 10. And notes that suicide by gun is heavily weighted, as are some other factors. Should suicide be included? No.

(NY Times link) Dr. Azrael, of Harvard, noted that the factors that were driving gun violence differed from state to state — in states like Montana and Idaho, for example, the rate of gun suicides greatly outstrips the rate of homicides committed with firearms.

What we do see from the study is that states with the strictest gun laws tend to have lots and lots of gun violence against others. I’d suggest that it’s not just the harsh laws against personal gun ownership, but also that these liberal states also are soft on criminals.

(Think Progress) The CAP report’s finding is yet another contribution to a growing body of empirical evidence that strong gun laws work.

And that is the point of the study, to take cherry picked and massaged data to increase restrictions on legal gun owners. Interestingly, these liberals never seem to call for stronger penalties on the actual criminals.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Read: Surprise: Left Wing Ant-Gun Groups Say Gun Crime Worse In States With Least Regulations »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Liberal World | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Obamacare Incompetence

By William Teach April 3, 2013 – 6:54 pm

—>shocked face<—

(Time) Let me try to understand this: The key incentive for small businesses to support Obamacare was that they would be able to shop for the best deals in health care super-stores—called exchanges. The Administration has had 3 years to set up these exchanges. It has failed to do so.

This is a really bad sign. There will be those who argue that it’s not the Administration’s fault. It’s the fault of the 33 states that have refused to set up their own exchanges. Nonsense. Where was the contingency planning? There certainly are models, after all—the federal government’s own health benefits plan (FEHBP) operates markets that exist in all 50 states. So does Medicare Advantage. But now, the Obama Administration has announced that it won’t have the exchanges ready in time, that small businesses will be offered one choice for the time being—for a year, at least. No doubt, small business owners will be skeptical of the Obama Administration’s belief in the efficacy of the market system to produce lower prices through competition. That was supposed to be the point of this plan.

Certainly, the Republicans who have stood in the way of these exchanges—their own idea, by the way, born in the conservative Heritage Foundation—deserve a great deal of the “credit” for the debacle. But we are now seeing weekly examples of this Administration’s inability to govern.

Tell us something we don’t know. Obama has failed to govern during his 4+ years in office.  He really hasn’t bothered. It’s been one long neverending campaign. We have a 2000+ page piece of legislation that was still extremely open ended, resulting (so far) in over 20,000 pages of regulations. When writing Obamacare no one sat back and said “so, um, how will this be implemented? Can it be?” Nor did anyone ask “can the Obama administration actually get it done with Obama at the helm? The guy has little clue as to getting anything other than campaigning done. Look at the economy, for one.”

Read: Obamacare Incompetence »

Posted in Barry Obama, Democrats, Healthcare | 8 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove