Whatcha Reading?

By William Teach February 13, 2013 – 4:14 pm

I experience this typically one to two times a week. Yes, that does mean I read that many books a year. Mostly science fiction, some fantasy (no frigging sparkly vampires!), a bit of mystery/thriller, and good zombie books as much as I can get them. Though, the one I just finished by Lisa Olsen, Angel Of Mercy, was kinda chick scifi. It was free (like tons of books I get for Kindle), and she has a couple other really good books like The Touch and Pretty Witches All In A Row. It was pretty good, she’s a great writer.

PS: I’ve started a nice gory zombie book to make up for all the feelings.

Read: Whatcha Reading? »

Posted in Books | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 13, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is snow which only happens because a fossil fueled helicopter is making the climate warm, you might just be a Climate Astrologer

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with the full text of Marco Rubio’s SOTU response.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Schoolkids Won’t Know What Working School Buses Look Like

By William Teach February 13, 2013 – 10:24 am

In the rush to save the planet from overheating, no one thought about how all those planet boiling GHGs would cause cold

(Northern Life) It would seem today’s modern fleet of school buses hasn’t been built for Northern Ontario weather.

According to the Sudbury Student Services Consortium, there is a problem with vehicles manufactured after 2010 which makes them hard to run in cold weather.

Changes to the engine design to make them more energy-efficient has had the unfortunate side effect of turning diesel fuel into gel in the extreme cold.

That’s exactly what happened Jan. 23, when school buses were cancelled because of record cold temperatures, which dipped below -36 C.

Students are also complaining of being cold on these buses because the engines aren’t able to run the heaters properly on such days.

I suppose this is what Obama meant when he said “But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change.”

Read: Schoolkids Won’t Know What Working School Buses Look Like »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Ted Nugent Responds On Gun Control

By William Teach February 13, 2013 – 7:51 am

Unfortunately, the Nuge was on his best behavior, and only provided some rare meat

(Buzzfeed) But when it came to gun control proposals, he didn’t mince words.

“Its more nonsense. Nothing he proposes or nothing he’s been proposed would have stopped any of the shootings. None of those shooters are gonna register anything,” Nugent said as dozens of reporters huddled around the conservative agitator just off the House floor.

“Canada finally abandoned its multibillion waste of a C68 gun law where goose hunters and farmers had to register their squirrel rifles. And it didn’t do anything to reduce crime or save any lives.”

“Who doesn’t know this? Who doesn’t know that registration and limitation on magazine capacity and the color of guns has anything to do with saving lives and reducing crime?” the “Nuge” argued, before his handler whisked him away for a television interview.

That’s because Nugent understands that what Obama and Democrats are pushing is to control gun ownership for law abiding citizens, making them more reliant on The Government for protection from criminals. And because Democrats simply do not like guns and do not want (Other People) to be allowed to own guns.

(The Hill) Obama on Tuesday acknowledged that policymakers will never eliminate gun violence altogether. But any progress on that front, he argued, is worth the effort.

“Our actions will not prevent every senseless act of violence in this country. … But we were never sent here to be perfect,” he said. “We were sent here to make what difference we can, to secure this nation, expand opportunity, and uphold our ideals through the hard, often frustrating, but absolutely necessary work of self-government.”

Strange how the majority of gun violence occurs in gun free zones and Democrat areas with massive restrictions on gun ownership by law abiding citizens.

Read: Ted Nugent Responds On Gun Control »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Barry Obama | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Obama Pushes Hotcoldwetdry Legislation In SOTU, Flatlines Amongst Republicans And Independents

By William Teach February 13, 2013 – 6:59 am

He puts a thrill up Al Gore’s leg, and all the climastrologers who are mostly interested in bigger government taking more money from Other People while enforcing more Big Government control of people and the private sector

(Politico) After years of talking about it, we are finally poised to control our own energy future.  We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years.  We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas, and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar – with tens of thousands of good, American jobs to show for it.  We produce more natural gas than ever before – and nearly everyone’s energy bill is lower because of it.  And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.

Those “green” jobs are virtually nowhere to be seen, because they cost a whole lot more and so many of the companies have gone out of business while others are just kinda idling away. As for for “dangerous carbon pollution”, if he can’t even use the correct scientific terms, we surely understand that he’s interested in politics. It’s CO2. Carbon is something different. And CO2 is necessary for life on earth. It’s also down because so many people are not working and/or can’t afford to really go anywhere during their vacation time. Oh, and everyone’s energy bill is going up. Gasoline has been perpetually above $3.00  gallon, and are expected to stay high. Energy companies keep asking for rate hikes as their costs go up.

But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change.

This from a man who keeps the thermostat high during the winter months and takes lots of long fossil fueled flights to make short speeches, and surely has one of the highest “carbon footprints” of anyone on this planet. Besides, he isn’t too concerned with the plight of our children as he keeps spending more and more and has added over $6 trillion to the debt.

Yes, it’s true that no single event makes a trend.  But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15.  Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and floods – all are now more frequent and intense.  We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence.  Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science – and act before it’s too late.

You can choose to believe whatever you want. But, if you aren’t willing to practice what you preach, you’re a hypocrite and just talking mule fritters. And, as Climate Depot points out during a point by point rebuttal

Obama is ignoring the climate elephant in the room. Global temperatures have essentially been flat lining for 16 years now. The halt in global temperatures has shown up in multiple data sets and peer-reviewed literature.

And the trends in drought, wildfires, and floods is not going up. Sandy was not a result of “climate change”, and even most responsible Warmists will tell you it was a freak storm, and freak storms happen.

The good news is, we can make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth.  I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago.  But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will.  I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.

Emperor Obama Has Spoken. He wants a cap and tax program, and, despite not actually offering to provide a plan, if Congress, which is made up of lots of people who disagree with Obama’s vision, doesn’t Do Something, Obama will screw the country by executive fiat. Obama always seems to forget that this is a not a dictatorship and he doesn’t always get his way. Let’s not forget that Obama couldn’t get a cap and tax bill through Congress when Democrats controlled both the Senate and the House.

Oh, and then there’s this

Bing Pulse saw 12.9 million votes, and here’s how it looked during the hotcoldwetdry portion

It may not be fully 100% negative, but damned close.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Obama Pushes Hotcoldwetdry Legislation In SOTU, Flatlines Amongst Republicans And Independents »

Posted in Barry Obama, Climahypocrites, Global Warming | Comments Off on Obama Pushes Hotcoldwetdry Legislation In SOTU, Flatlines Amongst Republicans And Independents | Trackback URL

People Affected By Superstorm Sandy Want Hotcoldwetdry Action From Obama

By William Teach February 12, 2013 – 3:54 pm

It was a HUUUUUUGE demonstration (via Tom Nelson)

(HuffPo) Hurricane Sandy survivors and environmental advocates met in front of the White House on Monday to demand action from President Barack Obama on climate change ahead of his State of the Union address.

“We’re here to deliver over 280,000 signatures to President Obama asking for climate action now,” said Brad Johnson, campaign manager for the environmental group Forecast the Facts, which, along with 350.org, CREDO and Moms Clean Air Force, helped gather signatures and put together the demonstration. Approximately 15 people showed up on the gloomy, wet Monday.

That’s the best they can do with all these far left agitation groups involved? 15 people? How did they get to D.C.? Fossil fueled travel?

Protesters on Monday held signs suggesting that any similarity between Obama and Abraham Lincoln will rest on “Obama’s climate legacy.”

Let’s see: Lincoln started an unpopular war because he believed heavily in preserving the Union and freeing the slaves. Obama believes in…..Obama. And if he pushes hotcoldwetdry legislation and executive orders, he still couldn’t hold a candle to Lincoln. These climastrologers are nuts.

Read: People Affected By Superstorm Sandy Want Hotcoldwetdry Action From Obama »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Enviroweenies, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times: It’s Not Easy (Or Cheap) Being Green

By William Teach February 12, 2013 – 1:07 pm

Yeah, now they tell us

(Fish Wrap) GREEN jobs have long had a whiff of exaggeration to them. The alternative-energy sector may ultimately employ millions of people. But raising the cost of the energy that households and businesses use every day — a necessary effect of helping the climate — is not exactly a recipe for an economic boom.

No! The hell you say!

The rest goes into all sorts of schemes to attempt to create a green economy, including things like cap-n-tax and all the other energy and economy killing measures, which should be sparked by *surprise!* Big Government.

BUT even largely successful mandates, like the one on autos, often bring little-noticed costs. So environmental economists are watching to see if Mr. Obama will also take steps to keep economic growth at the center of his climate policy, by attempting to regulate existing power plants with market-friendly permits.

When has Obama cared about the economy in the first place, outside of a few special interests who vote D and donated to Dems?

The two sides in the climate debate have spent recent years offering dueling — and dubious — economic claims. Switching to more expensive, cleaner energy does not promise a free lunch of more prosperity and a healthier planet. But it also does not need to result in stagnation. A federal climate response brings a mix of costs and benefits, and the specific policies that Mr. Obama and Congress pursue will help determine the balance.

Regarding the bold portion, then what’s the point if it won’t provide benefits? Oh, right, bigger and bigger Big Government control over people, companies, and economies. Next paragraph.

In the end, the strongest economic argument for an aggressive response to climate change is not the much trumpeted windfall of green jobs. It’s the fact that the economy won’t function very well in a world full of droughts, hurricanes and heat waves.

Did Climastrologer David Leonhardt just get done telling us that “green energy” might not create a healthier planet?

Read: NY Times: It’s Not Easy (Or Cheap) Being Green »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Economy, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 12, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is a planet killing plastic water bottle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jihad Watch, with new information on who CAIR associates with.

Read: If All You See… »

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

NY Times Really Concerned About Newest “Die Hard” Movie And Link To Gun Violence

By William Teach February 12, 2013 – 9:00 am

Here’s Joe Nocera writing an op-ed for the NY Tomes, The ‘Die Hard’ Quandry, in which he’s really, really concerned

Later this week, the fifth installment of the “Die Hard” movies is scheduled to open in theaters across the country. “A Good Day to Die Hard” stars, once again, Bruce Willis as John McClane, a too-stubborn-for-his-own-good cop who has to stop a highly trained army of bad guys out to wreak destruction and death. It will undoubtedly be a giant hit for Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, the owner of the “Die Hard” franchise.

Oh, that’s why, due to News Corp being the Big Company putting the movie out (Twentieth Century Fox). No one at the Times was particularly concerned about the other extremely violent movies, such as Django Unchained, but, if it is a Rupert Murdoch owned movie? Concern!

That’s a lot of “Die Hard.” Among the guns used — and used, and used, and used — in just the first “Die Hard” are a Steyr AUG assault rifle, a Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine gun, and a Walther PPK pistol with silencer. McClane himself relies on a Beretta 92 semiautomatic pistol in the first three movies, and a Sig Sauer P220 in the more recent films. (He also favors the bald look in the last two movies.)

Most of those guns are already banned for private ownership as long as they are automatic. Silencers are against the law. And I guess people who are bald are supposed to be scary, mean, and violent.

But, in all fairness, Mr. Nocera does bring his Fox Derangement Syndrome to an end (mostly). One thing he points out is that the MPAA is more concerned with language than violence (and think about this with the Die Hard franchise: the movies do tend to be cartoonish in regards to people getting shot. Boom, dead, no big bullet holes, no big screams, barely any blood from being shot) and that Hollywood doesn’t want to take any responsibility

…“There is tons of research on this,” says Joanne Cantor, professor emerita of communications at the University of Wisconsin, and an expert on the effect of violent movies and video games. “Watching violence makes kids feel they can use violence to solve a problem. It brings increased feelings of hostility. It increases desensitization.” Every parent understands this instinctively, of course, but those instincts are backed by decades of solid research.

When it comes to those who will truly act on the violence they witness and become extremely violent themselves there are typically other risk factors.

There is a second reason many people — indeed, many of the same people who would like to ban assault weapons — shrink from demanding changes in the culture’s tolerance for violent images. To do anything about it legislatively would likely violate the First Amendment. Just as an assault weapon ban is the slippery slope for Second Amendment advocates, efforts to restrict violent images — or pornography, for that matter — is the slippery slope for First Amendment absolutists.

Well, yeah, but what Mr. Nocera misses is that most of the people making the games, movies, and TV shows with massive gun violence tend to vote Democrat and donate to Democrats, hence, left side agitators who have no problem infringing on the Second Amendment won’t attempt to infringe on the 1st. Now, if the people making the violence were mostly on the right, the Lefties would be pushing for “common sense” legislation which “respects 1st Amendment Rights”, ie, censorship. They have no problem doing this with religious rights right now.

Read: NY Times Really Concerned About Newest “Die Hard” Movie And Link To Gun Violence »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Wonky Media | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Five Things To Watch For During Obama’s 2013 Neverending Campaign SOTU

By William Teach February 12, 2013 – 8:28 am

Tonight’s the night Obama will bring forth yet another State Of The Union speech where the state of the union still stinks. Will he still Blame Bush and everyone else for his failures? Time will tell, and The Politico offers 5 things to watch for

1. Soft, strident or somewhere in between?

Obama irritated Republicans with his unapologetically liberal inaugural address — and the lack of any perceived olive branch quickly became the news.

But as Obama prepares to move his agenda into legislation, he’ll need congressional — and at least some Republican — support.

So he has to find a way to do both: Make a robust case for limiting guns, overhauling immigration and protecting entitlement programs but without alienating the party that controls the House and the ability to filibuster in the Senate.

For Obama, though, his way of making a robust case is to assault, insult, and demonize anyone who stands in his way of pushing his big Progressive/fascistic ideas and policies. Out in the private sector, Obama would be the guy featured on Bad Bosses. He’d be the guy running the company considered one of the worst to work for. He’d be the guy watching the company crash, because he doesn’t understand how to work with people. He’s a harsh dictator who refuses to listen to others, and stifles dissent.

2. Will there be a breakthrough jobs plan?

It would be déjà vu, at this point, for Obama to use a high-profile speech to talk about jobs, the economy and the middle class — he’s been doing that for four years.

Isn’t that what the Stimulus was supposed to be? Or did the U.S., thanks to Obama and Democrats, waste what will turn in to over $1 trillion dollars once the interest is factored in on a worthless plan? Obama will supposedly talk about attracting new workers from overseas and legalizing illegal aliens, who will take the jobs while Americans suffer.

3. How far does he go on guns?

I’m going to go out on a limb and say Obama will go far and Blame Republicans, despite most of the plans not having the support of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Democrat). He’ll trot out the “if it can save just one life…” line while assailing legal gun owners, all the while forgetting the problem is about criminals illegally using guns. Hey, I wonder if Obama will call to make murder illegal?

4. What will the Obama vs. Rubio dynamic be?

The better question is “will Obama go after Rubio during the speech in order to blunt Rubio’s response?”

5. What’s the hashtag?

In the 140-character world of 2013, Obama’s State of the Union speech is certain to come with a theme both descriptive and ready to share.

I think there could have quite a few other questions to put as the last one, such as

  1. Will he talk about the use of drones?
  2. Will he talk about what happened in Benghazi?
  3. Will he offer any sort of spending plan?
  4. and what so many warmists are looking for, what will he say about climate change?

As for the hastag, I propose #5timesbullshit.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Five Things To Watch For During Obama’s 2013 Neverending Campaign SOTU »

Posted in Barry Obama | Comments Off on Five Things To Watch For During Obama’s 2013 Neverending Campaign SOTU | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove