…is heavy rain that never happened before someone else drove their fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on a women getting busted for shaving
Read: If All You See… »
…is heavy rain that never happened before someone else drove their fossil fueled vehicle, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on a women getting busted for shaving
Read: If All You See… »
From Mark and Angel Hack Life, via Ned Hardy:
Head on over to either link for the full details (linking an entire article is against Blogosphere rules). I really like #9, which is one I always try to abide by:
Life is happening right now. Instead of dwelling on the past or worrying about the future, practice being and living in the present moment.
Remember, right now is the only moment guaranteed to you. Right now is life. Don’t miss it.
Read: 10 Commandments For A Good Life »
This is what the NY Times editorial board runs with the day after Thanksgiving, cause it’s a super duper most important issue, unlike America being broke, facing the fiscal cliff, a stagnant economy, Iran, post-Sandy cleanup, housing still in the dumps, etc
President Obama’s fleeting mention of the need for stronger gun controls at a presidential debate last month was hardly the kind of forceful political statement needed to address the scourge of gun violence in this country. Even his tepid remark was considered by the nation’s gun owners as a threat to take away their firearms. In what amounts to a buyers’ panic, they are again ramping up gun and ammunition sales as they did four years ago, convinced that Mr. Obama intends a gun-control crackdown.
Mr. Obama talked about starting “a broader conversation†about reducing gun violence. The best place to start is in Congress, which has been grossly negligent toward constituent safety for the past 20 years as it bows to the demands of the gun lobby.
Yeah, because violating that pesky Bill Of Rights is no big deal in NY Times World. And it’s rather strange that the majority of gun violence tends to occur in Democrat held areas, eh?
Mr. Obama is free of the pressures of campaigning — and free to lead the nation toward sensible laws that can help reduce the flood of guns and related homicides.
Funny stuff, they actually linked Obama to leading. That would be a first.
The need for strong leadership on this issue is growing as statehouse politicians cave to ever more lethal demands from the gun lobby. State laws allowing students to go armed to class in Colorado, freeing owners in Oklahoma to wear holstered weapons in public, and letting people “stand your ground†in Florida and a score of other states have already damaged public safety immeasurably.
In Times World, citizens should not be free to shield themselves from criminals who carry guns obtained illegally. All of those measures mentioned allow law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families from people who would do them harm. I wonder if the NY Times editorial board would be willing to give up the armed guards in the lobby at the NY Times building.
The Times worries about the “30,000 lives lost to gun violence every year.” What they don’t tell you is that around half of those are suicides. Of the remaining, in 2010 (the latest year for data), 8775 were from crime, the rest accidental. That’s with over 270 million privately owned guns. I wonder how many crimes were prevented because someone owns a gun? Hmm, an estimated 2.5 million? And women are the most likely to be saved by owning a gun? And most shootings involved criminals killing other criminals? Oh, and women are the biggest recipients of being able to show a gun to someone who is looking to harm them?
Perhaps the Times should be concerned with the 1 million plus abortions this year.
But, all you climate terrorists Warmists should run right out and purchase carbon credits
(Forbes) As above, this is a very common misunderstanding of the very point of a carbon tax: it is not, not at all, in order to stop climate change. It is to enable us to have the right amount of climate change.
Now that’s funny! Tim Worstall thinks that Mankind can control the weather by (supposedly) planting a few trees through purchasing a few carbon offsets.
It’s also worth pointing something else out. $80 a tonne CO2 is something like 40 cents a gallon on gas. And that’s it, we’re done, problem solved, human utility maximised over time. OK, we’ve now got to add the tax to coal and natural gas and so on but the real point about the carbon tax is how trivially small the solution to climate change is. I myself just don’t understand why everyone makes such a fuss about it. get on with it and we’re done, sorted. In fact, in my native UK, the numbers are such that the correct carbon tax would lower the price of gas.
As Tom Nelson points out through a bit of research, the US per capita CO2 out put is 19.78 tons per inhabitant a year. That’s a price tag of $1,582.40 per American per year.
Ok, Warmists, pony up! Do your part….what? You can’t afford that? That would mean no fossil fueled trip for a vacation? Goodness!
Read: Warmist Thinks $1600 A Year Per Person To Pay For HotColdWetDry Is No Big Deal »
…is an evil oven contributing to obesity and huge carbon footprints along with an evil fridge, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on more Obamacare fallout.
And, because there is another oven and fridge photo (involving a thong, and I generally don’t put thongs on the front page in this manner) below the fold, the second blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Twinkies.

Read: If All You See… »
Yes, the same Morsi who is the president of Egypt
(Telegraph) Demonstators burned down a headquarters block of the Brotherhood’s political front, the Freedom and Justice Party, in Alexandria.
And there were also heavy clashes in cities with a record of protest against the former regime of ex-President Hosni Mubarak like Suez and Port Said.
In Cairo, the biggest demonstrations for months filled Tahrir Square, reviving the spirit and chants of last year’s revolution.
An array of liberal and secular groups, including activists at the forefront of the protest movement that forced Hosni Mubarak from power marched on the Square to demonstrate against what they were calling Morsi becoming the “new pharaoh”.
What’s happening is that Morsi ended judicial independence so that his decrees would be unchallengeable by law. So, the upshot is that a “dictator”, Mubarek, who kept the peace, tried to protect Coptic Christians in Egypt and work with Israel, was deposed and replace with….the makings of a dictatorship based along Muslim Brotherhood and theocratic lines. Gee, if only someone had been concerned that something like this could happen /sic
The Islamist president assumed sweeping powers on Thursday in a decree read out by his spokesman Yasser Ali on state television.
“The president can issue any decision or measure to protect the revolution,” it said.
“The constitutional declarations, decisions and laws issued by the president are final and not subject to appeal.”
And once he starts issuing “declarations, decisions, and laws” based on Sharia Law and the Koran, I wonder how those who were saying Mubarek had to go will feel? Will there be concern over the treatment of women and gays? Or will we get the same idiocy of multiculturalism and tolerance?
Ed Morrissey: So we went from having a US-friendly dictator who managed to keep a lid on the Muslim Brotherhood and enforced the peace treaty with Israel, to having a dictator from the Muslim Brotherhood in charge of the Suez Canal. And the only people who couldn’t apparently predict this very outcome were the people in the White House proclaiming their foreign policy as “smart power.â€
The NY Times and Associate Press seem a bit shell shocked that this could happen.
More at Memeorandum: Rubin Reports, Hugh Hewitt’s TownHall Blog, americanthinker.com, NewsBusters.org, Israpundit, Algemeiner.com, Questions and Observations, Jihad Watch, Outside the Beltway, Ricochet Conversations Feed, Israel Matzav and Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion
Read: Egyptians Not Happy With Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohammed Morsi »
Surprise! Well, not really, considering who cap and tax, er, trade programs have worked in countries around the world, with the costs of carbon essentially equating to junk bond status
(Sacramento Bee) State environmental leaders this week hailed California’s first auction of carbon emissions credits a huge success.
But budget writers are hardly thrilled.
A low price for credits and minimal demand for future offsets suggest California will see a mere fraction of the $1 billion that Gov. Jerry Brown and lawmakers estimated the state would receive this fiscal year.
The nation’s brokeyest broke state was depending on the money from the auctions to fix their fiscal house have more money to waste on foolish projects, reelection promises, free stuff, and supporting illegal immigrants who make up one third of their prison population. They pegged their hopes on something that had yet to occur, and were Facebooked
As California sells credits, it stands to benefit financially. Brown and lawmakers assumed California would take in $1 billion total this year, spending $500 million on state budget relief and $500 million on curbing greenhouse gas emissions.
The California Air Resources Board sold $289 million in credits this month, but most of the money is dedicated for utilities and their ratepayers. That leaves $55.8 million for the state.
$289 million is not chump change, of course. But, again, they were pining for $1 billion. That’s what was built in to the budget for spending.
State leaders erred on another market prediction when they assumed Facebook shares would trade at $35 this fall. The stock has traded below $25 since August, and the analyst estimates that California will see $626 million less than expected as a result.
The LAO said last week the state faces a lingering $1.9 billion deficit, partly because of less Facebook and cap-and-trade money.
So, they pinned their financial hopes on, well, hope, rather than actual economic conditions. Is it any surprise they have a $1.9 billion deficit?
Even David Roberts, one of Grist’s super climate terrorists Believers, thinks that carbon taxes are silly. One thing to note is that if done properly, the costs for CO2 goes down.
Read: Brokeifornia’s First Cap And Trade Auction Complete Failure »
Instead of running a “we’re thankful for…” editorial Thursday, something positive, the Washington Post editorial board attempted some tushy covering for Team Obama and Susan Rice
The GOP’s bizarre attack on Susan Rice
SINCE THE Senate is solely responsible for the confirmation of Cabinet officers, it’s not often that members of the House of Representatives jump into a debate about the nomination of a secretary of state — particularly before there has been a nomination. That’s one of the reasons a letter sent to President Obama this week by 97 House Republicans, challenging his potential choice of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice for the State Department job, is remarkable.
The House is solely responsible for initiating all legislation that involves revenue, yet, it was the Democrat controlled Senate that first passed ObamaCare, using complicated machinations to avoid Constitutional issues. The Post didn’t have a problem with that.
Another is blatant disregard of established facts. Drawn up by Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), the letter alleges that “Ambassador Rice is widely viewed as having either willfully or incompetently misled the American public†about the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. But as congressional testimony has established, Ms. Rice’s comments on several Sunday television talk shows on Sept. 16 were based on talking points drawn up by the intelligence community. She was acting as an administration spokeswoman; there was nothing either incompetent or deliberately misleading about the way she presented the information she was given.
Yet, the taking points initially said it was terrorism, a notion that pretty much every American thought was the root cause, not some stupid video. Until someone, supposedly James Clapper, changed them. And Susan Rice should have been skeptical going on TV a week later about those talking points. If not, she’s too much of a dupe to be Secretary of anything. Here we go, though
Though the Benghazi attack involved clear failures of U.S. security, Republicans have concentrated on a dubious subsidiary issue: the alleged failure of the administration to publicly recognize quickly enough that the incident was “a terrorist attack.†In fact, Mr. Obama has acknowledged that “the information may not have always been right the first time.†But if there was a White House conspiracy to cover up the truth, Republicans have yet to produce any evidence of it — much less a connection to Ms. Rice, who had no involvement with the Benghazi attack other than those television appearances.
They do have a point, one which I have noted in blog posts and many, many times on Twitter. This focus on the talking points, while important, is a focus on the third most important issue, second being what happened in the run up to the attack, and most important being what happened during the attack. Why were our people left to die? Why were the two ex-SEALs told to stand down? Was the Libyan government asked for permission to send in a rescue group? Who refused to send help from our bases in Europe and/or naval vessels in the Mediterranean? What happened?
I think we know that someone was not being done by the very fact that the Obama administration refuses to release any photos taken of US officials during the crisis, as highlighted by one of the last true journalists, Sharyl Attkisson. If the White House was involved and on the ball, they’d be releasing photos left and right to show how super mega awesome Obama is. And the GOP needs to focus its efforts on what really matters. Are you listening, Senators McCain, Ayotte, and Graham, et all?
BTW, the post ends with the raaaaacism meme
Could it be, as members of the Congressional Black Caucus are charging, that the signatories of the letter are targeting Ms. Rice because she is an African American woman? The signatories deny that, and we can’t know their hearts. What we do know is that more than 80 of the signatories are white males, and nearly half are from states of the former Confederacy. You’d think that before launching their broadside, members of Congress would have taken care not to propagate any falsehoods of their own.
Hey, remember when the Washington Post took liberals to task for the disgusting and real racist and sexist attacks on a different Rice, aka Condi Rice? Yeah, me neither. But, in todays world, to even investigate someone of color who happens to be a Democrat is raaaaacism.
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.
Read: Washington Post Inadvertently Makes A Good Point On Susan Rice Talking Points »
…is a time when CO2 was well below 350ppm, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of Thanksgiving is Primordial Slack, with the Ballad Of Barry And Reggie.
Read: If All You See… »