SCOTUS To Hear Ending Of DACA Challenge Tuesday

This should be a very, very, very interesting ruling

As Supreme Court takes up Trump plan to end DACA, American dreams at stake for nearly 700,000 immigrants

A lawyer, a teacher, a graduate student and an undergraduate gathered in a 6th-floor courtroom one recent afternoon to discuss their common dreams and nightmares.

The dreams are of futures in the United States filled with college degrees and successful careers, home ownership and happy families.

The nightmares are of losing their college loans, driver’s licenses, jobs – and the only country they can truly call home.

“It feels, in a way, very surreal,” said Anayeli Marcos, 25, who hopes to graduate from the University of Texas’ flagship campus here in May with dual Master’s degrees in social work and Latin American studies. “Sometimes it’s a bit overwhelming, feeling that your fate is in the hands of people who don’t know you.”

The Supreme Court will have the fate of these four DREAMers and some 660,000 others in its hands Tuesday when it considers the Trump administration’s decision to end the DACA program, which has provided a reprieve for some undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children. A ruling on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program is expected next spring in the midst of the 2020 presidential election.

Well, we all know that the liberals on the court will vote for keeping DACA in place, regardless of the Constitutionality of it. Even Obama said it was un-Constitutional for him to enact this executive action, one which contradicts federal law. What will the Conservatives on the Court decide? If they vote with the liberals, what they are doing is proclaiming that future presidents can never end a previous presidents executive orders. Realistically, DACA ended when Obama left office, since they are only good for the time the person was in office. Regardless, Trump ending DACA with an executive order is exactly the same as Obama enacting it with and EO, though Trump was ending something which was un-Constitutional in the first place.

That’s the argument in a nutshell, and I hope the Trump officials do not get caught in the weeds arguing that DACA should be ended. But, if they do, it should be remembered that these are not immigrants, they are illegal aliens, and federal law makes zero distinction on age or how they arrived. It should also be remembered that it is not 660K, it will be millions, since the parents and guardians who brought them here illegally as kids will be given a free pass, too. Further, DACA is essentially a stealth amnesty: first give the kids what is supposed to be temporary legal status, then make sure they never have to leave, much like we are seeing with all sorts of groups who were given temporary status in the U.S. post disaster, but now do not want to leave.

And what are they doing? They are demanding food, money, healthcare, housing, and education, among others. And U.S. taxpayers are shelling out for worthless degrees in social work and Latin American studies. Oh, and they’re are ungrateful

In Austin, where Texas state officials brought the original challenge to both DACA and an ill-fated effort by President Barack Obama to extend similar protections to 4 million undocumented parents, Pedro Villalobos’ job as an assistant county attorney is at risk.

The state argues in court papers that “Congress has never given the executive carte blanche to grant lawful presence to any alien it chooses not to remove, let alone benefits including work authorization, health care, unemployment, and a pathway to citizenship.”

Seated in a county courtroom he uses regularly to prosecute crime, Villalobos, 28, said a defeat at the Supreme Court “would end my service to this community.”

“I represent the state, but the state doesn’t represent me,” he said.

It doesn’t represent you because you’re unlawfully present, and it seems you’re arguing that illegal aliens should be given legal status.

But, again, getting beyond all the sob stories, this is about the lawful ability of a president to cancel a previous executive order, which has always been allowed. Liberals who are against this should consider what happens if Trump issues EOs that they do not like, because it means a future Democrat would not be allowed to cancel them.

Read: SCOTUS To Hear Ending Of DACA Challenge Tuesday »

Good News: It’s “Cold And Snow Is Caused By ‘Climate Change'” Season

Every year this starts

I try and avoid this, but, once it starts…

Read More »

Read: Good News: It’s “Cold And Snow Is Caused By ‘Climate Change'” Season »

If All You See…

…is an area flooding from carbon pollution from using gas heat, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Watts Up With That?, with a post on Extinction Rebellion nutters calling African oil leaders “climate criminals.”

It’s Canadians week!

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Patriotic Pinup Vaughan Bass

Happy Sunday! Another gorgeous day in America. The Sun is shining, the squirrels are squirreling, and the Giants-Jets game is cancelled and declared a draw…oh, wait, that last one was just wishful thinking. This pinup is by Vaughan Bass, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Weasel Zippers notes a brewery printing “Epstein didn’t kill himself” on beer cans
  2. Theodore’s World covers Trump signing the National POW/MIA Flag act
  3. The Right Scoop covers Trump and Melania getting a YUGE applause at football game
  4. The Quiet Towers explains that foreign aid IS quid pro quo
  5. The People’s Cube plays “history is repeating itself”
  6. The Last Tradition notes why Trump won in 2016 and will win in 2020
  7. The Hayride highlights the laughable protests against Trump at Alabama
  8. The First Street Journal discusses the Washington Post saying Republicans have trouble accepting political outcomes
  9. The American Conservative asks Progressives to explain how this all ends
  10. White House Dossier notes Liz Warren saying her Medicare for All push covers illegal aliens
  11. Raised On Hoecakes covers the release of the new Midway movie
  12. Powerline discusses the Ukraine scandal spreading
  13. neo-neocon wonders about this whole “OK-Boomer” stuff
  14. Moonbattery has giant creepy mural of St. Greta
  15. And last, but not least, Jo Nova wonders why solar panels aren’t saving us from bushfires

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page (nope, that’s gone, the newest Apache killed access, and the program hasn’t been upgraded since 2014). While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me.

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. And do you have a favorite blog you can recommend be added to the feedreader?

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

IIhan Omar Accused Of Anti-Semitism In Michael Bloomberg Tweet (Or Something?)

There’s no doubt that Representative Ilhan Omar is anti-Jew and anti-Israel. She’s demonstrated it time and time again, and, if you’re palling around with CAIR, that notion just gets reinforced. If you were hanging with KKK members, speaking at their events, there’s a pretty good chance you’re a racist and bigot, right? But, what of this?

Ilhan Omar tweet called anti-Semitic ‘dog whistle’; tennis great Martina Navratilova among critics

A Twitter message posted Saturday by U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., has revived accusations of anti-Semitism against the freshman congresswoman and member of the far-left “Squad.”

The remark, posted ahead of Omar’s scheduled appearance at a CAIR (Council of American Islamic Relations) event in Washington, also drew a response from tennis legend Martina Navratilova, who accused Omar of “assigning labels.”

Omar’s defenders, however, claimed that charges of anti-Semitism against her were overblown, and that Omar’s critics were “obsessed with every word Ilhan says or tweets.”

Early Saturday afternoon, Omar reacted to a news report that said businessman Leon Cooperman had decided to back billionaire Michael Bloomberg for president. Both men are billionaires and Jewish.

And, the critics came out

“I suppose you think it’s all about the Benjamins,” wrote Michael Dickson, executive director of Stand with Us, a group that fights anti-Semitism. “We get your insinuation. True to form.”

“Omar very carefully making an anti-Semitic tweet with just enough vagueness to claim that ackshually [sic] she meant it was about the benjamins and not about religion,” Twitter user Josh Jordan wrote. “But everyone knows what she meant, which is why she continues to do it.”

“Generalizing is wrong no matter which ‘group’ of people one talks about,” Navratilova wrote. “It’s about assigning labels and I hate that.”

There are plenty more like that at the article and under her tweet. Some people defended her

“Oh for God’s sake, stop this ridiculousness,” wrote Linda Sarsour, a Palestinian-American activist and former leader of The Women’s March, who herself has been accused of anti-Semitism. “This obsession with every word Ilhan says or tweets is tired and it’s getting old.”

It doesn’t really help when you have a virulent Jew and Israel hater defending you, nor when Omar retweets Sarsour’s tweet. But, was Ilhan actually impugning something with her initial tweet, or was it just because both Bloomberg and Cooperman are billionaires? When I first read the article I was thinking “come on, people, not everything is a “dog whistle”. Let’s not do this same unhinged language police stuff that the Left does, where they proclaim that everything, no matter how innocuous, no matter how easy to understand, is said to be a dog whistle.” I wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt, at least on this particular tweet, because you know we would be defending Trump and other Republicans when Democrats are twisting their words, right?

But, you would think that Omar and/or her team could perhaps defend her, right? Something simple like “it was about the billionaire, not the Jew). The closest it comes is

Read More »

Read: IIhan Omar Accused Of Anti-Semitism In Michael Bloomberg Tweet (Or Something?) »

‘Climate Change’ Could End Mortgages As We Know Them Or Something

The Cult of Climastrology is always looking for something new to impart doom on

Climate change could end mortgages as we know them

Climate change could punch a hole through the financial system by making 30-year home mortgages — the lifeblood of the American housing market — effectively unobtainable in entire regions across parts of the U.S.

That’s what the future could look like without policy to address climate change, according to the latest research from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. The bank is considering these and other risks on Friday in an unprecedented conference on the economics of climate change. (snip)

The housing market doesn’t yet factor in the risk of climate change, which is already affecting many areas of the U.S., including flood-prone coastal communities, agricultural regions and parts of the country vulnerable to wildfires. In California, for instance, 50,000 homeowners can’t get property or casualty insurance because of the increased risk to their homes.

Yet for now, no mortgage lender, portfolio manager or buyer of mortgages takes into account climate-induced floods, except to determine if a house sits in a 100-year floodplain at the time the mortgage is issued, said Michael Berman, a former official with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and former chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Once lenders and housing investors do start pricing in such risks, “There may be a threat to the availability of the 30-year mortgage in various vulnerable and highly exposed areas,” Berman wrote in a recent San Francisco Fed report. He predicts lenders could “blue-line” entire regions where flood risks are high — a reference to redlining, the practice of refusing mortgages to minorities.

The result: Entire neighborhoods would empty out, leaving cities unable to shore up their crumbling roads and bridges just as severe weather events become more extreme and more frequent. Home values would fall, potentially depleting the budgets of counties and states.

Of course this is coming from the nutty area of San Fransisco, eh? Perhaps they should worry more about earthquakes.

Read: ‘Climate Change’ Could End Mortgages As We Know Them Or Something »

If All You See…

…is horrible clothing which is bad for ‘climate change’, also made of leather from evil moo cows, being doubly bad, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Watcher Of Weasels, with a post on the 4 C’s of the impeachment scam.

Read: If All You See… »

Not Open Borders: Warren Suggests Suspending Deporations Of Illegal Aliens

Sadly, I wasn’t able to attend Liz Warren’s events here in Raleigh, but, probably for the best: I’m a heckler, and I might have yelled out questions that Liz couldn’t answer. Since the news media fails to ask pointed questions

At Latino community forum, Elizabeth Warren says she’s open to suspending deportations

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has supported focusing U.S. deportation efforts on criminals and national security threats rather than all immigrants in the country illegally.

At a rally Friday in Raleigh, Warren went farther, saying she would be open to a moratorium on deportations.

“I am open to suspending deportations particularly as a way to push Congress for comprehensive immigration reform,” Warren said. She said she believes “that when ICE comes into our communities, takes our neighbors, our friends, our family members, that they do not make this country safer.”

Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection should be focused on “real threats” from terrorism, contraband, and the shipping of deadly narcotic drugs like fentanyl, Warren said.

So, did anyone in the media ask a rather important question: “Senator, if you are for focusing deportation efforts on criminal illegal aliens, then why would you suspend all deportations of those who are criminals, putting U.S. citizens at risk for those criminals to commit crime against them, all to legalize people who are unlawfully present per U.S. federal law?”

Warren did not specify if such a suspension would apply to immigrants with criminal records.

No one asked her? Were you folks there as reporters or supporters?

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis tweeted in response to a video of Warren’s statement that her “radical, liberal agenda would be a disaster for North Carolina and the country,” calling it a “dangerous” proposal.

The comments also drew an emailed statement from President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign saying, “Warren is proposing regressive socialist plans that would dismantle our economic gains and hurt Latino families in North Carolina and across the country.”

Obviously, there are quite a few other questions she could be asked, such as “how does allowing open borders and rewarding people who broke our laws help out the Latinos lawfully present in the U.S., including those who are citizens, many of them who went through the whole long, expensive process to become citizens?”

Read: Not Open Borders: Warren Suggests Suspending Deporations Of Illegal Aliens »

There Are Four Stages Of Climate Grief, You Know

I’d recommend moving on and realizing that this whole thing is a scam. Perhaps seeking out mental health help from a professional who is not a practicing member of the Cult of Climastrology. In lieu of that, Warmists with climate grief/eco anxiety should give up all use of fossil fuels and make their lives carbon neutral, giving up most trappings of a modern life

The 4 Stages of Climate Grief

The sky was dark in the distance, a blue curtain of virga predicting an oncoming storm. Desert rocks glowed even redder in contrast. I was passing through—not enough time to wait or really do the moment justice—but I wanted to be in the canyons, so I jammed my feet into sneakers and set off running.

The trail was a figure eight, and once I made it past the most popular loop, no one else was out. When I gained the ridge, a rainbow cracked the dark sky, and I got that rare elated feeling of witnessing something beautiful alone. But when I stopped—telling myself I was taking a picture when I was really just catching my breath—I got walloped by an ache of loss in a place that I’d held in my mind as untouchable.

I was on the edge of the Escalante Canyons, a landscape threatened by both large-scale climate change and aridification and land-use changes that have opened it up to more drilling and mining. It’s destabilizing when the places that have always healed you start to hurt. (snip)

There are times when I can handle the creep of warming—though it feels insurmountable—by getting angry at specific injustices: the dark knowledge that oil companies had back in the 1980s about their impact on the climate, the financially inconvenient truths about who is funding climate deniers even today. But I have a harder time with the selfishness of my own life, my desire to be in the wild, the hypocrisy of the gas I burn to get there, and the way all those forces could change this place. Here, in the deceptively fragile desert, these ossified rocks seem stable. But once you drill a landscape and riddle it with roads, water runs off differently, the soil cracks, and animal-migration patterns change. It should be less complicated to love a place than, say, a person, but it’s not. Anger feels less scary than the ache.

There’s no clear-cut way to grieve for a place. It’s a specific kind of heartache, because it’s grief in anticipation, grief without end. How do you know when a place is really gone? What could you have done? What can you do? Iceland now has funerals for lost glaciers; fires decimate forests and they come back different. Racing the edge of a storm might be too obvious of a metaphor, but it feels about right.

“I’m concerned about the people who aren’t feeling climate grief right now, because I think they’re not paying attention,” says Laura Schmidt, a former environmental organizer who founded the Good Grief Network, which provides a framework for working through overwhelming climate loss. “The word overcome comes up a lot, but you don’t overcome it, you work with it.”

I wonder how much money she’s making off of pushing this scam, essentially reinforcing the fake mental issues of Warmists.

Jennifer Atkinson, a professor who teaches a class called Eco-Grief and Climate Anxiety at the University of Washington, says that recognizing your grief is the first step of a survival strategy, especially if the places that you go to escape from the world’s roughness are the very ones that feel threatened.

OK, good, this bit of insanity is being reinforced via an actual class.

After acknowledging your anxiety, says Atkinson, the next step is to take action, whether that’s political work or personal change. Civic engagement is the best answer to grief. “I love this Rebecca Solnit quote,” she says. “‘It’s not hope that drives us into action, it’s action that drives us into hope.’”

You know that most won’t change their own lives. This is about making more activists.

Schmidt adds that community is another big piece of fighting the feelings of uselessness and isolation. It’s important to talk about climate change and loss of landscape and biodiversity, she says, and to make those conversations normal and constant. Accept the severity and predicament, but don’t do it alone.

That’s less a step than finding like minded people to reinforce your delusions

Then, Atkinson says, go outside. “It’s not just that it’s therapeutic to be connected to those places, even though there are physical benefits to being outside,” she says. “Connection reminds us why they’re worth fighting for. We’re dealing with tremendous loss, but there is so much left to save.”

Most of these people would freak out if they went anyone truly “outside” after living in their liberal big cities.

Read: There Are Four Stages Of Climate Grief, You Know »

Devin Nunes Demands Adam Schiff Testify In Place of “Whistleblower”

Hey, why not? Schiff has as much firsthand knowledge of the Ukraine phone call as the so-called whistleblower

(Breitbart) House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA) on Friday sent a letter to Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) requesting that the House Intelligence Committee chairman testify as part of the impeachment inquiry.

In the letter, Nunes argued that Schiff should testify in lieu of the “whistleblower,” since the “whistleblower” went to Schiff’s staff before filing his complaint and since Schiff will not let the whistleblower testify.

In his letter to Schiff, Nunes wrote:

As the American public is now aware, in August 2019, you and/or your staff met with or talked to the whistleblower who raised an issue with President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky. Although you claim that nothing inappropriate was discussed, the three committees deserve to hear directly from you the substance and circumstances surrounding any discussions conducted with the whistleblower, and any instructions you issued regarding those discussions. Given that you have reneged on your public commitment to let the committees interview the whistleblower directly, you are the only individual who can provide clarity as to these conversations.

Nunes noted that there is precedent: Members of Congress participated for closed-door depositions during the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

He added: “Given your championing of such an arrangement two years ago, you should have no problem with you appearing before the three committees to discuss your interaction with the whistleblower.”

Will Schiff have the cajones to do this? Especially if he’s under oath? The so-called whistleblower, who never actually hear the call, went to Schiff’s staff well before “blowing the whistle”, and was instructed by Schiff’s staff on acquiring legal counsel and how to file the complaint. Schiff initially denied…ok, let’s be honest, he blatantly lied about the person contacting his staff initially.

But, we know he won’t, and we know this is just Trump Derangement Syndrome from the Democrats, who’ve been seriously talking about impeaching Trump since the moment he won the election.

Read: Devin Nunes Demands Adam Schiff Testify In Place of “Whistleblower” »

Pirate's Cove