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

OCasio-Cortz, Ed Markey Reportedly To Release “New Green Deal” Legislation

By William Teach February 1, 2019 – 8:29 am

Apparently, despite having yammered about it for months and months, legislation is apparently not written yet. Which really doesn’t matter, because it would pretty much be technologically unfeasable

OCASIO-CORTEZ, ED MARKEY ARE ABOUT TO REVEAL A ‘GREEN NEW DEAL’ BILL

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey could unveil “Green New Deal” legislation as soon as early February, according to Axios.

Ocasio-Cortez told reporters nine days ago her staff was in the “drafting phase” of legislation to “essentially just define the scope” of the “Green New Deal.” The plan has become a rallying cry on the left and now has the backing of Democratic 2020 presidential hopefuls.

Now, it’s clear Ocasio-Cortez is working on a serious legislation push in both houses of Congress, teaming up with Markey, the climate-crusading lawmaker behind the failed 2010 cap-and-trade bill.

Markey’s office said the “Green New Deal” bill hasn’t been finalized and “timing isn’t final yet for next week,” Axios reported Wednesday evening. Sunrise Movement co-founder Varshini Prakash, who helped write the original draft bill posted online, told Axios legislation is due next week. (snip)

However, not everyone on the left is getting behind a “Green New Deal.” Top House Democrats have not supported the idea, including New Jersey Rep. Frank Pallone, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Pallone and other committee chairs have their own legislation they want to push, and don’t see a “Green New Deal” as a viable plan.

“This is something that we should take a look at, but some of it may not be technologically or politically feasible,” Pallone said in early January.

Most of the Democrats running for president support the Green New Deal, but a lot of the old school are looking at measures that wouldn’t essentially be the ‘climate change’ version of Obamacare, ie, a massive increase in the scope and size of the federal government, with massive taxes, fees, and control of citizen’s lives.

“A carbon tax bill isn’t going to be called a Green New Deal,” Ocasio-Cortez recently toldreporters. “It could be part of a Green New Deal, but we have to be sure that we define the scope of what comprehensive Green New Deal legislation would look like.”

In other words, they’ll just call all the taxes something else.

It’d be nice if every single reporter would ask AOC, Markey, etc, what they’ve done in their own lives towards making them carbon neutral.

Read: OCasio-Cortz, Ed Markey Reportedly To Release “New Green Deal” Legislation »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Democrats, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

Progressive World: NJ Gov Won’t Help Homeless, As It Costs Too Much

By William Teach February 1, 2019 – 8:10 am

Remember, though, that Democrats are the ones who are totally selfless and just want to help

Murphy torpedoes homeless aid, and top Democrat calls it ‘a cold act on the coldest day of the year’

Gov. Phil Murphy on Thursday vetoed legislation that would have created a more generous housing assistance program for thousands of chronically ill and disabled people in New Jersey, saying the measure would have all but written a blank check the state cannot afford.

State Senate President Stephen Sweeney, the bill’s sponsor and a fellow Democrat, quickly assailed the governor’s decision, calling it “a cold act on the coldest day of the year.”

Sweeney, D-Gloucester — who often clashes with Murphy — noted how the thermometer dipped into the single digits this week.

“Days like this should be a reminder that there are homeless veterans suffering from PTSD, abused mothers with young children, recovering drug addicts and alcoholics who find themselves out on the street and need our help,” Sweeney said.

The bill (S1965) provided up to a maximum of 18 months of “emergency assistance” payments for low-income people, including those deemed unable to work because they are chronically ill and disabled or are taking care of a sick or disabled spouse or child. Any time spent in the program in the prior to seven years ago would not be counted toward the 18-month period, according to the bill.

The legislation earned rare bipartisan support, passing by a 35-0 vote in the state Senate and 70-9 in the state Assembly.

Phil refused to sign it, as it could cost way too much, and he may or may not have a point, and wants to discuss it in the spring. Figures others were looking show it could cost up to another $20 million. And, with the vote counts, the veto will probably be overridden.

Funny thing is, here’s also Murphy

Those are just two of the things Phil supports for illegal aliens. What is the cost of financial aid? What’s the cost to NJ residents for NJ being mostly a sanctuary for illegal aliens? Putting them in K-12? Letting them have driver’s licenses, which could put many in the state run bad driver insurance program, which the citizens pay for in the car insurance?

Read: Progressive World: NJ Gov Won’t Help Homeless, As It Costs Too Much »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | Comments Off on Progressive World: NJ Gov Won’t Help Homeless, As It Costs Too Much | Trackback URL

Hot Take: Colonization Of America Caused Little Ice Age

By William Teach January 31, 2019 – 2:30 pm

Not content to blame the Modern Warm period mostly/solely on Mankind, the Cult of Climastrology has now aimed its insanity at the Little Ice Age

https://twitter.com/spudseven/status/1091008418725355521

From the link

Colonisation of the Americas at the end of the 15th Century killed so many people, it disturbed Earth’s climate.

That’s the conclusion of scientists from University College London, UK.

The team says the disruption that followed European settlement led to a huge swathe of abandoned agricultural land being reclaimed by fast-growing trees and other vegetation.

This pulled down enough carbon dioxide (COâ‚‚) from the atmosphere to eventually chill the planet.

It’s a cooling period often referred to in the history books as the “Little Ice Age” – a time when winters in Europe would see the Thames in London regularly freeze over.

“The Great Dying of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas led to the abandonment of enough cleared land that the resulting terrestrial carbon uptake had a detectable impact on both atmospheric COâ‚‚ and global surface air temperatures,” Alexander Koch and colleagues write in their paper published in Quaternary Science Reviews.

There’s absolutely nothing the CoC won’t do and say to uphold their cultish beliefs.

Read: Hot Take: Colonization Of America Caused Little Ice Age »

Posted in Global Warming, New Climate Deniers | 16 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 31, 2019 – 1:00 pm

…is a world flooded from too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The American Conservative, with a post on why Democrats hate Howard Schultz.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

Science Must Discusses Social Justice In Regards To ‘Climate Change’ Or Something

By William Teach January 31, 2019 – 10:30 am

Just an FYI: I see no point in discussing the blamestorming of the current cold snap by all the Warmists yet again, as they manufacture a way to blame Mankind’s CO2 output for creating warmth which creates cold. Cold waves that have been happening for way longer than Mankind has been around. Let’s look at why this really isn’t a science at all

To tackle climate change, share burden — and benefits

If you look at the permalink, you can see that the original headline was toned down from “Science must join with social policy evolution to battle climate change”, which says it all: this is all activism science from a far left point of view

Even as climate change reaches new and terrifying levels, hope remains — but the time to act is now.

Terrifying to whom? The climate has always changed.

That was the message Professor Daniel M. Kammen brought to a lecture in the Undiscovered Science series at Radcliffe Institute on Monday. Even before he began his talk, “An Energy Plan the Earth Can Live With,” he took a moment to stress the problem’s scope.

“We are at a point where a call for ‘a just transition’ is more accurate than ‘an energy plan,’” said Kammen, the Class of 1935 Distinguished Professor of Energy and chair of the Energy and Resources Group at the University of California, Berkeley. “We have to make this great energy transition, but we are moving too slowly.”

The clock is ticking. Last October, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007, issued a statement about the need to hold additional global warming to less than 1.5 degrees Celsius. (Humans have already warmed the planet 1 degree Celsius.) But as emerging economies pursue growth and the Trump administration denies climate change, that objective is growing increasingly elusive.

During his address, Kammen, who has been the coordinating lead author for the IPCC since 1999 and is a professor in the Goldman School of Public Policy and its Department of Nuclear Engineering, not only spoke of the scientific advances that can make such goals achievable, but addressed the social and policy evolution that must go hand in hand with the technology.

So, someone who has a lot at stake in pushing ‘climate change’ doom wants to further scare people into far left politics. Huh.

In America, Kammen said a “Green New Deal” must lead to a “much bigger discussion about equity.” For example, although 16 states have passed laws to enable alternative clean energies, too often these simply focus on subsidizing changes made by homeowners, he said. The efforts also tend to target only one group, viewed as more likely to modify or build for energy efficiency.

“Even when you control for income, solar is 30 percent to 40 percent more prevalent in white/Caucasian-dominated” communities, Kammen said. And since such legislation relies on taxpayer money, in effect it “borrows money from all to pay those who are better off,” he said. The result is alternative energy inequality. Though the laws are well-meaning, they ignore the exponentially higher price communities of color pay in terms of health and wellness because of climate change.

We’ve completely left the realm of science. But, that happened long ago.

Read: Science Must Discusses Social Justice In Regards To ‘Climate Change’ Or Something »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Virginia Governor Floats Allowing Just Born Babies To Die

By William Teach January 31, 2019 – 7:35 am

I never found the time to follow up on the story of a Democratic bill in Virginia that would allow babies to be aborted right up to birth (I often have pre-written posts from the morning which I can post in a few minutes using my phone). This is nuts, and something that should end up in the ads of not just every Virginia Republican, but Republicans nationwide, highlighting what the abortion supporters in the Democratic Party really stand for

(Daily Caller) Virginia Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam couldn’t precisely answer whether he supports abortion until birth and suggested an infant could be born and then the mother and doctor could discuss what should happen next, in a Wednesday morning interview.

“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother,” Northam said in a WTOP interview.

Aborting a baby after it has been born is illegal.

His comments come after Democratic Virginia Delegate Kathy Tran introduced HB 2491, or the Repeal Act, in January. The legislation seeks to repeal the state’s current restrictions on late-term abortions. The bill would allow a doctor to perform an abortion when a woman is dilating, meaning she is about to give birth.

This would be the legalization of infanticide

https://twitter.com/noonanjo/status/1090661336026103808

Evil codified. Put into law. The statement his office put out didn’t help his cause at all. And of course Democrats are rushing to support Northam. And, of course, the media goes with the “Conservatives Pounce!” angle

https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1090708004561924098

When you’re pushing letting the just born die, you deserve backlash. Oh, and then there’s this

The Democratic Virginia delegate who has recently come under fire for sponsoring a bill in the Virginia House of Delegates that would allow the termination of a pregnancy up to 40 weeks old, is also the chief patron of a bill that would protect the lives of “fall cankerworms” during certain months.

Democratic Virginia Del. Kathy Tran introduced “House Bill No. 2495 – Fall cankerworm; spraying prohibited during certain months” on Jan. 9, the same day as “House Bill No. 2491 — Abortion; eliminate certain requirements.”

Democrats have some seriously f*cked up priorities.

Read: Virginia Governor Floats Allowing Just Born Babies To Die »

Posted in Democrats, Unhinged Tools | 24 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove