Texas Governor Signs Anti-Sanctuary Jurisdiction Bill

Texas Governor Greg Abbott designated passing a ban on sanctuary jurisdictions as an emergency priority this year, and the Texas state legislature happily complied, and the bill goes into effect September 1

(Dallas Morning News) Gov. Greg Abbott has signed the state’s sanctuary city ban into law, achieving one of his major goals for the legislative session and enacting a bill that is almost certainly headed for legal challenges from opponents.

“Texans expect us to keep them safe, and that is exactly what we are going to do by me signing this law,” Abbott said before inking his signature during a Facebook Live video Sunday night — the first time a Texas governor has signed a bill through an Internet live stream.

Signing it in that manner drove the Usual Illegal Alien Criminal supporters into apoplexy, because they weren’t able get out into the streets and protest and damage things and poop on things and scream obscenities. Oh, and there’s this

Lots of people watched.

Opponents of the law were quick to condemn the signing. Thomas Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said that the law was a “colossal blunder” and that the lawmakers who championed it were small-hearted.

“MALDEF will do its level best, in court and out, to restore Texas, the state where MALDEF was founded, to its greater glory, and to help Texas to overcome ‘Abbott’s Folly,’ ” he said in a written statement.

So, MALDEF  (imagine what would happen if a group called itself the Caucasion American Legal Defense and Educational Fund) is all in on supporting people who are unlawfully present in the U.S., people who often commit more serious crimes, who deflate wages, and commit identity theft.

Saenz said the law would alienate “nearly half the state population” and make people subject to widespread racial profiling. He said the law undermines voters’ rights to choose elected officials who set local policy, makes the job of local law enforcement more difficult by straining relationships with immigrant communities and would cost Texas in trade and tourism, as well as legal challenges.

“This racist and wrongheaded piece of legislation ignores our values, imperils our communities and sullies our reputation as a free and welcoming state,” Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas said in a prepared statement. “We will fight this assault in the courts, at the ballot box, and in the streets if we have to.”

You know they’re out of rational, adult, thought through arguments when they throw out the “racist” word. Because, really, how do you make a coherent and cogent argument to protect people who are breaking federal law, at a minimum, ever single day they are in the U.S.?

Oh, and then there is this

(Breitbart) A recent poll reveals that Texans overwhelmingly support (by 93 percent), a police officer being able to check a person’s immigration status when they are arrested for a crime. Forty-three percent say that immigration status may be checked during a traffic stop, 40 percent say it is okay if the person is reporting a crime, and 39 percent believe that asking about their status is okay if the person is a witness to a crime. Ninety-nine percent of Republicans, and 88 percent of Democrats, think immigration status should be checked during an arrest.

Ninety-three percent of Hispanics believe it is okay to check the immigration status during an arrest, 38 percent think it should be permitted when a person is a crime witness, and 37 percent say it is okay during a routine traffic stop. Interestingly, Latinos are more likely than Anglos to say that immigration status should be checked when a person is reporting a crime (46 percent to 36 percent).

Of course, what the current bill simply does is put sanctuary jurisdictions on the hook to follow the law when it comes to dealing with illegal aliens, as well as things that many like in that poll (back to DMN)

The law will ban cities, counties and universities from prohibiting their local law enforcement officers from asking about immigration status and enforcing immigration law. It will create a criminal charge for police chiefs, county sheriffs and constables who violate the ban and will charge local jurisdictions up to $25,000 for each day they are in violation.

The law will also allow police officers to ask about a person’s immigration status during any legal detention, which could include a routine traffic stop. Opponents have likened the law to Arizona’s “papers, please” legislation, parts of which were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.

It’s rather sad that a law had to be enacted to get certain law enforcement members to comply with federal law.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Texas Governor Signs Anti-Sanctuary Jurisdiction Bill »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful field that should be full of wind turbines, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Last Tradition, with a post on suicide by cop.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! It’s a great day in America. The sun is shining, the birds are singing, it’s a nice day for a ride. This pinup is supposedly by Ande Rooney, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. Right Wing News fact checks Democrat talking points on pre-existing conditions in Ryancare
  2. JoNova discusses the difference between 1 coal worker and 79 solar workers
  3. America’s Watchtower notes a House committee will look into Obama’s Iran deal
  4. The Daley Gator covers what it takes to be an elf
  5. Chicks On The Right highlights a painful to watch Democrat fail
  6. Creeping Sharia wonders why the U.S. is still funding Palestinian terrorism
  7. Doug Ross @ Journal explains the 12 taxes pulverized by the AHCA
  8. Fire Andrea Mitchell notes the latest insanity from Liberals on the AHCA
  9. Legal Insurrection features leftists blaming Israel for police shootings of blacks
  10. Moonbattery notes that Trump kinda still favors Socialist healthcare
  11. Patterico’s Pontifications covers California wanting to punish those who offer to build the wall
  12. Powerline provides all you need to know about climate in one chart
  13. Raised On Hoecakes notes the extreme difficulty in being a Pikachu dancer
  14. Small Dead Animals notes “activist appropriation”
  15. And last, but not least, White House Dossier notes what Dianne Feinstein had to say on all that Russia collusion yammering

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 »

More Cities Are Using Taxpayer Funds To Provide Legal Defense For Illegal Aliens

It’s not like cities and counties and states have an issue with the “crumbling infrastructure” or anything. Remember this?

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti and County Supervisor Hilda Solis in December announced the creation of a $10-million legal aid fund to “hire lawyers to defend local immigrants without legal status.” (“A $10-million fund will help immigrants fight deportations. But should it help those with violent criminal convictions?” April 17)

My street hasn’t been swept for years. When I tried to find out why, I was told that my area is not “on the list” because there are no longer enough machines and people to drive them. Services that I continue to pay for have been stopped.

If there is enough money around to help illegal immigrants, surely there is enough to begin sweeping my dirty street again. Shouldn’t citizens come before illegal residents?

Well, sorry, buddy, illegals come before citizens

(Fox News) Sacramento became the latest city this week to go above and beyond ‘sanctuary’ policies by approving the use of taxpayer dollars to support the legal defense of illegal immigrants facing deportation.

The City Council voted unanimously Thursday night to draw $300,000 from the general fund to “provide urgent legal and support services to Sacramento families facing the immediate threat of separation due to deportation.”

The plan, backed by the mayor, fits a trend of local and state lawmakers taking similar action. As the Trump administration separately faces a court setback in its bid to cut off federal funds to sanctuary cities, those jurisdictions are only doubling down.

Earlier in the week, officials in Michigan’s Washtenaw County gave initial approval to pay such legal bills with taxpayer funds.

Proposals to directly or indirectly pay for legal assistance to illegal immigrants have also gained approval in Providence, R.I.; Austin, Texas; San Francisco, Calif.; and Newark, N.J.

Even in the small New York city of Ithaca, politicians are gearing up to spend emergency funds to help illegal immigrants taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, according to The Ithaca Voice.

And on a broader scale, New York lawmakers recently signed off on a statewide legal defense fund, while California legislators are considering a bill creating a fund that could carry a price tag of up to $12 million per year.

What is it with Liberals (and some squishy Republicans) in the almost addictive need to protect people who are unlawfully present in the United States? Realistically, they will all be simply wasting taxpayer money in attempting to defend people who are unlawfully present in the United States.

Immigration Judge: “Mr./Ms. Lawyer Defending The Illegal Alien client, did your client have the permission of the government of the United States to enter the U.S./overstay their visa? Are they unlawfully present in the United States?”

Illegal alien lawyer: “well, you see, your honor…”

Judge: “yes or no, counselor”

Lawyer: “well, no, but…”

Judge: “great, thanks, put the illegal on a bus to the border/plane to their home country. Bye now!”

If they are here illegally, then they do not belong. They get deported. It really is that simple. They could have done things the right way, they CHOSE not to. Choices can have consequences, good or bad.

BTW, all those involved in enforcing the laws on illegal aliens should certainly move some of their focus to a different part, not just those who have illegally entered, and fix a few issues

(Xinhuanet) The U.S. arrested less than 1 percent of foreign visitors who overstayed their visas in 2015, due to inefficient technology support, found a newly-released government audit report.

The report, released by the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), found that only 3,402 of an estimated 527,127 nonimmigrant visa overstays in 2015 were caught.

The main reason for this is officers of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have to use 27 different DHS computer systems to track visa overstays and make arrests.

This leads to a lot of time and money wasted by ICE and other law enforcement officials, and has created a 1.2 million backlog on visa overstays.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: More Cities Are Using Taxpayer Funds To Provide Legal Defense For Illegal Aliens »

10 Incredible Things Hotcoldwetdry Will Do To Create Doom Or Something

Scaremongering via the use of a crystal ball at its best

10 incredible things climate change will do
Climate change will bring some surprising effects: Bumpy plane rides, greater mood swings and more volcanic eruptions are just a few of the things we can expect over the decades to come. And yes, even more lightning.

We’re already familiar with some of the more evident effects of global warming such as melting glaciers and more extreme weather events. But few people are aware of some of the other, less obvious – and completely surprising – impacts of our changing climate, which could have a serious impact on the way we live.

Did you catch it in the subhead? Let’s see that list

  1. Airplane turbulence will get worse (they’ve been pimping this for years, and it still hasn’t happened)
  2. Icebergs will clog up shipping lanes (wait, I thought they were all going to melt? No?)
  3. Lightning will strike more frequently (so far, that hasn’t happened either, but, this is about The Future!!!!)
  4. Volcanic activity could increase
  5. We’ll become angrier (is it possible for liberals to become angrier? They’re already pretty miserable, angry people now)

…..wait, go back to #4.

You would be forgiven for thinking that climate change and volcanic activity are completely unrelated phenomena. But the workings of our planet are interconnected in suprising ways.

In places like Iceland, volcanoes and glaciers have coexisted for thousands of years. However, as glaciers melt due to rising temperatures, the pressure on the Earth’s mantel decreases, which in turn increases magma amounts while reducing stress on a volcano’s magma chambers. This leads to higher volcanic activity, along with the travel chaos that often follows.

There is a historic precedent to this prediction: 12,000 years ago, Iceland was covered by a glacier as thick as 2 kilometers. When that glacier abruptly melted due to a warming trend, a huge surge in volcanic activity followed.

The problem here is that they’re linking the melting ice, which happened before the invention of fossil fueled vehicles, with volcanic activity in Iceland, when the two are not related all that much (there is some relationship, but, not to the extent Warmists claim). Iceland was created because it sits on spot between the North American and European plates, and volcanic activity built it up. This occurred around 16-18 million years ago, during the Miocene period, where it was warm (darned early humans driving fossil fueled vehicles), but cooling. But, what’s the point in explaining Science, because Warmists aren’t interested.

Read: 10 Incredible Things Hotcoldwetdry Will Do To Create Doom Or Something »

If All You See…

…are pumpkins which will be destroyed by carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Maggie’s Farm, with a post on how multiculturalism is going in France.

Read: If All You See… »

Climate Change Is Releasing Ancient Infections Or Something

Because you refuse to give up your fossil fueled vehicle, oh, and pay lots more in taxes and fees and give up your modern lifestyle and freedom to government, the zombie apocalypse may soon be here. Or just other disease. It’s proper that this article is in a website called Futurism

Climate Change Is Freeing Ancient Infections From Their Icy Prisons

In a TV series called “The Last Ship,” humanity is almost wiped out by a plague that emerges from the frozen Arctic as a result of global warming. The idea of a disease originating from a remote landscape makes for good science fiction, but it looks like we could potentially experience that devastation first-hand.

The source of these real-world outbreaks? Permafrost soil in the polar regions. (snip)

Due to climate change, permafrost melting has increased to alarming rates. Efforts to combat it are underway, including an idea to refreeze polar ice caps, but we have no way of knowing just how imminent a viral outbreak is from previously frozen viruses hiding under the now-thinning permafrost layers. “[T]here is now a non-zero probability that pathogenic microbes could be revived, and infect us,” Claverie said. “How likely that is is not known, but it’s a possibility.

The best thing we can do is ensure we are able to combat any such outbreaks if they do occur by keeping adequate vaccine stores on hand. That, and continue our efforts to end global warming and, perhaps, even reverse some of the damage that’s already been done.

What caused those viruses to be encased in ice in the first place? The world must have been warm prior. So, what made it warm then, and why can’t the same mechanism be in play now?

Read: Climate Change Is Releasing Ancient Infections Or Something »

Senate Republicans Promise Big Changes To Ocare “Repeal” Bill

Repeal is in quotes because the House bill, the AHCA, does not, in fact, repeal Obamacare, otherwise known as the Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act. And, it has its own big problems

(The Hill) Senate Republicans plan to dramatically overhaul the House ObamaCare replacement bill that passed Thursday and are warning the process could take weeks.

The House bill, the American Health Care Act, has raised an array of concerns among Senate Republicans, chiefly among lawmakers from swing states who are opposed to the cap on ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion that would take effect in 2020.

GOP senators are also troubled by analyses that the legislation would significantly cut federal subsidies for people between the ages of 50 and 65, especially in rural areas such as Maine, Montana, Nebraska and North Carolina.

Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) announced Thursday that there would no “arbitrary deadlines” for the healthcare legislation, setting up an open-ended process.

“We’re going through the issues methodically,” he said. “The House passing the bill gives us a little bit more of a sense of urgency, but it’s going to take a while.”

Here’s an idea: scrap the whole thing and replace it with one of the plans that have already been concocted by Republicans in the Senate. Such as Rand Paul’s. Unfortunately, even there, he doesn’t simply repeal Ocare in full, because the time to do that was 2012, before it started to be implemented. Now, there needs to be pathways to move people off the government plans and slowly limit the damage done by Ocare without hurting people.

And a lot of the opposition comes from Republicans who are worried about a reduction in the Medicaid expansion. Interestingly, they forget that Ocare would leave states on the hook for the money to pay for it. Now, they seem to want this to be funded by the federal government. Republicans seem to want to implement their own Big Government solution. Why did we vote them in since 2010 again?

What’s to be done? The Hill’s Rachel Roubein offers 5 changes the Senate could make (unfortunately, tossing the whole thing and starting again isn’t mentioned). Those are

  • Increasing the Tax credits (that wouldn’t be bad, let people keep more of their own money)
  • Keeping the Medicaid expansion (once it kicked in, it was too late to kill the expansion, and you can bet Obama and the Democrats knew this)
  • Coverage (doing something that would keep the scaremongering 24 million who would maybe might possibly lose coverage from doing something. It’s interesting that the media is suddenly concerned with people losing their plans)
  • Pre-existing conditions (better yet, they should look at making sure that people who get sick are not thrown off their plans for, get this, using them. It’s not the same as getting thrown off your auto insurance because you’re a bad driver)
  • Essential health benefits (the Senate Republicans had best not keep all the government requirements as expanded by Ocare. In fact, they should allow people to choose plans that match their lifestyle.)

One important thing to consider is that any bill must provide a pathway from the Ocare plans to actual private insurance. When discussing this, someone who is a Democrat but is against the PPACA because it has caused problems with his insurance, mentioned that one thing that could be done is allow insurance companies to offer their wares via the already established insurance websites. The infrastructure is there already. People could go to the websites and compare/contrast all the offerings. A centralized warehouse, if you will, much like, say, one of those travel websites like Trivago. There would be lots and lots of competition. Then, the actual purchase would go to the insurance company website for purchase. At that point, they could also go see individual agents. The government involvement would be limited.

Then, ideas like having larger pools of people and small companies nationwide in order to reduce the costs caused by the risk pools while increasing those who cause the risk pools could kick in. This is not easy. Again, the time to stop it all was 2012.

Read: Senate Republicans Promise Big Changes To Ocare “Repeal” Bill »

Washington Post: OMG, Trump Has Brought Down Border Crossings With Fear!

Wouldn’t you think that reducing the flow of people entering the United States un-lawfully would be a good thing? Not in the world of the Washington Post Editorial Board

Trump has brought down border crossings — by scaring people away

BY NOW it is clear that no big new stretch of physical wall will rise anytime soon along the Southwest border. Owing to President Trump, however, a towering wall of hostility directed at Mexico is already surely in place. And its effects, while impermanent, are nonetheless real.

Those effects are already imposing stiff costs on the United States in prestige, goodwill and moral authority, as well as more tangible expenses: International travel associations, as well as U.S. hotel executives, warn that rising nationalism, stoked by Mr. Trump, is likely to constrain the flow of tourists into the United States this year. Given that travel and tourism contribute more than 8 percent of America’s gross domestic product, amounting to some $1.5 trillion annually, the unintended business losses could be stiff.

So, refusing to allow unfettered unlawful immigration is earning the U.S. negative prestige, goodwill, and we’re losing moral authority? From doing exactly the same thing as pretty much every country in the world? And is supposedly going to maybe might possibly cause a reduction in tourism? Of course, there are two issues at play.

First, the WPEB is guilty like all the rest of the media in conflating legal with illegal immigration. Their constant fear-mongering has probably done more to help Trump slow the flow than anything Trump and his team have done.

Second, the WPEB is mixing the illegals issue with other things, per the link they offer, to proclaim that tourism might possibly we’ll see drop, in order to make their fear-mongering article complete. At the end of the day, though, we have laws that say that people who enter the country improperly/overstay their visas are unlawfully present, and, at a minimum, should be deported.

The WPEB goes on to mention the precipitous drop in illegal border drops, coming to the conclusion

The likely main cause of that precipitous drop is the rhetoric Mr. Trump has aimed at undocumented immigrants, reinforced by media coverage of actual and threatened deportation sweeps, and expectations that the administration will assemble the bigger and more aggressive deportation force that the president promised in his campaign. For Central Americans who would enter the United States illegally, the perceived heightened risk of detention and removal has shifted their cost-benefit calculus — especially given that smugglers demand rates as high as $10,000.

The Washington Post has been as helpful to Trump as all the others. It’s nice to see that the WPEB recognizes this. It won’t stop the media from doing this, thankfully.

Stanching the flow of illegal immigration at the border is a good thing, as long as it lasts, notwithstanding the irony that it undercuts Mr. Trump’s own argument for a big wall. There is little dispute that the United States, like any country, is entitled to control its borders and demand that those who enter do so legally. How to treat unauthorized immigrants who have lived here for years, and now form part of the United States’ fabric, is a different question.

Um, didn’t they just get done telling us that it was bad for the nation’s prestige, goodwill, and moral authority? At the end, if we deport the heck out of those “unauthorized immigrants”, it’ll help reduce the future flow. So, it is not a separate question.

Mr. Trump’s success in jawboning down the flow of illegal border crossings relies on the fear he has inspired, which is likely to dissipate unless his words are backed up by sustained action, including expanded capacity in detention centers and immigration courts. The danger is that the collateral damage stemming from that fear — in ill will from the United States’ neighbors and the wider world, in addition to divided, distrustful communities at home — may outlast the temporary benefits derived from Mr. Trump’s bombast.

Why would we earn ill will from countries, such as Mexico, that themselves have tough law regarding illegal immigration? The only real ill-will involved is by the leftist supporters of illegal aliens in places like the Washington Post, because, if you legalize them, you create a new voter base for the Democrats. To heck with the notion that this hurts Democratic Party voters who are citizens now.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Washington Post: OMG, Trump Has Brought Down Border Crossings With Fear! »

If All You See…

…is a carbon pollution front, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is NoTricksZone, with a post noting the absence of warming in the Southern Hemisphere.

Happy Cinco de Mayo, possibly one of the dumbest names for a holiday. Seriously, “May 5th”? How much tequila was involved?

Read: If All You See… »

Pirate's Cove