Get The Popcorn: DOJ Sues California Over Sanctuary Policies

By William Teach March 7, 2018 – 7:14 am

California wanted to play games in attempting to blow off federal law on illegal aliens. They were virtue signaling at a high level, and now they’re going to be in a dog fight

(Fox News) The Trump Justice Department filed a lawsuit Tuesday night against California, saying three recently-passed state laws were deliberately interfering with federal immigration policies.

It marked the latest legal and political confrontation with the nation’s most populous state, which the federal government says has repeatedly stood in the way of its plans to step up enforcement actions in the workplace and against criminal aliens.

“The Department of Justice and the Trump Administration are going to fight these unjust, unfair, and unconstitutional policies,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions was expected to tell California law enforcement officers on Wednesday. “We are fighting to make your jobs safer and to help you reduce crime in America.”

The state’s Democratic governor, Jerry Brown, fired back: “At a time of unprecedented political turmoil, Jeff Sessions has come to California to further divide and polarize America. Jeff, these political stunts may be the norm in Washington, but they don’t work here. SAD!!!”

Jerry Brown might be in for a bigger sad, because the federal government has primacy in immigration policy. Heck, Democrats made sure to tell us this when they opposed Arizona’s SB1070 immigration law, which strengthened immigration policy in the state, rather than saying “we’re not going to help the federal government.” Obama’s DOJ, which sued Arizona for daring to tighten up immigration policing, set the precedent for being In Charge of immigration policy.

One of those laws offers additional worker protections against federal immigration enforcement actions. Senior Justice Department officials have said it’s prevented companies from voluntarily cooperating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.

Employers are mandated under the law to demand ICE agents present a warrant or subpoena before entering certain areas of the premises, or when accessing some employee records.

There’s a very good chance this one succeeds, as the California law violates the 1st Amendment, and the California law puts the businesses in the middle of choosing between following a state law and getting fined by the federales or following federal law and getting fined by the state.

Another state law dubbed known by critics as the “sanctuary state” bill protects immigrants without legal residency by limiting state and municipal cooperation with the feds, including what information can be shared about illegal-immigrant inmates.

A third law gives state officials the power to monitor and inspect immigrant detention facilities either run directly by, or contracted through, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The second will most likely succeed, as, again, the federal government has primacy, and states must follow federal law. Especially when they’re taking federal money. The 3rd might not succeed. Regardless, there is a supremacy clause in the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution explicitly gives the federal government control over immigration policy. California officials have trotted out the 10 Amendment in the past about this, but, the power of immigration policy is reserved not for the states, but delegated to Los Federales.

Read: Get The Popcorn: DOJ Sues California Over Sanctuary Policies »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Surprise: Democrat Offers Up Legislation To Punish Law Abiding Gun Owners With Taxes And Fees

By William Teach March 6, 2018 – 3:30 pm

Rep. Danny K. Davis is looking to be in contention for Gun Salesperson Of The Year, because this is the kind of thing that drives sales

(Breitbart) Rep. Danny K. Davis (D-IL) is pushing legislation to place a 20 percent tax on guns and a 50 percent tax on ammunition.

The legislation is titled the “Gun Violence Prevention and Safe Communities Act of 2018.”

The act amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, so as to require a 20 percent tax on “pistols,” “revolvers,” “firearms (other than pistols and revolvers),” and “any lower frame or receiver for a firearm, whether for a semiautomatic pistol, rifle, or shotgun that is designed to accommodate interchangeable upper receivers.”

The act places a 50 percent tax on ammunition “shells and cartridges.”

These taxes will only apply to law-abiding citizens, just as similar taxes in Chicago and Seattle only raise the purchase price of firearms and ammunition for law-abiding citizens. Both Chicago and Seattle have a “violence tax” on the retail sale of guns and ammo, but criminals do not participate in the tax because they do not buy their guns at retail.

This ultimately means that such taxes drive up the prices for the tools that law-abiding citizens need for self-defense, even to the point of making firearms cost-prohibitive for poorer residents.

This is what Democrats mostly do: harm law abiding citizens. Make it hard for women to protect themselves from the criminals Democrats are soft on. And, ultimately, while this has zero chance of making it out of committee, much less getting approved, it will drive people to purchase guns they do not necessarily need and ammo which is just beyond extra.

Perhaps we should submit legislation that requires Congress members to pay for their own armed security, and we’ll put a big tax on that and for the permits and for the firearms they carry, along with the ammo for the guns.

Read: Surprise: Democrat Offers Up Legislation To Punish Law Abiding Gun Owners With Taxes And Fees »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Democrats | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 6, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…are animals that have low carbon footprints so we should replace cars with them in order to modernize, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The H2, with a post asking what’s wrong with some people.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

Warmist: ‘Climate Change’ Needs To Be A Litmus Test For Democrats Or Something

By William Teach March 6, 2018 – 10:30 am

Democrats keep coming up with great ideas to push during campaigns. Grabbing guns from law abiding citizens, doing away with tax cuts for the vast majority of middle class voters, the gender confused in bathrooms and locker rooms with young girls, and so much more idiocy. Like this

A Climate Change Litmus Test For Democrats

In April 2016, at a campaign stop on the campus of SUNY Purchase, just north of New York City, I filmed a short video of Hillary Clinton. I captured the former secretary of state berating my friend for asking if she would commit to refusing money from the fossil fuel lobby. “I’m so sick,” Clinton answered, “I’m so sick of the Sanders campaign lying about this.”

The video quickly went viral, partly because of the outsized response from a famously tight-lipped politician, partly because it played so well into the Democratic primary narrative that pitted Clinton, buddy-buddy with Wall Street, against the people-powered challenge of Sen. Bernie Sanders. (snip)

These factions will battle each other again in primaries this year. To mount the strongest challenge to the party of Trump in November, the Democrats will need to energize their young activist base. They must commit to what Clinton would not ― refusing fossil fuel money. The wellbeing of our climate and our communities is at stake. (snip)

Common sense dictates that the economy undergo a massive restructuring away from fossil fuels to save lives. And a growing body of research shows that the only way to avoid catastrophic levels of climate change is to cease production of vast amounts of “unburnable” carbon. Accomplishing this requires bold government action ― not faith in the current system that subsidizes both the production of fossil fuels and the salaries of oil and gas executives. (snip)

Democrats need to earn the millennial vote. The party can do this and thus minimize its perennial off-year disadvantage ― the turnout gap ― with a simple promise: to refuse fossil fuel money. This commitment would signal to young voters that a candidate understood climate change as a threat worthy of action.

OK, so, they aren’t really proposing to actually Do Something of significance, just refuse to take money from fossil fuels companies. Not give up their own use of fossil fuels, not pledge to initiate all sorts of taxes and fees, just virtue signal that they won’t take money from fossil fuels companies. As Instapundit is fond of writing “I’ll believe that it’s a crisis when the people who tell me it’s a crisis act like it’s a crisis (in their own lives)”.

Hilariously, this is yet another attempt to whip up the young vote, which so often is all sorts of enthused, but fails to show up at the ballot box. But, here’s a question: do Democrats really care about Hotcoldwetdry?

Poll: voters want Democrats to focus on health care if they win in 2020

Significant pluralities of American voters, and Democrats specifically, want the Democratic Party to prioritize health care if they retake the White House and Congress in 2021:

So, Warmists are saying “ZOMG, that includes evil denier opinion!!!!!” OK

After years of spreading awareness, scare mongering, putting it on TV, and so forth, 7%. Just one percent more than with all likely voters.

Read: Warmist: ‘Climate Change’ Needs To Be A Litmus Test For Democrats Or Something »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Collapsing Science, Global Warming | Comments Off on Warmist: ‘Climate Change’ Needs To Be A Litmus Test For Democrats Or Something | Trackback URL

Oregon Passes Law Banning Convicted Stalkers And Domestic Abusers From Firearm Ownership And Possession

By William Teach March 6, 2018 – 7:26 am

See, now, if you’re going to pass laws against gun ownership, this is the way you go: going after people who really shouldn’t have them. This does zero to stop the problem as we saw in Parkland, Florida, but, it helps overall

Instead Of Thoughts And Prayers, Oregon Passes New Gun Safety Law

Anyhow, despite the silly headline from the HuffPost, we learn

Oregon Gov. Kate Brown (D) signed new gun safety legislation into law on Monday, making the state the first to tighten its firearm regulations since last month’s mass shooting at a high school in Florida.

The bill expands an existing law to prevent intimate partners who have a domestic violence or stalking conviction from buying and keeping guns. Until now, the state’s law only applied to married partners, and the new measure closes what was termed the “boyfriend loophole.”

“I’m proud to sign this bill, making Oregon the first state to take action to prevent senseless gun violence since the tragedy in Parkland, Florida,” Brown said in a statement. “Today marks an important milestone, but we know we have more to do. It’s long past time we hold the White House and Congress accountable. Now’s the time to enact real change and federal gun safety legislation.”

Added to this was a prohibition on convicted stalkers having firearms. Despite these being good, common sense restrictions I think we’d all agree with (except those who’ve been convicted of stalking and domestic abuse), none of this would have stopped the Parkland shooting.

(KION6) Although closing what lawmakers are calling “the boyfriend loophole,” with HB 4145 wouldn’t have affected Garcelon’s daughter, she’s telling her story to help people see why anyone with a history of domestic violence should not have guns.

“Nobody’s trying to take your Second Amendment rights,” she said. “The only person who has to worry about this bill is if you’re a crazy, abusive boyfriend.”

And this is the way it should be. Go after the criminals. Not the law abiding citizens. Perhaps national Democrats constantly yammering about implementing laws that affect the law abiding and not the criminals could take note.

Read: Oregon Passes Law Banning Convicted Stalkers And Domestic Abusers From Firearm Ownership And Possession »

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Current Affairs | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Dreamers Turn On Democrats

By William Teach March 6, 2018 – 6:58 am

Live by the patronization, die by the patronization

(Daily Caller) A group of DREAMers held a protest in front of the Democratic National Committee Monday with the aim of criticizing Democrats for not passing a permanent fix to the DREAM Act.

Approximately two dozen activists gathered in the street outside of the DNC early Monday morning with bullhorns and signs criticizing National Democrats for not passing new protections for DREAMers. The protesters then blocked the front doors of the DNC and refused staffers from entering or exiting the building.

“The Democrats party has never been on my side,” another protester said. Another said Democrats left DREAMers “hanging by a thread.”

“I am here today to tell Democrats that they are not my allies and I will continue to fight and show that that I will not collaborate with them until they do something for my community” the protester said before calling Democrats “fake allies.”

“If you won’t let us dream,” protesters chanted, “we won’t let you sleep!”

There’s video of this over at the Daily Caller, here’s one of the photos

Yes, many were wearing sleepwear and bathrobes. The one in the middle has a teddy bear.  And we’re supposed to take these people seriously. They also had white wigs and canes to signify the 17 years that they’ve been waiting, as Democrats keep promising and promising and promising to provide some sort of legal status for these illegal aliens.

The Democrats created this situation, by doing their normal thing of promising and patronizing a group of people, then, as usual, failing to follow through. They could have gotten something done, all they had to do was approve of border security and other immigration notions in exchange for a pathway to citizenship. They keep demanding a “clean” bill, one with nothing but that pathway to citizenship, which will never pass. Heck, the Dreamers who push this aren’t helping their cause, either.

Democrats have prioritized illegal aliens over American citizens, and are starting to find that those illegals are rather demanding.

Read: Dreamers Turn On Democrats »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

Say, Will The Repeal Of #NetNeutrality Cause Internet To Grind To A Halt

By William Teach March 5, 2018 – 7:12 pm

The Washington Post Fact Checker actually fact checks stupidity from Democrats

Will the FCC’s net neutrality repeal grind the Internet to a halt?

“If we don’t save net neutrality, you’ll get the Internet one word at a time.”
— U.S. Senate Democrats, in a tweet, Feb. 27, 2018

This clever tweet caught our eye because each word is separated by paragraph breaks, giving readers a bitter taste of what it’s like to scroll through the Internet one word at a time.

It also set off our antennae because of the sweeping claim Democrats are making — that consumers will see a sharp drop in Internet speeds if the Federal Communications Commission proceeds with its plan to unwind net neutrality rules imposed under President Barack Obama in 2015.

This is the stupid tweet in full

The tweet from Senate Democrats is clearly meant to be exaggerated. For words to load one at a time, the Internet would have to slow down to a glacial crawl that would render it pointless. But the basic assertion in the tweet — that consumers will see a sharp drop in Internet speeds — is worth fact-checking.

No, really, it isn’t, unless your fact check is “you people are f***ing stupid, and just trying to scaremonger.” And, seriously, the article is really long, ending in

For now, though, there’s scant evidence that Internet users should brace for a slowdown. Yet the Democrats’ tweet conveys the false impression that a slowdown is imminent unless net neutrality rules are restored. This transmission error merits Three Pinocchios, but we will monitor the situation and update our ruling depending on whether the fears were overstated or came true.

Let’s remember, the Net Neutrality order never went into full effect to start with. Nothing bad will happen, the Internet will continue on just fine, and the ‘net did awesome before the 2015 order by unelected bureaucrats.

Read: Say, Will The Repeal Of #NetNeutrality Cause Internet To Grind To A Halt »

Posted in Web/Tech | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach March 5, 2018 – 1:00 pm

…is a world turning to dust from Other People eating burgers, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Bookworm Room, with a post on ignorance and a lack of logic in Progressive’s anti-gun position.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Who’s Up For Lab Grown Clean Meat To Stop ‘Climate Change’?

By William Teach March 5, 2018 – 11:07 am

All the Warmists will rush out and get this instead of eating regular meant, right?

Lab-grown ‘clean’ meat could be on sale by end of 2018, says producer

Meat grown in a laboratory could be on restaurant menus by the end of the year, one manufacturer has claimed.

In vitro animal products, sometimes referred to as “clean meat”, are made from stem cells harvested via biopsy from living livestock, which are then grown in a lab over a number of weeks.

Some environmentalists believe the process could be the key to reducing global warming, with one study predicting it could lower harmful greenhouse emissions by 96 per cent. (snip)

Chicken nuggets, sausage and foie gras created using the technique could be served in restaurants in the US and Asia “before the end of 2018”, he told CNN.

No thanks!, But, apparently so will, in theory

But one recent study revealed one third of Americans would be willing to eat clean meat regularly or as a replacement for farmed meat.

Um, see, this is why we call the media biased. 31.1 would be definitely willing to try, 34.2% would probably try. On 7.2% would be definately willing to have it to replace farm grown meat, and 24.3% would probably be willing to do so.

Anyhow, here’s your thing, Warmists! Get to it!

Read: Who’s Up For Lab Grown Clean Meat To Stop ‘Climate Change’? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Food and Drink, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Today Is Last Day For DACA

By William Teach March 5, 2018 – 7:18 am

What a shame. Let’s start deporting them all now

(ABC News) Six months ago, when he announced he was ending the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, President Donald Trump picked March 5 as the deadline for Congress to work out a solution to prevent DACA recipients from facing deportation.

But the president’s plans were thwarted by multiple court challenges, rendering Monday’s deadline all but meaningless. Now, as Congress and the Dreamers await a resolution in the courts, lawmakers have paused their legislative efforts and some 700,000 DACA recipients have been plunged into a constant state of uncertainty.

Two separate federal court injunctions have effectively halted the president’s rescission of the DACA program with the judges ordering the Department of Justice to maintain the current program as it was before Trump’s announcement last September.

In January, a federal judge in California issued a nationwide injunction that prompted U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to begin taking DACA renewal applications again.

Since then, DACA policy for renewals has been operating on the Obama-era terms that were in place before it was rescinded.

Realistically, Trump can just do what Obama did numerous times: ignore the courts, especially since federal law takes precedence over an executive order that even Obama said was un-lawful and un-Constitutional. And he can also let the clock run out. No new applications are being accepted for DACA.

Of course, we need a sob story with this (the annoying autoplay video with the story also has a sob story)

While the DACA cases make their way through courts on both coasts, young people affected by the policy, like Sarahi Aguilera, are living in limbo.

Aguilera was born in Camargo, a city in the eastern part of the Mexican state of Chihuahua. She arrived in the United States at the tender age of six as an undocumented immigrant. She is a DACA recipient.

“For most of us, DACA was the only opportunity we had to come out of the shadows and show everyone what we are capable of doing, regardless of the legal status in which we stand in,” Aguilera said in a testimonial provided by the Center for Popular Democracy to ABC News.

Hey, it’s easy to come out of the shadows. Go home with the parents that brought you in violation of our immigration laws.

Anyhow, as long as Democrats and other illegal alien supporters demand a “clean” DACA bill nothing will get done. If they want some sort of legal status for Dreamers, they are going to have to give up a lot to get it.

(NBC News) DACA recipient Javier Gamboa sees this year’s midterm elections as crucial to electing officials as a willing to find a solution for Dreamers and immigrants with no legal status.

As the director of Hispanic media for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, his job is to get Democrats elected to the House. Although the focus of the party he’s working for is centered on becoming the majority, the ambition also is personal.

“We are going to hit the deadline and nothing has been done and nothing has been passed to provide a solution for DACA,” Gamboa said. “We belong in this country and it is a fight to remain in this country. It is a fight for my future.”

No, you don’t belong in this country. If you want to stay, you should ask nicely. But, if you think Democrats will do anything, you’re going to be disappointed. They do not want a fix for this: they want to whip up their voters to get out and vote. If the problem is solved, that hurts them at the ballot box. They could have done something in 2009, when Republicans couldn’t stop them. They didn’t even consider it.

Read: Bummer: Today Is Last Day For DACA »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 14 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove