If All You See…

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled truck causing the planet to boil, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Jammie Wearing Fools, with a post on irony and Bob Menendez.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Change: The Skeptics Case In 12 Minutes

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 10:51 am

This is a long video (12 minutes, obviously), but well worth the watch

This is accompanied by a link to Dr. David M.W. Evans’ website with charts and graphs and data and facts. Like me, Mr. Evans used to be a Believer, and is now a Climate Realist. He is showing that all the climate models are pretty much mule fritters. Something we’ve all know for a while now.

PS: this in no way means that the global climate didn’t warm post-Little Ice Age (it has) nor should it conclude that we are headed for a cool period.

Read: Climate Change: The Skeptics Case In 12 Minutes »

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

Gun Grabber States Consider Requiring Insurance

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 8:13 am

Just more proof that this debate is about doing everything possible to burden legal gun owners with draconian rules while failing to go after criminals with guns

(NY Times) Both sides in a nation sharply divided over guns seem to agree on at least one thing: a bigger role for the insurance industry in a heavily armed society. But just what that role should be, and whether insurers will choose to accept it, are much in dispute.

By “both sides”, do writers Michael Cooper and Mary Williams Walsh mean liberals and Progressives? Actually, what they’re referring to is that groups like the NRA and United States Concealed Carry Association recommend and/or offer insurance for gun owners. The difference here is that it is voluntary, while many gun grabber States would make insurance mandatory, and you can bet your bottom dollar that it will be expensive and burdensome.

Lawmakers in at least half a dozen states, including California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and Pennsylvania, have proposed legislation this year that would require gun owners to buy liability insurance — much as car owners are required to buy auto insurance. Doing so would give a financial incentive for safe behavior, they hope, as people with less dangerous weapons or safety locks could qualify for lower rates.

So, if you’re a tiny woman and want a scary looking gun with a collapsible stock which makes it easier to hold, say, a Bushmaster .223, you’re rates would be sky high (hey, you can always vomit on yourself instead to stop a rapist!). But, if you buy a Vepr-Pioneer .223, which is harder to hold for a small woman, you can save money. As for safe behavior, will that include insurance agents and law enforcement making random and un-announced visits?

“I believe that if we get the private sector and insurance companies involved in gun safety, we can help prevent a number of gun tragedies every year,” said David P. Linsky, a Democratic state representative in Massachusetts who wants to require gun owners to buy insurance. He believes it will encourage more responsible behavior and therefore reduce accidental shootings. “Insurance companies are very good at evaluating risk factors and setting their premiums appropriately,” he added.

What about criminals who engage in violence with guns, Mr. Linksy? Like most of the gun grabbers, Linsky is silent on that point. And all that this gun grabbing will do is make law abiding citizens more prone to being the recipients of criminal behavior. Don’t worry, though, because law enforcement will be around sometime after the assault to…check to make sure you have all your guns locked up tight and your insurance is in order.

Read: Gun Grabber States Consider Requiring Insurance »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 6 Comments | Trackback URL

Politico: Is Obama Overplaying Sequestor Hand?

By William Teach February 22, 2013 – 7:45 am

A random act of journalism from Carrie Budoff Brown and Jake Sherman

(Politico) President Barack Obama’s greatest adversary in the latest budget battle isn’t the Republican leadership in Congress — it’s his confidence in his own ability to force a win.

He has been so certain of his campaign skills that he didn’t open a line of communication with House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell until Thursday, a week before the spending ax hits. And when they did finally hear from Obama, the calls were perfunctory, with no request to step up negotiations or invitations to the White House.

Is anyone particularly surprised that Mr. Obama didn’t bother talking to Boehner nor McConnell until yesterday? I wouldn’t be surprised if he had failed to discuss this with Congressional Democrats. It’s all part of Obama’s crisis creation governance system, based on Cloward-Piven. We’ve seen this time and time again, it follow the same pattern. He waits till the last minute, he demonizes and insults his opponents (before even engaging them in discourse), he scare-mongers in front of groups of human shields, and also tends to scuttle any deals which Congressional Republicans and Dems have worked out. Plus more demonizing and insults.

That’s because Obama’s all-in on an outside strategy, doing just about everything other than holding serious talks with Republicans. In the last two days alone, he’s courted local TV anchors, called in a select group of White House correspondents to talk off-the-record, chatted up black broadcasters, and announced plans to stump next week at Virginia’s Newport News Shipyard. Throughout, he’s talked in tough terms that signal little interest in compromise — or suggestion of backing down.

All this is guaranteed to create a crisis without attempting to do anything to mitigate or solve the issue. It’s part of the Neverending Campaign, but campaigning is not governing.

White House aides argued that a precedent had been set in the short-term deal by paying down the sequester with a share of spending cuts and tax hikes. They also rationalized that the reprieve would give both sides some space to figure out a solution.

But there has been no discernible effort by the White House to work on a bill that might pass.

Well, you know, golf lessons and hitting the links with Tiger Woods. One has to prioritize one’s calendar, and Obama probably understands the reality of the situation, namely that the Sequester is meaningless. It contains no cuts, it’s simply a slight reduction in the rate of growth, and will probably be blown off in a year or two. But, hey, once a community agitator always a community agitator. For someone who was handed a Nobel Peace Prize, Mr. Obama sure likes picking fights.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Politico: Is Obama Overplaying Sequestor Hand? »

Posted in Barry Obama, Current Affairs | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

MTGP: IPCC Head Admits Global Warming Standstill

By William Teach February 21, 2013 – 3:05 pm

Don’t worry, he’ll find a way around this

(GWPF) The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last “30 to 40 years at least” to break the long-term global warming trend.

This comes from an The Australian article beyond a pay wall. Pachauri has absolutely no problem Moving The Goal Posts with the “30-40 years” thing. Warmists see a thunderstorm or a fart in the wind and blame AGW

Dr Pachauri said global average temperatures had plateaued at record levels and that the halt did not disprove global warming.

Of course not. Nothing will ever disprove AGW in the minds of the Warmists. If the Earth went into an actual glaciation period this year they’d blame it on Mankind.

“The climate is changing because of natural factors and the impact of human actions,” Dr Pachauri said.

“If you look at temperatures going back 150 years, there are clearly fluctuations which have occurred largely as a result of natural factors: solar activity, volcanic activity and so on.

“What is quite perceptible is, in the last 50 years, the trend is upwards.

“This is not to say you won’t have ups and downs – you will – but what we should be concerned about is the trend, and that is being influenced now to a large extent by human actions.”

If it was mostly natural factors back then, why can’t it be mostly natural factors now?

Read: MTGP: IPCC Head Admits Global Warming Standstill »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach February 21, 2013 – 1:00 pm

…is an evil fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Nice Deb, with a post on why we resist.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Schoolkids Won’t Know What Match Play Looks Like

By William Teach February 21, 2013 – 9:23 am

Won’t someone please think of the children?

(Brattleboro Reformer) Already a year of wacky weather on the PGA Tour, this might have topped it all — snow.

The opening round of the Match Play Championship was suspended Wednesday when a cold rain that came down sideways quickly gave way to snow from a winter storm that dumped close to 2 inches on Dove Mountain in just over an hour.

“I’ve never actually played golf to the point where we’ve actually stopped for snow, which is kind of crazy,” said Jason Day of Australia, who was 6 up through 10 holes over Zach Johnson. “A little crazy for it to snow in the desert, as well. But that’s just how it is. Mother Nature can do whatever she wants.”

It’s so terrible! Schoolkids also won’t know what their schools look like due to over-heated planet created snow.

Read: Schoolkids Won’t Know What Match Play Looks Like »

Posted in Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

More And More Firearms Businesses Refuse To Sell To Anti-Gun States

By William Teach February 21, 2013 – 8:40 am

Perhaps it’s not fair to deny law enforcement the means to purchase a gun, but, many states are doing all they can to deny their citizens their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms

(The Blaze) Last Friday TheBlaze reported on a growing list of gun manufacturers and retailers who had stopped selling to law enforcement in states that were enacting stringent new gun laws.

Since that report, the initial list (seen below) has changed. However, none of the “big three” (Glock, Sig Sauer, Smith & Wesson) providers to law enforcement have stepped up and joined the companies who have chosen to take a public stand on the issue. In less than two weeks, at least 18 companies have made the decision to stop selling to law enforcement in states that limit a private citizen’s right to own a gun.

In some cases, like Armalite, the companies will, in fact, sell to individual police officers who are purchasing the weapons themselves, but not the actual police department. I really like the stance of Trident Armory

Sunday night, 9pm. As of this moment, all contract bids and offers, as well as any current production contracts for any and all US government agencies and affiliates by Trident Armory are null and void.

“We will no longer participate with, or work for a government where the “rights” of the people are able to be adjusted by the whim of the government”.” I will not build guns which can be used to disarm my fellow Americans

And here’s the NRA’s ad, which will surely annoy liberals and gun-grabbers with the notion that government doesn’t grant us rights and doesn’t make us free

Read: More And More Firearms Businesses Refuse To Sell To Anti-Gun States »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Current Affairs | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Majority Of US Citizens Are Big Meanies, Want Illegal Aliens Deported

By William Teach February 21, 2013 – 8:03 am

Well, the story doesn’t actually call Americans big meanies, yet that will certainly be the viewpoint of people who support amnesty

(Reuters) More than half of U.S. citizens believe that most or all of the country’s 11 million illegal immigrants should be deported, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday that highlights the difficulties facing lawmakers trying to reform the U.S. immigration system.

The online survey shows resistance to easing immigration laws despite the biggest push for reform in Congress since 2007.

Thirty percent of those polled think that most illegal immigrants, with some exceptions, should be deported, while 23 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be deported.

Only 5 percent believe all illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the United States legally, and 31 percent want most illegal immigrants to stay.

Put me in the category of deporting most illegals with a few exceptions.And making sure they don’t come back.

As the article goes on to point out, American attitudes towards illegals has barely changed since the last amnesty push. Most are against it. It’s only the political class that is interested in passing legislation that provides a pathway to citizenship for people who broke our laws and break the law everyday they’re here. American citizens seem more interested in The Law than elected officials.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Majority Of US Citizens Are Big Meanies, Want Illegal Aliens Deported »

Posted in Current Affairs, Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Gun Control Group No Longer Wants To Use Phrase “Gun Control”

By William Teach February 20, 2013 – 6:38 pm

Hey, I agree, they shouldn’t use the phrase “gun control” in their name, they should change it to “law abiding people control”. Alas, they plan on moving in a different direction

(Washington Post) What’s in a name? A lot, if your name includes the term “gun control.” So in a nod to the political realities of the moment, a group founded in the days after the Newtown, Conn., school shooting is officially changing its name by dropping the politically loaded term.

Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America is the new name for an organization formerly known as One Million Moms for Gun Control, the group’s founder will announce Wednesday. The change was prompted by confusion with another group, One Million Moms, which advocates for family-friendly entertainment media — and because the group’s old name includes the term “gun control.”

“We’ve gotten a lot of feedback from stakeholders that ‘gun control’ isn’t the best term to use because it can be polarizing,” the group’s founder, Shannon Watts, said in an interview Tuesday. “We don’t want to be polarizing — we want to be a nonpartisan organization. We’re not about overturning the Second Amendment or banning guns, but we also don’t believe that we should arm every citizen.”

Well, guess what, honey, whether I, as a law abiding citizen, want to be armed is none of your business. And pretty much everything the group is pushing is a reiteration of Democrat policies, none of which will keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but will treat law abiding citizens practicing their 2nd Amendment Right to be treated as criminals.

And, perusing the Moms website, sure looks like quite a few Leftists.

Back in December, Doug Ross had a few choice words for Ms. Watts, who thinks our Constitution is antiquated, a rather Liberal notion. Fortunately, she is really non-partisan. She certainly wouldn’t give money only to Dems, right?

Now, I could possibly maybe have the wrong Shannon Watts. Except for the LinkedIn profile

Notice in the 1st screengrab the “Fleishman-Hillard”, which that Shannon Watts in Zionsville, In. Like the rest. Quite possibly an astroturfed Democrat group. At best, simply Democrats pretending to be “non-partisan”.

BTW, lots of other gun control groups mentioned in the Washington Post article are backing away from using the phrase “gun control”.

Read: Gun Control Group No Longer Wants To Use Phrase “Gun Control” »

Posted in 2nd Amendment | 4 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove