If All You See…

By William Teach April 7, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…is a fence that will rust from too much extreme rain, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Moonbattery, with a post on Nivea committing a Thoughtcrime.

Read: If All You See… »

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

Are You Ready For A 48 Degree Rise?

By William Teach April 7, 2017 – 10:30 am

The Cult Of Climastrology is getting desperate in their prognostications of doom

From the link

Continuing to burn fossil fuels at the current rate could bring atmospheric carbon dioxide to its highest concentration in 50 million years, jumping from about 400 parts per million now to more than 900 parts per million by the end of this century, a study warns.

And if greenhouse gas emissions continue unabated beyond that point, the climate could reach a warming state that hasn’t been seen in the past 420 million years. (Snip)

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has presented estimates of how much the Earth might warm under a business-as-usual trajectory over certain time periods. It suggests that by 2300, the Earth could warm by nearly 48 degrees Fahrenheit. But there are many factors that could affect temperature trends in the long-term that remain uncertain, Foster suggested, such as changes in terrestrial vegetation or the amount of carbon dioxide the ocean has room to absorb in the coming centuries.

photo picard-face-palm_zps6efb11ab.gif

Read: Are You Ready For A 48 Degree Rise? »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, AGW Scaremongering, Global Warming | 3 Comments | Trackback URL

San Diego Union-Tribune: Say, Maybe We Shouldn’t Be Allowing The Not-So-Bad Illegal Aliens To Stay

By William Teach April 7, 2017 – 7:46 am

The Editorial Board of the SDUT has some concerns

Flaw in California ‘sanctuary state’ bill needs fixing

…..

Yet it is possible to believe all of these things and still be wary of SB 54, a bill touted by Senate leader Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles, to make California a “sanctuary state.” In its initial form, what de León calls the “California Values Act” amounted to the state’s formal declaration of noncooperation with the federal government when it comes to federal immigration laws. The measure’s main provision would “prohibit state and local law enforcement agencies, including school police and security departments, from using resources to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect or arrest persons for immigration enforcement purposes.” After criticism from law enforcement officials, de León amended the bill to allow Sheriff’s Departments to notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement of the release from local jails of certain types of serious and violent felons; to allow law enforcement officers to notify ICE if they encountered someone with a violent felony record who had previously been deported; and to make it clear that local and state law enforcement authorities could be part of investigatory task forces led by federal agencies even if immigration enforcement were involved.

After the changes were made, de León’s bill passed the state Senate 27-12 on Monday on a party-line vote. Democrats, many of them Latino, celebrated the approval as sending President Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and other immigration hardliners a defiant, principled message that California stands with its immigrant community.

But these Democrats muddle their message by refusing to take seriously concerns about their attempts to make distinctions between bad felons — take them away — and allegedly not-so-bad felons — let them stay. According to Assembly Republicans, the latter category includes people convicted of assault with a deadly weapon, human trafficking and other significant crimes.

And there’s the flaw: Democrats being soft on illegals who have committed other significant crimes in this bill which would make California a sanctuary state.

But one risk they shouldn’t take is offering protection to convicted felons who are unauthorized immigrants. They haven’t earned the compassionate treatment that de León hopes to provide.

Yet, that is the treatment that Democrats seem to be offering to illegal aliens all the time when they refuse ICE detainers. On one hand, they say they do not want the bad ones, then they show the other hand which attempts to shelter almost all illegals, even those with serious crimes. Perhaps they’ve realized that, in order to gain all these new voters if they could ever get amnesty through, they would need to ignore that a goodly chunk of illegals have committed some sort of serious crime, from DUI and identity theft to illegally crossing the border after being deported, which is a federal felony. It’s not just rape and murder and arson and assault.

Read: San Diego Union-Tribune: Say, Maybe We Shouldn’t Be Allowing The Not-So-Bad Illegal Aliens To Stay »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Trump Orders Strike Against Syrian Base

By William Teach April 7, 2017 – 7:07 am

President Trump is putting both Russia and Syria’s leader Bashar Assad on notice

(NBC News) The United States fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at Syria overnight in response to what it believes was a chemical weapons attack that killed more than 100 people.

At least six people were killed, Syria claimed, but the Pentagon said civilians were not targeted and the strike was aimed at a military airfield in the western province of Homs.

The action completed a policy reversal for President Donald Trump — who once warned America to stay out of the conflict — and drew anger from Damascus and its main ally, Russia.

The missiles were launched from the USS Ross and the USS Porter in the Mediterranean Sea toward Shayrat Airfield. American officials believe it was used by the government of Syrian President Bashar Assad to carry out a strike on Tuesday involving chemical weapons that resulted in the deaths of more than 100 people.

“Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children,” Trump said in remarks from Mar-a-Lago, his family compound in Palm Beach, Florida. “It is in this vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons.”

For all the attacks that the U.S. has launched in Syria, this is the first time the Assad regime’s infrastructure was attacked. As Marco Rubio noted, this was no symbolic strike

Syria’s military said the U.S. attack violated “all international laws and customs” and that it made America a “partner” of ISIS “and other terrorist organizations.” It condemned the White House for acting “without knowing the truth about what occurred and without identifying those responsible” for the chemical attack.

Our intelligence was pretty darned certain who was responsible for the attack, as were other intelligence services.

The good thing here is that Trump is a maverick. Assad can’t be certain what Trump will do next, other than launch massive airstrikes for the use of chemical weapons. And that should concern Assad heavily. Perhaps Assad thought Trump would just shrug his shoulders like Mr. Obama did.

So far, most liberal opinion pages haven’t decided what to make of this. The NY Times Editorial Board hasn’t chimed in yet. They’re surely attempting to find a way to slam Trump. The Times’ Thomas Freidman is on Morning Joe as I type this, and approved of the strike. The Washington Post Editorial Board takes a rather even tone in a rather short piece, wondering what he might do next. Most other major outlets haven’t run anything yet.

But, then, there are the Democratic Base nutters. Salon’s Tatiana Baez runs a short (well, short for Salon) article, but, then the nuts go nuts in the comments

  • We have been through this movie before: a peacock-strutting neophyte, desperate for “tough-guy” street cred, blows the shit out of a puny, inconsequential “enemy”…because he can. The crack-like rush of one sortie will not be enough for Trump. Next up: North Korea.
  • Trump the draft-dodging moron is the best recruitment tool ISIS ever dreamed of. the goddam idiot is now a murderer on top of all his other disgusting titles.
  • TRAITOR TRUMP FU

Just a few. Then we jump to the Democratic Underground, which has been ramping up the crazy back to George W. Bush levels since the end of January

This supposed f***ing ‘missile strike’ STINKS to High Heaven. I’m not buying it …

I’d bet that *IF* the US actually DID what the Drumpf Administration is claiming in Syria today … then we did probably not blow up a single actual plane, or munitions dump, nor kill a single person.

In fact I’ll go a step further and say PUTIN, in cahoots w/Drumpf … probably ordered the chemical attack in the first place.

It’s all WAY TOO CONVENIENT that it all happened just in time to distract the public from:
a) Nunes stepping down from Russia Probe, due to Ethics violations, directly involving Drumpf,
b) The F***ING GOP using the Nuclear Option to force Gorsuch down our throats,
c) Bannon being removed from NSC,
d) The ex-CIA Chief coming out and saying that they’d been monitoring the Russian Connections between Drumpf’s cohorts and Russian operatives for MONTHS before the elections,
e) the FAILURE of the AHCA to get through before the Congressional Recess

What could POSSIBLY WORK BETTER for Drumpf … than the entire sequence of events that just happened?

I mean, not only does he distract from these negative stories, he gets to ‘appear’ to be ‘acting against Russian interests’. HOW PERFECT!

And people are BUYING THIS BULLSHIT?

Adam Schiff (D) whined over at Raw Story about Trump not having the authorization to do this from Congress, and attempts to claim that he was against Obama doing this. Rep Jim Himes (D) is on Morning Joe attempting to find ways to slam Trump along the same lines, until Joe got him to agree that the strikes were a good thing.

Deadspin called the release of photos showing the launch of the missiles “war propaganda.” Oh, and ANSWER, which had been pretty quiet during the Obama regime period, goes nuts

Got that? Trump’s war on Syria after one strike.

Wrapping up, Joe Scarborough makes a good point, namely that it would be a Bad Idea for Syria or Russia to mock Trump, especially with anything that notes that Trump didn’t do that much damage. Because Trump will attack back to finish the job.

Well, one more bit of nutbaggery. I’ll leave you with this conspiracy theory

https://twitter.com/CodePinkCLEVE/status/850190176823500801

It’s referring to this

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Trump Orders Strike Against Syrian Base »

Posted in Barking Moonbats, Current Affairs, Donald Trump | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Fancy Pants Malibu Pranked Over Sanctuary City Status

By William Teach April 6, 2017 – 4:12 pm

If you’ll remember, Malibu, California, voted to officially be a sanctuary city. Then this happened (via Twitchy)

https://twitter.com/sthornet0713/status/849989286258782210

Which caused Malibu (where single wide trailers go for a cool $1 million) officials to whine, er, denounce the punking.

On Wednesday however, city officials said the sign was nothing more than a mean prank.

“Mean.” Kate Steinle was unavailable for comment (and, yes, I know that happened in San Fran. Could have easily been Malibu.)

“This was not an official city sign,” Malibu Councilwoman Laura Rosenthal said. “It’s down, and it’s very disheartening that anyone would put up such an ugly sign.”

It might as well be an official sign. It’s factual.

The LA Times reports that the signs have since been removed by the city.

Read: Fancy Pants Malibu Pranked Over Sanctuary City Status »

Posted in Illegal Immigration | 1 Comment | Trackback URL

17 States Challenge Trump Over ‘Climate Change’ Policy Or Something

By William Teach April 6, 2017 – 2:12 pm

If only there was something all these Democrat run states could do, like raise taxes and fees on their citizens, force them into cities, force them out of their private fossil fueled vehicles and onto mass transit, raise taxes and fee, require citizens to pay for and install solar and wind, shut down non-“renewable” power plants, raise taxes and fees…

(UK Guardian) A coalition of 17 US states filed a legal challenge on Wednesday against efforts by Donald Trump’s administration to roll back climate change regulations, deepening a political rift over his emerging energy policies.

Led by New York state, the coalition said the administration has a legal duty to regulate emissions of the gases scientists believe cause global climate change.

“The law is clear: the EPA must limit carbon pollution from power plants,” New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman said in a statement announcing the challenge.

That would be the same Schneiderman who is using his Power to assault private companies and think tanks for Wrongthink on anthropogenic climate change, wanting them to release tons of communications and documents, while, at the same time, refusing to release his own communications and documents.

However, the law doesn’t state anything about CO2 emissions: just some court rulings and made up regulations from EPA.

The coalition includes attorneys general from California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington –- along with the District of Columbia and a number of smaller localities.

So, why don’t those states implement the measures for their individual states that Trump is getting rid of for federal policy? No one is stopping them. Trump won’t stop them. He’ll laugh when their economies tank and citizens abandon those states and move to Republican states. But, see, Warmists don’t want to implement all these things in their own lives: they want to force them on Everyone Else. And do it by increasing the size, scope, and power of the central government.

Read: 17 States Challenge Trump Over ‘Climate Change’ Policy Or Something »

Posted in Climahypocrites, Global Warming | Comments Off on 17 States Challenge Trump Over ‘Climate Change’ Policy Or Something | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach April 6, 2017 – 1:00 pm

…are horrible meat hotdogs, causing the temperature to spike in the future, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Obamacare collapsing.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Rep. Nydia Velázquez Attempting To Ban Federal Officers From Wearing “Police” On Uniforms

By William Teach April 6, 2017 – 8:15 am

Why? Because Democrats are more worried about people who are unlawfully present in the United States, and, in particular, the ones ICE targets, who are mostly those who have committed further crimes, than they are about those who are lawfully present

Law would bar immigration agents from having ‘police’ on uniforms

Federal immigration officers would be barred from wearing the word “police” on their uniforms under new legislation to help undocumented immigrants distinguish between the NYPD and deportation agents.

Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-Brooklyn) said she’ll introduce legislation Thursday to address growing fears immigrant communities have of federal immigration and border patrol agents.

“Not only are ICE raids an unconscionable attack on our most vulnerable communities, any attempt by immigration officers to deceivingly pose as local police ought to be prohibited,” Velázquez said in a statement.

Valazquez is federal representative, so, she is attempting to make this law for all the land. Quite frankly, Republicans should allow her to bring this to the House floor for debate and a vote, in order to put Democrats on record as supporting illegal alien criminals. Ones like these

(Washington Examiner) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers arrested 82 illegal immigrants in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area as part of in a five-day sting that concluded March 30, according to a press release Wednesday.

The standard enforcement operation targeted criminal aliens, illegal re-entrants and immigration fugitives. Virginia topped Maryland and the District of Columbia with the highest number of arrests at 79. D.C. followed with two arrests, while only one Maryland resident was taken into custody.

About 80 percent of the arrestees have been convicted of criminal offenses in addition to illegally residing in the country, including crimes like armed robbery, larceny and drug distribution. The other 14 people were seized for ties to the MS-13 gang, outstanding deportation orders, overstaying visas, being wanted by a foreign law enforcement organization, being a verified human rights violator.

The illegals were from 26 different countries, and not just Mexico and Latin American ones. They were also from China, Iran, and Sudan, among others. Even New Zealand was represented. ICE targeted other areas of the country, such as in Texas.

Meanwhile, the 3rd edition of the Declined Detainer Outcome Report has been released, and features the usual suspects refusing immigration holds on people who have committed serious crimes. Why are Democrats defending criminals?

Read: Rep. Nydia Velázquez Attempting To Ban Federal Officers From Wearing “Police” On Uniforms »

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

Senate Expected To “Go Nuclear” Regarding Gorsuch Confirmation Today

By William Teach April 6, 2017 – 7:51 am

Negotiations to avert having to implement the nuclear option Harry Reid option

collapsed, so, now we’re going to get this

(The Hill) Senate Republicans are expected to trigger the “nuclear option” on Thursday, eliminating the minority party’s power to filibuster Supreme Court nominees.

The historic vote will ensure the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch, President Trump’s pick for the high court, preserving a conservative majority that had been in doubt after Justice Antonin Scalia’s death early last year.

If all goes as expected, Gorsuch will receive a final confirmation vote Friday.

It appears as if the Senate will attempt a vote to end debate and move forward with the final vote on Gorsuch. If Democrats continue to filibuster and/or vote to continue debate, McConnell will trigger the Reid Option.

Some Republicans are suggesting that the rules be changed further in order to speed up confirmation of Trump’s nominees.

Who’s to blame? Both parties. Why? Because this is politics. It’s a dirty game. It has always been a dirty game. Democrats can say it’s because of Republicans blocking Merrick Garland. Republicans can say they were just applying the Biden Rule. Dems can say that Republicans attempted to gum up the works on Obama’s nominees. Republicans can say that Dems did the same on Bush’s nominees.

It’s politics. It hasn’t gotten more hardcore: it’s just that more people are “involved” with all the social media and 24 hour cable news stations.

Cloture has long been a part of the Senate rules. Originally, it required two-thirds. That was changed in 1975 by….Senate Democrats, who instituted a three-fifths option. Remember, none of this is required by the Constitution. The Constitution allows for the Senate to set its own rules, but, still only requires a simple majority for votes. Which, interestingly, some Liberals have argued as being against democracy because it gives smaller states (that Democrats do not control) as much power as big states (that Dems do control).

Anyhow, perhaps this does mean that Congressional Republicans are finally stiffening their spines. For so long they have been cowed into doing what the Democrats want with little fight-back. Will they continue to have spine? Time will tell.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Senate Expected To “Go Nuclear” Regarding Gorsuch Confirmation Today »

Posted in Constitution, Current Affairs | 2 Comments | Trackback URL

Could The Border Wall Be Going Green?

By William Teach April 5, 2017 – 3:20 pm

I’m no fan of a long, long border wall. In certain areas, sure. I prefer other methods, part of which are way more border patrol agents. But, hey, if we’re going to have one, why not do this?

(CNS News)  Gen. Jack Kelly, the secretary of homeland security, told Congress on Wednesday there’s “no way” he can estimate how much President Trump’s long-promised border wall will cost.

“I mean, I don’t know what it will be made of; I don’t know how high it will be; I don’t know if it’s going to have solar panels on the side, what one side’s going to look like and how it’s going to be painted — I have no idea. So I can’t give you any type of an estimate.

Now, Gen. Kelly might have been responding to a question from a Congresscritter, I’m not finding anything more concrete. Plenty of articles mentioning the quote, but, not what might have precipitated it. But, would it be a bad idea to have solar panels on the wall? Why not use it for energy production, part of which could be used for cameras, lights, etc?

It’d be hilarious if enviroweenies were protesting the emplacement of solar panels, wouldn’t it?

Jazz Shaw points at that some contractors are making bids that would include solar panels. And aesthetically pleasing art. And decking.

General Kelly also stated

“The barriers work. Technology also works. But all of it doesn’t work at all unless you have men and women who are willing to patrol the border, develop relationships which they do with their Mexican counterparts directly across the border.”

He seems to be a fan more of manpower than walls/fences along the entire border.

Read: Could The Border Wall Be Going Green? »

Posted in Current Affairs, Global Warming | 2 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove