McConnell Set To Force Democrats On Tough Iran Vote

Instead of taking the easy route and launching the nuclear option, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will attempt something different after Democrats blocked taking a vote on the Iran deal a second time

(The Hill)  Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) plans to force Democrats to walk the line on the Iran nuclear agreement, teeing up a vote on a contentious amendment on the deal.

The Republican leader scheduled a procedural vote on an amendment that would block President Obama from lifting sanctions against Iran under the nuclear deal until Iran publicly supports Israel and releases Americans currently held in Iranian prisons.

That would actually be requiring Iran to say that Israel has a right to exist, and releasing the 4 Americans held.

Under Senate rules, the vote would occur Thursday, which is also the deadline for Congress to pass legislation on the Iran nuclear agreement.

The procedural hardball comes after Democrats blocked a resolution of disapproval on the deal from overcoming a procedural hurdle for a second time. Opponents of the agreement were largely expected to fall short of the 60 votes needed to move forward.

The Kentucky Republican warned Democrats ahead of Tuesday’s vote that if they blocked the resolution that he would file his amendment, saying that “my strong preference is for Democrats to simply allow an up-or-down vote on the president’s Iran deal.”

“But if they’re determined to make that impossible, then at the very least we should be able to provide some protection to Israel and long-overdue relief to Americans who’ve languished in Iranian custody for years,” he added.

Good thing Republicans pushed the Corker amendment, which turned the approval process on it’s head, eh? McConnell could have, right before attempting cloture, said “we haven’t received all material related to the Iran deal, and till Mr. Obama sends over all side deals and communications, the review period cannot start, so, there is no way the Iran deal can be implemented till that occurs, so, we won’t be taking any votes.”

“The Republican leader has threatened to us, ‘we lost and we’re going to make you suffer,'” Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said. “The Republicans have lost. They lost this measure, and we should move on to something else.”

Of course, the majority of Americans have, in almost every single poll, said they are against the Iran deal and want the Senate to shoot it down. Only in Democratic Party politics is it considered “losing” when they block the ability to vote on a major piece of foreign policy.

Forcing Democrats to filibuster the resolution would put Dems in a tough place, where most have to pretend they care about Israel. Sure, some actually do support Israel, but, most are hardcores who despise Israel.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: McConnell Set To Force Democrats On Tough Iran Vote »

Hillary Really Wants To End Sexual Assault On Mostly Liberal College Campuses

She does, she really does

(MSNBC) Democratic White House hopeful Hillary Clinton added her voice Monday to the growing push to combat the scourge of sexual assault on college campuses. And she said her rival Bernie Sanders is “doing a great job.”

“It is not enough to condemn campus sexual assault. We need to end campus sexual assault,” Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, said in a speech in Cedar Falls, Iowa.

Interesting. Most colleges tend to be hotbeds of Leftism, chock full of leftist administrators and teachers, along with all the students who are leftists and are turned more leftist.

Must be something wrong with Democratic Party ideology, beliefs, and policies for so much sexual assault to propagate on college campuses, eh?

Perhaps Bored Grandma Clinton could explain how she stood up for all the sexual assaults her husband was credibly accused of.

Read: Hillary Really Wants To End Sexual Assault On Mostly Liberal College Campuses »

If All You See…

…are wonderful trees that are being killed by too much carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Blazing Cat Fur, with a post on discussing Islam’s jihad problem.

Read: If All You See… »

LAPD Looks To Make Their Fleet All Electric

Police cars aren’t cheap. They have big engines and strong body reinforcements, made to take abuse normal models cannot take. The LAPD is bringing new meaning to “green police”

(Mashable)  A Tesla Model S is about as far from a Ford Crown Victoria as you can imagine, but the former might just replace the latter in the police fleets of the U.S.

As part of a larger effort to be more environmentally friendly, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) announced Friday that it would be leasing a Tesla Model S P85D and a BMW i3 for research into electric vehicles (EV).

The city of Los Angeles is looking to lease a total of 160 EVs, which would give it the largest city-owned EV fleet in the U.S.

Here’s what they look like

Fantastic! So, officers will have to get off the road every hour or so (maybe less) and take time to charge the cars up. Usually around 30 minutes for an 80% charge. So, that means law enforcement is unavailable to patrol or respond to calls during 1/3 to 1/2 of their shift. And, they’ll have to find charging ports around the city. Police will literally have to plan their driving day around constant recharging. Good idea!

Pit maneuver? Good luck with that. What happens if they are in an accident? Special fire department responses are needed, like with most hybrid and electric cars.

Read: LAPD Looks To Make Their Fleet All Electric »

Seattle Sued Over Use Of “Green Police”

But, does this have any merit? Oh, and it is amusing that the uber-Progressive citizens of Seattle are suddenly upset when the far left politicians they voted in to office institute a policy that comes back and negatively effects those same citizens

(Fox News) When it comes to garbage, the city of Seattle has launched a waste war.

Nine full-time solid waste inspectors have been hired as part of a controversial program to check city trash to make sure people are recycling. Additionally, contracted waste haulers have been effectively deputized as trash police, given the authority to tag bins when people fail to recycle and compost enough.

The program is now the subject of a lawsuit, as residents fume over what some call an intrusive government program.

“I understand people have noble goals,” said Keli Carender, who got tagged two weeks in a row, an offense that soon could bring a fine. “But at some point we have to say, you can’t violate my rights to achieve this noble goal.”

Carender is among 14,000 residential and commercial customers this year to get tagged. The sticker warns them that more than 10 percent of their trash content should have been recycled or put into compost bins.

Do the residents have any protections against this?

(Is That Legal?) As a general rule, it is legally permissible to go through the trash of another person. However, there are a couple nuances worth noting. First, if the person going through the trash is a police officer or one who is acting on the behalf of a police officer, then United States Supreme Court case law is quite clear: it is legal, constitutional, and not even considered a “search.” (see California v. Greenwood, 486 US 35). The Supreme Court has consistently held that an expectation of privacy does not give rise to Fourth Amendment constitutional protection unless society is prepared to accept that expectation as objectively reasonable. Therefore, since the Court did not believe society was prepared to accept an expectation of privacy in the garbage we put out to the curb for collection as objectively reasonable, it is not unlawful for an officer or his agent to go through such trash. Second, a private citizen will not likely go to jail for simply rummaging through the trash of another person. However, if he does anything that the state he lives in finds unlawful during the course of his rummaging, he could face criminal charges, serious penalties, and even jail time.

But (back to the news article)

“The Supreme Court of Washington state went the other direction,” said Ethan Blevins, an attorney with the Pacific Legal Foundation who filed the lawsuit. “[It] said our state Constitution provides better protection, and we believe that people expect that our garbage is going to be protected from prying eyes.”

Blevins cites a ruling in which a criminal conviction was overturned on the grounds that the police found a key piece of evidence in the suspect’s trash without first obtaining a search warrant.

So legal? Illegal? Realistically, the fines are minor, ranging from $1 to $50, and do not even start till January 1st, 2016. But, there is no appeals process, which may, in fact, violate due process proscription. Regardless, it is amusing to see the Progressives get upset when they are forced to walk the talk.

And, yes, you did read it right that Seattle has actually hired people who are drawing a salary to inspect people’s garbage.

Read: Seattle Sued Over Use Of “Green Police” »

McConnell To Hold Second Vote On Iran Deal

Last week, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell attempted to hold a vote on a measure of disapproval for the Iran deal, which failed, as all but 4 Democrats voted to refuse to allow that vote to proceed. McConnell promised that he would hold another vote, and it looks like that is happening today

(AP) Senate Republicans will try a second time on Tuesday to move ahead on a resolution rejecting the Iran nuclear deal, and the outcome is expected to be the same: Democrats are poised to block the measure and preserve President Barack Obama’s foreign policy win.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has scheduled another vote Tuesday to end debate, but that motion is likely to be blocked by Senate Democrats as well. It’s unclear if this is the last vote the Republican-led Senate will take on the Iran nuclear deal.

Republicans now are working to craft new sanctions legislation to maintain a hardline stance against Iran. Looking ahead to next year’s elections, Republican campaign committees also have targeted Democrats who backed the deal and some organizations against the deal already have threatened to withdraw political contributions from members of Congress who backed it.

We can thank Senator Corker and feckless Republicans for setting up this situation, where, instead of the norm, where they would have to vote to approve the deal, now they have to vote to disapprove it. What did they think they would accomplish with that Corker bill? Did they think they could punk Obama and the Democrats, forcing them to vote for the Iran deal, and then have Obama veto it? Perhaps the Democrats, in voting for the Corker bill, claiming it was very important to have this debate and vote, punked McConnell.

McConnell should force actual debate on the Senate floor, rather than just attempting to get a proper vote. Put Democrats on record. See who will take the floor for this deal.

Hopefully, McConnell has a plan in taking this second vote. Perhaps, after Democrats block moving to a full vote, he will implement the nuclear option, requiring just a simple majority in order to end debate (not that there really was any last week) to move to a yes/no vote on the Iran bill.

Better yet, he should force actual debate, then, cancel any vote, saying that Mr. Obama is in violation of the Corker amendment, which Obama signed, since Obama has not submitted all the necessary material, including side deals and letters to foreign governments, as required by the Corker bill. Henceforth, the consideration period cannot start, so no sanctions can be lifted, as least involving American companies/holdings.

More than likely, McConnell will simply hold this vote, get blocked by Democrats, and then drop the subject. That’s his MO. He likes to talk tough, then surrender.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: McConnell To Hold Second Vote On Iran Deal »

If All You See…

…is an evil energy and water sucking 1%er pool, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Right Wing News, with a post on Kentucky cops shooting the guy who killed a State Trooper.

Read: If All You See… »

Climate Change To Drastically Increase Temps In Pennsylvania Or Something

Today’s unhinged scary fable based on bad computer models, hysteria, and cracked crystal balls

Report shows climate change could change everything in Pa.

The Pennsylvania we know today is being fundamentally altered by the impacts of climate change, according to scientists and economists from Pennsylvania State University.

Their Climate Impacts Assessment Update, prepared for the Department of Environmental Protection at the direction of the General Assembly, finds that Pennsylvania has warmed 1.8 degrees in the past 110 years, and the warming will increase at an accelerated rate. By 2050, Pennsylvania will be 5.4 degrees warmer than it was in the year 2000. By 2050, Philadelphia’s climate will be similar to current-day Richmond, Va. Pittsburgh will be similar to current-day Washington, D.C., or Baltimore.

This report is profoundly disturbing. Science is showing us that not only are the changes and disruptions to our state’s climate significant, but they are also occurring alarmingly fast, in ways that will affect key sectors of the economy, our health, and our quality of life.

It is profoundly disturbing for it’s unfounded and non-scientific alarmism. To think that Pa. will see an average rise of 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit in the next 35 years has no basis in reality. There’s no big acceleration for Philly, nor other Pa. cities.

Warmists just can’t help themselves for their insane prognostications.

Read: Climate Change To Drastically Increase Temps In Pennsylvania Or Something »

Mother Is Upset After Raising Eco-fascist Who Berates Her

The words “hoist” and “petard” run through my brain. This comes via Darleen Click who notes “The second one is what is glaringly absent from this whole hot mess

Bidding My College-Bound Son Good Riddance
I have raised a sweet, thoughtful, environmentally conscious monster—and soon I will be free.

My son, Cory, will leave our Northern California home to start college back East in the fall, prompting other mothers to offer condolences about my soon-to-be-empty nest. Though they expect me to break into tears, my overriding emotion when my youngest departs will be relief. I will finally be freed from the constant scrutiny of the ever-vigilant eco-warrior I raised.

Remember that part about college (Brown U in Rhode Island, to be exact) for later

I can do nothing right in my teenage son’s eyes. He grills me about the distance traveled of each piece of fruit and every vegetable I purchase. He interrogates me about the provenance of all the meat, poultry, and fish I serve. He questions my every move—from how I choose a car (why not electric?) and a couch (why synthetic fill?) to how I tend the garden (why waste water on flowers?)—an unremitting interrogation of my impact on our desecrated environment. While other parents hide alcohol and pharmaceuticals from their teens, I hide plastic containers and paper towels.

I feel like I’ve become the adolescent, sneaking around to avoid my offspring’s scrutiny and lectures. Only when Cory leaves the house do I dare clean the refrigerator of foul-smelling evidence of my careless waste—wilted greens, rotten avocados, moldy leftovers. When he goes out to dinner, I smuggle in a piece of halibut or sturgeon, fish the stocks of which, he tells me, are dangerously depleted. Even worse, I sometimes prepare beef—a drain on precious water, my son assures me, and a heavy contributor to greenhouse-gas emissions.

Although I did not mean to raise a Mr. Sustainability, it must be admitted that I set him on the path. I tried to instill the imperative of tikkun olam, Hebrew for “repairing the world.” When Cory was eight, we served the homeless in a local soup kitchen. In middle school, he played guitar for retirement-home residents. In high school, he spent a June morning pulling weeds from a riverbed and all summer nursing a poison oak rash covering his arms and legs—an irritant not unlike the imprecations of an environmentally zealous son.

I admit that when he displayed a propensity for science, I could not suppress the Jewish mother in me and tried to convince my boy that he could best help people by becoming a doctor. But I never meant to guilt-trip him into thinking he had to save the whole entire planet—and certainly not from people like me.

This keeps going on and on and on, as Ronnie Cohn describes how she raised him from an early age to be hyper-eco conscious. You really, really have to read the whole thing for full effect. It can’t be described fully with excerpts.

I knew Cory had met his match when the BFF came for dinner (vegetarian, naturally), emerged from the bathroom with his hands dripping, and declined a towel. Neither paper nor cloth would be necessary, he insisted, while I watched the water from his hands trickle onto my hardwood floor. Like an untrained puppy, he appeared blind to the puddles he left in his wake as I followed behind him mopping at his heels.

How about kicking the little eco-fascist out of your home? Who’s the adult here? She allowed her son to forgo the use of paper towels, heck, any towels, so, drippings from oranges (organic, locally grown, of course) to hit the floor, and her son would wipe his hands on his clothes and chairs and couches. So, she no longer buys oranges.

Darleen wonders where are all the men? No husband, no father to the kid around? Someone who “would have pulled this little asswipe aside and told him to knock-off the totalitarian nonsense or get knocked into next week — “Don’t ever, ever let me catch you treating your mom this way again.””

Mom was afraid to buy water bottles, worried that her crazy son would get arrested for his “activism”, had a battle over “peeponics” (you have to read it), battles over out of season asparagus, etc

It’s no surprise Cory feels the weight of the planet’s future on his shoulders. He answered the call from Raffi, the Lorax, and his grandmother. Now he is calling on me and my generation—Baby Boomers who thought we could fix the mess we helped create by doing little more than buying a Prius‚ to seriously examine the way we live.

As he goes off to college to learn how best to contribute to turning around climate change, I am proud of him, worried about him, and, in so many ways, I am going to miss him.

So, let me ask: how is this insufferable eco-prick getting to Brown? Walk or bike cross country? Or, a fossil fueled flight? Strange how everything else should be all local, except for the college he wants to attend ($47k a year). And the multiple trips back and forth each year.

Definitely 1st World Problems. It’s easy to be a Social Justice Warrior and eco-fascist till it interferes with your own life, eh?

Read: Mother Is Upset After Raising Eco-fascist Who Berates Her »

Surprise: Only 10% Think Iran Won’t Break Agreement

Heck of a job there, Barry and John!

(CNN) President Barack Obama’s big policy win this week — preventing Congress from blocking the nuclear agreement with Iran — may do little to improve his sagging approval ratings.

Apparently, shutting down debate is a “big policy win”, as is making sure your party is on the hook for whatever Iran does. Let’s also make sure we thank Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for his fecklessness.

A new CNN/ORC poll finds 59% disapprove of the way Obama is handling the U.S. relationship with Iran, and about half would have preferred Congress reject the deal. Few believe Iran will abide by its terms, and a growing number consider the country a serious threat to the U.S.

Most Americans think Iran will ultimately violate the terms of the agreement, with 37% calling that extremely likely and 23% saying very likely. Just 10% think it’s not at all likely that Iran would break the agreement. Republicans (83% likely) and independents (58% likely) are more apt to believe Iran would violate the agreement than are Democrats (44% likely).

Now, why would anyone possibly think Iran would break the agreement? Oh, right, Iran. Obama has 55% disapproval/42% approval rating on foreign affairs overall. And now that the Iran deal is supposedly a done deal, 49% see Iran as a “serious threat”. The last time we saw a number that high was back in 2012, with the number dropping. Only 11% see Iran as just a slight threat. Add that 33% see Iran as a “moderately serious threat”, and we have a heck of a meme! That #IranDeal is wonderful!

Russia is rising fast as a “very serious threat”. Reset button time!

Only 38% of Independents approve of the way Obama is handling Iran, and 37% of Democrats disapprove.

If Iran did violate the deal, 64% of all adults say the United States should respond with military action, including majorities across party lines (57% of Democrats, 64% of independents and 72% of Republicans). About a third, 34%, say the United States should not take military action if the deal is broken.

Sure, go ahead and invade the Sudetenland.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Surprise: Only 10% Think Iran Won’t Break Agreement »

Pirate's Cove