Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

By William Teach February 3, 2019 – 8:51 am

Happy Sunday! Another fantastic day in America. The sun is shining, the birds are singing, and the majority of Americans are rooting against the Patriots. Go figure. This pinup is by Joyce Ballantyne with a wee bit of help.

What’s happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Chicks On The Right covers Northam’s wife having to stop him from moonwalking
  2. Ice Age Now discusses religious zealotry vs science truth
  3. Jo Nova notes the new talking point that climate change spreads AIDS
  4. Weasel Zippers covers Democrats now backing wars in order to thwart Trump
  5. Vox Popoli notes CBS rejecting a Just Stand ad
  6. This ain’t Hell… has Sunday feel good stories
  7. Theodore’s World discusses Trump pulling out of the INF
  8. The Right Scoop notes another state proposing an evil abortion law
  9. The Lid features California Dems livid that Trump nominated Conservative judges
  10. The Last Tradition highlights Ann Coulters losing her mind
  11. The Crawdad Hole notes that they were fine with killing babies, but blackface? Too far
  12. Powerline notes that Newseum is about to close its doors
  13. Patterico’s Pontifications covers Gavin Newsome trying to square promises with economic realities
  14. Moonbattery discusses how birth tourism screws Americans
  15. And last, but not least, Irons In The Fire covers the priorities of the British police
  16. And one to grow on: Congratulations to The Daley Gator on hitting 10,000,000 hits! (I’m not even sure what my true count is after Go Stats crashed on me. The internal WordPress.org one is way, way behind)

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. 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.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Posted in Patriotic Pinup | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Says There’s A Good Chance He’ll Declare An Emergency To Build The Wall

By William Teach February 3, 2019 – 7:26 am

This was something very easy: give the pittance, in terms of the federal budget, to Trump to build some border barrier. Democrats could have demanded something like more security in the ports of entry. But, no, they staked a claim, and won’t budge. Even though they said they would negotiate once government was reopened. So, they’re pushing Trump to make a move

Trump says there’s a ‘good chance’ he’ll declare an emergency for border wall

President Donald Trump said there is a “good chance” he’ll declare a national emergency to build his proposed border wall and said he would use his State of the Union address next week to once again make a case for the barrier.

“I think there’s a good chance we’ll have to do that,” he said of the declaration, which he has threatened for weeks. “We have very strong legal standing.”

The emergency declaration could help the Trump administration free up billions of dollars in construction money for the wall, but it will also almost certainly face legal challenges that could redefine the president’s ability to use emergency powers.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is working against a Feb. 15 deadline to produce a deal to fund the government and avoid another shutdown. Trump has demanded the final product include funding for his proposed border wall but has also said Republicans on the committee are “wasting their time” trying to negotiate with Democrats.

If Democrats refuse to negotiate, then it is a waste of time. Putting up some cameras and drones does nothing but allow the Border Patrol to watch them come in.

(Fox News) In fact, walls work. Love them or hate them, their effectiveness is indisputable.

“Part of our area is covered with some fencing on our east side. That accounts for about 6 percent of our traffic,” Border Patrol chief Raul Ortiz told journalists during President Trump’s January 10 visit to Rio Grande Valley, Texas. “Where we have no fencing, over 90 percent of our traffic occurs in those areas.” A day earlier, Ortiz added, 450 people were apprehended in the unfenced sector, including 133 from such non-Latin nations as India, Pakistan, and Romania.

Some 560,000 illegals were caught astride San Diego and Tijuana in Fiscal Year 1992, when a border wall was installed there. By FY 2017, the Border Patrol says it snared 26,086 — down 95.3 percent.

Realistically, the solution is to implement laws that make the majority of illegals and visa overstayers not come illegally/overstay their visas, such as requiring all asylum seekers to apply at designated U.S. facilities in other countries. Immediately deporting any illegal caught in the U.S. Not giving them education and stuff. And slamming any entity that employs an illegal without doing their due diligence with massive civil and criminal penalties, meaning most won’t take the chance. Making those who sponsor visa holders responsible for the status of the visa holders. And much more. Remove the reasons so many come illegally/overstay visas.

Read: Trump Says There’s A Good Chance He’ll Declare An Emergency To Build The Wall »

Posted in Democrats, Donald Trump, Illegal Immigration | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Who’s Up For The New Language On ‘Climate Change’?

By William Teach February 2, 2019 – 3:07 pm

They might not have had to do this if it wasn’t a) a hyper-partisan political issue and b) an actual scientific discipline dependent on facts and figures and the scientific method (there are a very few who do treat it as a science in practice, but no one wants to listen to them beat down the Cult of Climastrology)

The New Language of Climate Change

Leading climate scientists and meteorologists are banking on a new strategy for talking about climate change: Take the politics out of it.

That means avoiding the phrase “climate change,” so loaded with partisan connotations as it is. Stop talking about who or what is most responsible. And focus instead on what is happening and how unusual it is—and what it is costing communities.

That was a main takeaway at the American Meteorological Society’s annual meeting this month, where top meteorologists and environmental scientists from around the country gathered to hear the latest research on record rainfall and drought, debate new weather prediction models and digest all manner of analysis on climatic mutations.

Too late. They decided that it was mostly/solely caused by Mankind, regardless of not having the scientific proof, and decided to run with it. Hence the change from global warming to climate change, and attempts at things like climate disruption and such. It’s so political now that even if it was truly real, as in the man-caused part, you’d never get the skeptics to believe it, and never get the Warmists to make the big changes in their own lives.

It’s dead. The very fact that they have to discuss this says all the world about it.

Educating the public and policymakers about climate change at a time when elected leaders are doubling down on denying that it is happening at all or that humans are responsible for it demands a new lexicon, conference attendees told me—one that can effectively narrate the overwhelming scientific evidence but not get sucked into the controversy fueled most prominently by President Donald Trump.

Which means it’s political.

Read: Who’s Up For The New Language On ‘Climate Change’? »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 25 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 2, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a CO2 dried out world flooding from CO2, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Daley Gator, with a post on CNN pushing exclusion of MAGA hat wearers.

Ideas for next week’s theme?

Read: If All You See… »

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

Open Borders Advocate Totally Knows How To Improve Our Immigration System

By William Teach February 2, 2019 – 10:30 am

Of course, the thing here that Open Borders Sara Ramey, an immigration attorney and the executive director at the very open borders Migrant Center for Human Rights in San Antonio, Texas, fails to note is that illegal aliens aren’t actually part of the immigration system, beyond federal law which states if they are caught they are punished. For a first offense, a small fine and deportation

5 ways the new Congress can improve our immigration system

Whether as part of the government shutdown negotiations or through other legislative efforts, Congress can make a real difference in the lives of immigrants a number of way. Here I’ve outlined five effective steps that can be taken:

  1. Ensure judicial independence (she wants it not subject to the whims of whomever is in office as POTUS. So, who provides oversight? Doesn’t say)
  2. End prosecutions of asylum seekers (and this is the kind of thing which makes all the illegals claim asylum, despite less than 7% qualifying)
  3. Protect domestic violence victims (funny that she doesn’t want to protect victims of illegal alien crime)
  4. Protect family unity and well-being (I’m going to come back to this one)
  5. Eliminate unjustified detention (in other words, release all illegals, because they’ll totally come back for their hearings, right?)

Now, back to #4, in which she writes

Additionally, Congress should stop the administration from charging parents with smuggling their children under 8 U.S. Code § 1324. Congress can pass a law clarifying that bringing a minor child with you does not constitute smuggling, thereby clarifying that we are not a country that penalizes parents and children for wanting to be together.

Remember the days when we were told that we shouldn’t punish the children for the sins of the parents? Sin means “breaking U.S. law,” correct? So, someone has to pay. That would be the parents. The Open Borders advocates are exposing what they really mean, which is “let the kids and parents stay, regardless.” Which incentivizes more to come illegally.

Look at Senator Jeff Merkely (D-Oregon): he’s bringing a mother and child who were separated for two months (under a policy that Obama himself used) after they came illegally. This tells people to come illegally.

Illegal immigrants jump the line, making legal immigrants wait

Despite political and religious oppression under the Soviet Union, my parents waited their turn and legally immigrated to the U.S. They became doctors and saved thousands of American lives.

My Ukrainian aunt, cousin, and other relatives are doctors and other needed professionals. They have struggled constantly to immigrate for decades. Even as other less qualified cross the southern border daily and then cut the line, my family is forced to wait, kept apart by a broken immigration system.

President Trump’s promise of border security offers them hope that one day, illegal immigration may slow down and their turn will come to arrive legally. (snip)

Then again, how can the line to immigrate not take 20 years if there are thousands entering illegally every year? How can our government not be concerned about issuing visas when so many are overstayed, and we don’t have nearly enough personnel to ensure enforcement? Securing our borders and investing in enforcement is not “anti-immigrant” but “pro-legal immigrant.” It would also help countless Americans.

Yeah, but Democrats need gardeners, farm workers, and other low wage, uneducated people who will end up depending on government and voting Democrats. Why would we want people who really want to be American and bring valuable skills and knowledge? Sheesh.

Read: Open Borders Advocate Totally Knows How To Improve Our Immigration System »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Say, Does The Deep Freeze Mean ‘Climate Change’ Is Accelerating Or Something?

By William Teach February 2, 2019 – 7:17 am

OK, I’ve tried to ignore these wonky wackadoodle cultish belief articles, not even bothering with them on Twitter. This one caught my attention, though, for the headline and a specific line

Is deep freeze the latest sign climate change is accelerating?

Hundreds of thousands of fish have choked during Australia’s hottest monthsince records began, swathes of the United States is colder than the north pole, new ruptures have been found in one of the Antarctic’s biggest glaciers and there are growing signs the Arctic is warming so fast that it could soon be just another stretch of the Atlantic.

And so the new year is carrying on where the old one left off, with growing signs climate disruption is accelerating at a more destructive rate than many scientists predicted.

The US deep freeze, which has plunged temperatures in Minnesotato -50C(-58F), may appear to have little in common with the searing heatwave that cooked Marble Bar, Australia, in 49.1C. But the extremes are consistent with theories about how increasing human emissions change major weather systems.

As carbon builds in the atmosphere, the planet warms and the ice caps melt, so the temperature gradient between the equator and the poles flattens out. Although the science is not yet conclusive, many scientists believe this is weakening the jet streams, which are important drivers of weather systems.

So, what caused this?

You think it’s brutally cold in New Jersey today as the polar vortex tightens its grip? Well, luckily you weren’t standing outside in River Vale in Bergen County on Jan. 5, 1904.

That’s when the air temperature dropped to 34 degrees below zero — without factoring in the wind chill. To this day, that insanely frigid reading stands as the coldest temperature ever recorded in the Garden State, according to New Jersey State Climatologist David Robinson, whose office is based at Rutgers University. (snip)

New Jersey’s coldest month on record was February 1934, when the statewide average temperature was only 17.2 degrees, Robinson said. That’s the average of all the daily highs and daily lows in each region of the state.

New Jersey’s coldest year on record was 1904, with a statewide average temperature of 47.8 degrees.

OK, that’s just NJ, and there were plenty of cold records broken this year. But CO2 was below the safe level of 350ppm. And different states will have different records. It just goes to show that weather happens. There’s no witchcraft of CO2 involved. Having a warm period is normal.

Read: Say, Does The Deep Freeze Mean ‘Climate Change’ Is Accelerating Or Something? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 84 Comments | Trackback URL

Eric Swalwell (D) Plans To Push “Right To Be Safe” Gun Control Next Week

By William Teach February 2, 2019 – 6:57 am

Obviously, Swalwell forgot to real the actual Bill Of Rights, which restricts government

Rep. Eric Swalwell: ‘Right to Be Safe’ Trumps Right to Bear Arms

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) is pledging a gun control vote next week by exclaiming that the “right to be safe” trumps the right to bear arms.

He argues that the “right to be safe” supersedes “any other rights” possessed by Americans:

While the right to bear arms is easy to find in the Bill of Rights, as is the right to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom from government intrusion on private property, etc., the “right to be safe” is elusive. In fact, no such right is declared in the Bill of Rights. Rather, Americans keep themselves safe via the exercise of the whole of their rights, including the right to keep and bear arms for defense of self and of liberty.

Swalwell is setting the stage for a gutting of our Second Amendment rights. He tweeted, “For too long, an NRA-controlled Congress failed to pass common sense gun laws, instead allowing the most dangerous weapons to be in the hands of the most dangerous people. Predictably, thousands have died. & Congress would respond w/ moments of silence & zero moments of action.”

He did not mention that nearly every mass shooter of the 21st century acquired his guns by complying with all the left’s gun controls–including background checks–rather than going around them. Nor did he mention that the left’s refusal to remove gun-free zones continues to provide a target-rich environment for crazies, and no amount of gun control will change that.

Stalwell also failed to note that California, at the state level, has every gun control the Democrats are pushing at the federal level, and they continue to have high profile attack after high profile attack. Perhaps this is because gun control does not disarm criminals, but the law-abiding citizen.

What are they going to focus on? What’s that you say, going after criminals who use firearms to commit crimes? You’re funny

Raise your hand if you think Democrats will go after law abiding citizens in their hearing.

Read: Eric Swalwell (D) Plans To Push “Right To Be Safe” Gun Control Next Week »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

NY Times Circles The Wagons Over Virginia’s Infanticide Bill

By William Teach February 1, 2019 – 3:44 pm

Fortunately, and at least for the moment, the Virginia bill which would have codified infanticide at the moment of birth has been defeated. Remember, these are the same types of people who got all squishy over treating stone cold Islamic terrorists meanly. Babies, though? The Democrats are just showing their true stripes on the issue. And along comes Michelle Goldberg in the NY Times, which has this as the featured opinion piece on the web front page

Fake News About Abortion in Virginia

Under current law in Virginia, third-trimester abortions are permitted when a woman’s physician and two other doctors certify that continuing a pregnancy would result in a mother’s death, or “substantially and irremediably impair the mental or physical health of the woman.” This week Kathy Tran, a Democrat in Virginia’s House of Delegates, testified in favor of a bill that would end the requirement for two extra doctors to sign off on such abortions, and strike the words “substantially and irremediably” from the existing law. Similar legislation has been introduced in past years. Despite what you might have heard, at no point did Tran try to legalize infanticide.

When Tran appeared before a statehouse subcommittee, the Republican majority leader, Todd Gilbert, presented her with an outré hypothetical. Could a woman about to go into labor request an abortion if her doctor certified that she needed one for mental health reasons? Tran said that the decision would be between a woman and her doctor, but, evidently taken aback by the question, eventually allowed that it would be permitted under her bill.

Tran handled the moment poorly. She might have pointed out that legislation is not generally written with an eye to prohibiting ridiculous and unprecedented scenarios. It is inconceivable that a doctor would certify a need for an abortion while a woman is in labor; some doctors won’t even let a woman turn down a C-section if they think a baby’s health is at risk. But Tran’s impolitic answer to a ludicrous question gave abortion opponents grist for an explosion of self-righteous outrage.

Oh, she just “handled it poorly”, which is LibSpeak for “she told the truth.” The vast majority of late term abortions are not to protect the mother: they are elective. Exactly what was the need to change the existing law on late term abortions if not to make it that much easier?

Michelle continues on for a bit, attempting to circle the wagons, ending with

Having extra doctors sign off on each late abortion safeguards against (mythical) cavalier terminations, but it means that women in anguished, urgent situations need to jump through extra hoops. Abortion opponents treat mental health exemptions as easily exploited loopholes, but one instance in which they’re invoked is when a woman learns that her fetus has little chance of surviving outside the womb, and can’t face the prospect of going through labor only to watch her baby die.

In other words, let the child die while it’s lying on a table.

Read: NY Times Circles The Wagons Over Virginia’s Infanticide Bill »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 23 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 1, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a world turning to desert from carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Feral Irishman, with a post on the Dems 2020 platform.

Read: If All You See… »

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

#TDS: NJ Democrats Pushing Legislation Which Would Require Tax Returns To Be On Ballot In NJ

By William Teach February 1, 2019 – 10:30 am

First of all, I don’t think Donald Trump would care, because there’s little chance of a Republican winning NJ

N.J. Democrats threaten to toss Trump from the 2020 ballot if he doesn’t release his tax returns

Democratic state lawmakers in New Jersey aren’t done seeking President Donald Trump’s tax returns.

Some members of the state Legislature have revived legislation that would require candidates for president and vice president to disclose their tax returns from the previous five years to appear on the ballot in the Garden State.

The bill would also ban New Jersey’s voters in the electoral college from voting for a candidate that did not do so.

That would affect Trump, a Republican who in 2016 became the first presidential candidate in four decades not to release his returns, if he runs for re-election in 2020.

Similar legislation died in 2017 when then-Gov. Chris Christie — a longtime Trump friend and fellow Republican — conditionally vetoed the measure. He called it unconstitutional and dismissed it as a “transparent political stunt masquerading as a bill.”

Second of all, it would be unconstitutional. There is no state’s rights provision for this. The U.S. Constitution sets the specific requirements to be president, and they can’t simply expand on them because they’re having a mental meltdown in the Democratic Party due to Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Many other states have introduced similar legislation. And a Democratic congressman from New Jersey, U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr., D-8th Dist., is leading a similar effort in Washington to force Trump’s tax returns to become public.

The effort has been bolstered by Democrats retaking the House after last year’s elections.

And every single one would violate the Constitution. But, then, when have the Dems ever worried about that?

Read: #TDS: NJ Democrats Pushing Legislation Which Would Require Tax Returns To Be On Ballot In NJ »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Democrats, Donald Trump | 60 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove