Warmist Mother Leaves Child In Tears Over Climate Change (Hoax)

By William Teach August 14, 2012 – 11:34 am

With all due respect to Steven Hayward, Jerry Brown can’t be the Green Weenie of the Week: this lady is, and should probably be nominated for Green Weenie of the Year (via The New Nostradamus of the North)

(NJ Today) My 12-year old has just asked to participate in another weekly activity thirty minutes away. I try a quick rebuff: “You’re already too busy and it’s too expensive.”

We’re already into “Mother of the Year” before adding the Warmist agitprop

With more than a bit of adolescent attitude, she replies, “You just don’t want to take the time to drive me.”

I look at the clock. It’s past 7 p.m. We haven’t eaten dinner, and unfinished homework clutters the kitchen table. There is never a perfect moment to get into the real nitty gritty of why and wherefore. Still, sometimes you have to take the time to give your kids an honest answer to their questions.

“Yes, you’re partly right,” I tell her, and her sister too, who has now wandered in. “I don’t especially want to spend more time carting you around (WT-more mother of the year). But there is another reason. Every time we get in the car we contribute to climate change. By the end of this century – and you may both still be around – climate change is likely to make conditions for life on earth drastically different from what they are today.”

I pause. It’s gloomy stuff, the state of the environment. Usually I try not to dwell on scientists’ pessimistic planetary forecasts. Nobody, including me, really wants to hear it. Nobody wants to read about it over morning coffee and a doughnut. Nobody wants to tell their kids about it.

What follows is more doom and gloom, the standard unhinged Warmist talking points, yet, Mom of the year still hasn’t given up her fossil fueled vehicle. Weird.

Although this cheers them up a bit, they are smart enough to know that a few leaves of spinach are not going to fix a whole lot. By the end of the conversation, they’re in tears.

How special. And, as NNoN points out “There are probably thousands of similar families, with children in tears after listening to their alarmist parents´ global warming scaremongering.” Warmists do not care. Like most Lefties, they are hyper-narcissistic people who really do not care about anyone else.

Yet, most still refuse to become carbon-neutral. They want you to do that.

Read: Warmist Mother Leaves Child In Tears Over Climate Change (Hoax) »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming, Unhinged Tools | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

GOP Has 10 Questions For Next Time Obama Takes Any

By William Teach August 14, 2012 – 8:05 am

It’s been quite some time since Obama answered any questions, apparently his twisted version of “transparency”

(Politico) As the national discourse has skipped along from the July jobs report, to negative campaign ads, to the new GOP vice presidential pick, the Republican National Committee points out, President Obama has yet to personally answer questions about either.

“It’s been almost eight weeks since President Obama last took questions from the White House press corps,” the RNC notes in a memo to be released Tuesday. “Since then, a lot has happened, and the American people are demanding answers on a growing list of issues.

“When will President Obama quit ducking and dodging? When will he hold himself accountable?”

Here are the questions (since they are coming from the RNC, rather than being written by Donovan Slack in the Politico article, I’m going to excerpt them all. Excerpting too much of an article is supposed to be a no no in the blogosphere)

1) Why did you cut $700 billion from Medicare?

Even as he talks Medicare on the campaign trail, the president has not explained why he robbed Medicare—and the seniors who depend on it—to bankroll Obamacare.

2) Do you condemn the Obama Super PAC’s desperate and despicable ad campaign?

As a candidate, then-Senator Obama promised to “walk the walk” and denounce independent organizations that ran indefensible ads on his behalf. Yet when the Obama SuperPAC Priorities USA produced an ad attempting to exploit a woman’s death for political gain, he remained silent. He previously gave his blessing to the SuperPAC and allows his cabinet and top staff to fundraise for it, but he lacks the courage to take responsibility for their appalling behavior.

3) How do you explain the July increase in unemployment and slowing GDP growth?

Last month, unemployment increased to 8.3 percent, marking the 42nd straight month of unemployment above 8 percent. We learned in July that GDP growth slowed, meaning the economy is losing steam. Yet the president cannot say why four more years of the same failed policies will turn around this dangerous trend.

4) Why is your plate too full for your own Jobs Council?

President Obama has not convened his Jobs Council in over seven months. The White House says he’s too busy, but he has found time for 130 political fundraisers since the last meeting of what he claimed was not a “show council.” (He has attended more than 200 fundraisers since April 2011.) So much for making jobs a “number one” priority.

5) Did you approve of David Plouffe’s profiting from a sponsor of terrorism?

Right after announcing his return to the Obama White House, David Plouffe accepted a $100,000 speaking gig with a company who had ties to sponsors of terrorism. It hardly seems responsible to give someone a high level security clearance after exhibiting such poor judgment.

6) Can you explain to business owners your “You didn’t build that” comment?

Small businesses are struggling in the Obama economy—especially in the wake of Obamacare. Entrepreneurs and innovators are rightfully outraged that the president would denigrate their hard work and attack them both with his policies and his words.

7) Do you condone your staff using personal email accounts to conduct government business?

We learned recently that former Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina used a private account to email lobbyists about “rolling Pelosi” during Obamacare negations. This seems highly hypocritical for the self-proclaimed “most transparent administration in history.”

8) Why didn’t you stop the restructuring of Solyndra’s loan?

Nearly everybody in the president’s inner circle knew Solyndra was headed for disaster. But the White House and the Administration approved of a loan restructuring plan that put taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of millions more. The president has not explained how he let this happen.

9) Why did you invoke executive privilege on the Fast and Furious scandal?

Americans deserve answers on how this failed operation turned into a tragedy. But the president is hypocritically impeding transparency and accountability.

10) Can you reconcile the conflicting responses to national security leaks?

Keeping America safe and secure is of paramount importance, but the president has yet to see fit to answer the charges, from Dianne Feinstein no less, that sensitive information has been leaked by his administration for political gain.

Some excellent questions. I’d really like to know the answer to #9. Since Obama slapped Executive Privilege on the remaining 90% of the documents, it must mean he has personal knowledge of the operation. How deep does that knowledge go? Since he’s POTUS, under the liberal blame rules established during the Bush 43 presidency, this means that Obama is personally responsible for the murders of 2 federal agents and 200-300 Mexican civilians.

And I’m sure we all have some questions for Obama. Personally, I’d like him to answer the question “how, exactly, do you plan on returning America to an economic powerhouse if given a 2nd term, considering that your 1st term policies have been failures?”

Read: GOP Has 10 Questions For Next Time Obama Takes Any »

Posted in Barry Obama | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Petula Dvorak: “How Dare Chick-fil-A, Papa John’s and In-N-Out Burger Offer Their Opinions”

By William Teach August 14, 2012 – 7:46 am

Liberals love Free Speech as long as it conforms exactly to their own narrow, rigid dogma

(Washington Post) Since when does serving up junk food give someone a license to preach?

Since it’s a private business and they are covered by the 1st Amendment of the Bill Of Rights would be my guess.

Politics and all things fried, fatty and fast are becoming intertwined to the point of absurdity.

We’ve got the Papa John’s pizza guys weighing in on the health-care debate, while the burger slingers out west at In-N-Out can’t serve up a cheeseburger without a Bible verse.

In Liberal World, one is not allowed to discuss Obamacare raising one’s costs, and, sheesh, In-N-Out has dared, dared I tell you, to put numbers of Bible tracks on some of the cups and food wrappers! It must be excruciatingly painful for a Liberal to see “Proverbs 3:5” and “Nahum 1:7” written out on their soda cup (make sure it is less than 20 oz!). That’s what she calls “Bible verse”: just a name and passage number.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy opposes same-sex marriage to anyone who has heard the hymns piped into the restaurant or tried to tame a chicken jones on a Sunday, only to find a closed restaurant because Sunday is for God, not chicken. But his remarks on the subject created a furor and divided the nation yet again along political lines.

I’ve lived in the South full time since 1991, and started attending college here in 1985: I’ve been to lots of Chick-fil-a stores around the state and in other states, and I have never heard hymns piped in. The music is……well, if there’s music, you can’t hear it over the sound of lots of people eating. Perhaps Petulant Dvorak heard a Christian soft rock song being played at the mall, where the stores do not control the music. And, of course, you see the whines about the store daring to be closed on Sunday.

Fortunately, she provides balance

On the other end of the spectrum, the folks who brought us the bulk of that eat-a-pint-after-a-breakup weight, Ben & Jerry’s, churned out a Hubby-Hubby flavor in support of same-sex marriage.

Why does bad food have to come with politics? Where do the broccoli people stand on abortion? That, we’ll never know.

Perhaps some people do not find it to be bad food. Perhaps it’s little thing called “First Amendment Rights”.

Of course, this is America. And all business owners have a right to express their views however they see fit. But sometimes a right simply turns into righteous.

And that doesn’t taste too good.

Then don’t eat there.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Petula Dvorak: “How Dare Chick-fil-A, Papa John’s and In-N-Out Burger Offer Their Opinions” »

Posted in 1st Amendment, Liberal World | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Eliot Spitzer Provides A Climate Change (Hoax) Plan That Even Conservatives Can Love!!!!

By William Teach August 13, 2012 – 2:59 pm

I’m assuming that by “love” they are referring to the way some would say “love it!” when they see something funny like the videos from Freaky The Scary Snowman

A climate change fix conservatives can love (also at Slate)

Well, Eliot would know about love, eh? OK, cheap shot.

And what are we talking about in our presidential campaign? Obamaloney and Romney Hood. Silliness has taken over, and the capacity to raise tough issues has dissipated if not gone entirely. Climate change appears to have fallen off the political agenda.

Are you ready for silly? I bet you are

Yet there is an answer for either candidate courageous enough to take the first step. This answer is steeped in conservative economics: Companies that pollute should be taxed so that a product’s cost to society is reflected in the price of that product. Milton Friedman and Richard Posner agree on this point!

The idea, proposed by Hansen, is simple: a fee on carbon emissions collected from fossil-fuel companies, with 100 percent of the money rebated to legal residents on a per capita basis. It is simple, would move us away from carbon-based fuels, would cost most consumers nothing, and would stimulate innovation in the clean-energy sector. Right now, in contrast, we are subsidizing fossil fuels to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars a year — while the greatest minds in science agree that we are destroying our planet.

So, let me get this straight: we’re going to tax companies that “pollute”, ie, release some greenhouse gases, with the result being that the price of the product will be artificially inflated, then take that fee/tax and give it in full back to the people who are paying the higher costs for the products because the companies are being taxed/fee’d? In what world is that in any way conservative? Not that I have to explain it to you, but this is a classic far left redistributive plan which would also cause the price of everything else that relies on fossil fueled transportation to rise precipitously, which would not be covered by the “rebates”, which would surely see a huge cut end up in the government’s hands and used for other things.

Read: Eliot Spitzer Provides A Climate Change (Hoax) Plan That Even Conservatives Can Love!!!! »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Beyond Moonbat, Carbon Credits, Global Warming | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 13, 2012 – 1:00 pm

…is the last iguana on Earth trying to keep above a rising sea, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Conservatives4Palin, with a post about Sarah Palin’s statement on the RNC.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Romney Says Obama Should Get Campaign Out Of The Gutter

By William Teach August 13, 2012 – 10:11 am

Yesterday, a heckler made the mistake of taking on Mitt Romney

(Fox News) “If you follow the campaign of Barack Obama, he’s going to do everything in his power to make this the lowest, meanest, negative campaign in history. We’re not going to let that happen. This is going to be a campaign about ideas, about the future of America,” Romney said. “Mr. President, take your campaign out of the gutter. Let’s talk about the real issues that America faces.”

What else does Obama have? He can’t talk about his domestic policies and their successes. There haven’t been any. 56% still want to repeal Obama’s signature legislation, Obamacare. Only 27% want government investing in private business. Only 24% think the jobs market is better than a year ago. The job creation index is at a pitiful 18. Economic confidence index is at -27. Unemployment at 8.3%. Real unemployment over 15%. Household income and disposable income down. GDP stagnant at a low rate. The economy hasn’t bounced back 3 years after the end of the recession. Over $5 trillion in new debt in less than 4 years. What’s there for Obama to talk about?

Read: Romney Says Obama Should Get Campaign Out Of The Gutter »

Posted in Barry Obama, Elections, Romney | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

ABC News Really, Really, Really Hoping Hurricane Hits Tampa RNC

By William Teach August 13, 2012 – 9:04 am

How else to explain why they recycled a story from August 10th to August 13th?

Could a Hurricane Rock the Republican Convention?

In 15 days the best and brightest of the Republican Party will flock to Tampa for a showdown between Tea Party conservatives and the GOP establishment as the party attempts to coalesce around one man: Mitt Romney.

But as ideas clash inside, a storm could be brewing outside as well. The Republican National Convention is scheduled during the peak of Florida hurricane season. And Tampa Bay is three kinds of vulnerable to the horrific winds, piercing rains and engulfing floods that come with an Atlantic hurricane.

As a coastal city, Tampa is vulnerable to storms spinning west from the coast of Africa, coming north through the Caribbean or swirling east from the Gulf of Mexico.

My original reason for bothering to read the story was to see if the climate change hoax was mentioned. Surprisingly, it wasn’t. But, a hurricane could rock the RNC!!!!!!!1!!!!!!

The Republican National Convention takes place smack dab in the “heart of hurricane season,” Feltgen said. That season became slightly bleaker last week when the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association tacked an additional three storms onto its predictions.

NOAA said Thursday that it expects between 12 and 17 storms with winds exceeding 39 mph, and two or three could be major hurricanes with winds of at least 111 mph. (snip)

Since NOAA began keeping track in 1852, the Tampa area has weathered 27 hurricanes. Six of those have made landfall in the month of August, the month of this year’s GOP convention.

The area’s most recent hurricane, Charley, blew through in 2004. The category 4 storm was originally projected to storm straight into Tampa, but made a last-minute change of direction, hitting about 130 miles south. It brought 150 mph winds and caused $15 billion in damages.

This appears to be wishful thinking on the part of ABC News’ Amy Bingham rather than an actual story. Right now there are zero active storms in the Atlantic. There’s one tiny low pressure wave out in the Atlantic at the moment with virtually no chance to develop and in a location that would pose no threat to the United States, and another that is approaching the lower Caribbean with little chance of development. Granted, we’re still 15 days out. But, consider that a hurricane hasn’t hit the United States since Hurricane Ike on September 13, 2008, almost 4 years ago. It’s been almost 2500 days since a major hurricane (Cat 3 or higher) hit (Wilma, October 24, 2005).

Warmists breathlessly prognosticated that globull warming would cause more hurricanes. When that didn’t work out, they said there would be fewer hurricanes, but stronger. That failed, too. Now, apparently, they are really hoping that the city of Tampa and the surrounding areas are hit with a hurricane just to disrupt the Republican National Convention.

Read: ABC News Really, Really, Really Hoping Hurricane Hits Tampa RNC »

Posted in Current Affairs, Elections, GOP, Wonky Media | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Washington Post Delves Into Non-Issue Of Paul Ryan And Dennis Troha Donations

By William Teach August 13, 2012 – 8:46 am

The Obama water carrying media is working overtime to provide the smear articles that have little basis in reality

(Washington Post) Democrats have wasted little time blasting Republican vice presidential pick Paul Ryan over his federal budget plan, but a more obscure part of his record could also draw attention: his relationship with a convicted Wisconsin businessman.

Ryan accepted nearly $60,000 in contributions from businessman Dennis Troha and his family, records show. Troha was later indicted on campaign finance charges over an Indian casino he sought to open. During the casino application process, Troha said, the Republican congressman called federal regulators at his request.

Ryan (Wis.) also supported a bill in Congress that benefited Troha and his trucking company, legislation that drew the interest of federal prosecutors because of the contributions Ryan and other congressmen had accepted from Troha and his family.

Except

Ryan was not found to have violated any laws, nor was he a target or key figure in the federal investigation, people familiar with the inquiry said. He was among more than 20 politicians of both parties who benefited from Troha’s largess. Troha was convicted of funneling illegal donations to other politicians, not Ryan, and Ryan donated Troha’s contributions to youth programs when the businessman was indicted.

So, there was absolutely no wrongdoing? Then what would the Democrats have to attack on? The Romney campaign says this a “complete non-issue.” When Troha was indicted, Ryan donated all contributions to the Kenosha Boys and Girls Club.

It is unclear how far that part of the federal probe progressed, but people familiar with it said there was no indication Ryan was aware that he was receiving problematic contributions.

Yet, somehow, this is “problematic” for Ryan? Perhaps the Washington Post could do an investigation into Barack Obama’s dealings with convicted felon Tony Rezco. Perhaps they could illuminate us on Obama’s dealings with unrepentant domestic terrorist Bill Ayers? How about the sweetheart deals Obama donors received for their “green” energy companies? Obama’s college transcripts?

Oh, here’s one that the could investigate: Fast and Furious, since the Washington Post has generally ignored the operation. What that comes down to is at least 2 murdered US federal agents along with 200-300 Mexican citizens, with scores more injured, and, instead of releasing all the documents, Obama slapped Executive Privilege on 90% of the requested documents, which must mean Obama knows about the program, and, as Chief Executive, that would mean those murders are at Obama’s feet.

Of course, all the studies show that people, especially on-line, tend to remember the tenor of the headlines and the first 3 paragraphs. Which was the point in putting the fact that Ryan wasn’t guilty of anything in the 4th.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Read: Washington Post Delves Into Non-Issue Of Paul Ryan And Dennis Troha Donations »

Posted in Journalistic Malpractice | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmists Really Upset Over Paul Ryan Pick

By William Teach August 12, 2012 – 2:15 pm

I’m not sure why Warmists bother, since their little cult is dying a painful, slow death, with fewer and fewer people caring about the issue, especially in light of the way far left policies have and are destroying economies around the world, and that Warmist policies, essentially leftist progressive policies, will make things worse. Anyhow, Climate Progress’ Brad Johnson is apoplectic over the pick (via Climate Depot)

Meet Paul Ryan: Climate Denier, Conspiracy Theorist, Koch Acolyte

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential pick, is a virulent denier of climate science, with a voting record to match.

A favorite of the Koch brothers, Ryan has accused scientists of engaging in conspiracy to “intentionally mislead the public on the issue of climate change.” He has implied that snow invalidates global warming.

Ah, of course there had to be a mention of the Koch brothers, part of Progressive Tourette’s Disorder.

What follows at the “article” is list of Paul Ryan not buying into the climate change hoax (and, really, the phrase climate change is an unscientific term designed to blame every weather and natural event on mankind), and ends with the standard agiprop

In short, Paul Ryan stands with Big Oil against scientific fact and the future of human civilization.

If Big Oil is so evil, why haven’t Warmists simply stopped using it? Why do they drive cars and take fossil fueled air travel? The comments get funny, with the standard unhinged Warmists. The first one is a hoot

Such people are a threat to national security, because they threaten the survival of the state, they provoke food riots and anarchy with their manipulative actions.

We need to put these people on trial for crimes against humanity.

In Liberal World, if you disagree you should be tried and probably executed.

Likewise, Grist isn’t too happy about Ryan being a Climate Realist.

No Tricks Zone points out that Ryan understood Climategate to a tee.

Global Warming Skeptics highlights some of Ryan’s best anti-globull warming votes.

Non-AGW related for Ryan, The First Street Journal has reactions from around the blogroll to the Ryan pick. Doug Ross has the best reactions to the pick. Nice Deb has lots of info and links on the pick.

Read: Warmists Really Upset Over Paul Ryan Pick »

Posted in AGW Scaremongering, Elections, Global Warming, GOP | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach August 12, 2012 – 1:00 pm

…is wood that is just too hot to stand on, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Kevin’s Korner, with a post about dishonest Democrats.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 1 Comment | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove