Bummer: Immigration Judges Only Have Seven Minutes To Make A Decision

That’s probably about 5 more than is really needed. “Are you in the United States illegally? Yes? Goodbye”. But the Washington Post is Really Concerned about this “miscarriage of justice”, that illegals aren’t getting their fair time in court, that it takes, per the headline on the front page, about the same time as taking a shower to decide

His courtroom rarely came to order, and by now the judge had decided it was a waste of time to try. Interpreters explained legalese in three languages. Adults squeezed into crowded seats while children crouched in the center aisle. A court official stood near the doorway and worried about the building’s fire code. “Por favor,” he said in halting Spanish, as another family tried to enter. “No mas.”

Judge Lawrence Burman sat quietly in front of the chaos, adjusting his reading glasses and sifting through a stack of files on his bench. He had 26 cases listed on his morning docket in Arlington Immigration Court — 26 decisions to make before lunchtime about the complicated future of undocumented immigrants in the United States.

“The rocket docket” is what lawyers had begun calling this schedule, warning clients that their future could be decided in the time it took to walk to the restroom and back.

In Burman’s courtroom, the urgent number on this January morning was smaller but just as daunting. He had an average of seven minutes per case.

Just a random thought: if we’d stop coddling illegals, if we stop them at the border, if we’d disincentivize them from coming here illegally or overstaying their visas (like make it really painful, criminally and civilly, for companies to hire them, schools to host them, etc.), stop giving them money and social services, the work load might be a whole lot less. Instead, the Political and Chattering Class do all they can to incent them to come illegally or overstay their visas.

Undocumented immigrants try to prove they deserve to remain in America by bringing their versions of America with them to court: wives carrying family photo albums; babies wrapped in American flag blankets; pastors, bosses, neighbors and community soccer teams, all of whom fill the courthouse and sometimes kneel in the hallways to chant or to pray.

“Somos Americanos,” one group said. We are Americans.

Regardless of illegality, there are some we would love to be Americans. We are a generous nation. Showing up for court being unable to speak English probably isn’t the best way to demonstrate one wants to be part of the American experience.

Of course, the WP trots out sob stories, like a family separated from the husband, who’s in jail for getting caught while driving drunk on Thanksgiving, then being kept in jail since. They have a son born in the USA. The parents are illegals, though. Yes, this is tough. But, the parents made a choice to do this. They can take the child with them. The child is welcome to come back as a natural born citizen. Choices have consequences.

Oh, and the sob story includes the father have been involved in two separate property hit and runs. Because he had no license or insurance, and was worried about being deported. BTW, why has his wife not been arrested, since she is an illegal, too?

Ed20748 in the comments wraps it all up:

Being an immigration judge seems easy enough or at least it should be. Does the individual have the legal right to stay here? If yes he stays, if no he’s deported. What’s so difficult about that?

It should be.

Read: Bummer: Immigration Judges Only Have Seven Minutes To Make A Decision »

Obamacare “Innovation Center” Testing Method Is A Mess

I know what you’re thinking: how could an idea born from the Affordable Care Act be a problem?

(NY Times) The idea seemed transformative. The Affordable Care Act would fund a new research outfit evocatively named the Innovation Center to discover how to most effectively deliver health care, with $10 billion to spend over a decade.

But now that the center has gotten started, many researchers and economists are disturbed that it is not using randomized clinical trials, the rigorous method that is widely considered the gold standard in medical and social science research. Such trials have long been required to prove the efficacy of medicines, and similarly designed studies have guided efforts to reform welfare-to-work, education and criminal justice programs.

But they have rarely been used to guide health care policy — and experts say the center is now squandering a crucial opportunity to develop the evidence needed to retool the nation’s troubled health care system in a period of rapid and fundamental change.

The idea, though, is to retool the supposedly trouble health care system (love how people who receive excellent care call it that) towards a government driven and government controlled system. As such, they feel no need to follow the tried and true randomized clinical trials method.

Instead, the Innovation Center has so far mostly undertaken demonstration projects; about 40 of them are now underway. Those projects test an idea, like a new payment system that might encourage better medical care — with all of a study’s participants, and then rely on mathematical modeling to judge the results.

How’s that working out?

Dr. Patrick Conway, the director of the center, defended its reliance on demonstration projects, saying they allowed researchers to evaluate programs in the real world and regularly adapt them. “Does it look like it is working?” he asked. “If it does not look like it is working, we can stop.”

He said that the center has had trouble getting such studies to yield solid results because those in the control groups — who do not get the innovation being tested — tend to drop out.

So, the director of the center defends the projects, then admits that they have trouble getting results, because those in the control groups drop out. Sound rather like Obamacare in a microcosm.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obamacare “Innovation Center” Testing Method Is A Mess »

Rules For Watching The Super Bowl

This goes, really for watching almost all sports, but especially a championship game

  1. Ladies, imagine all you want to do is soak in a tub, with scented candles, soft music, the lights down low. No one is to bother you unless it is a category 5 issue. Yeah, that’s the way we feel about watching sports, especially championship games
  2. Guys who aren’t sports fans, well, well, I’m not sure about your “bathtub place”, but imagine it. And zip it.
  3. Now is not the time to “discuss X”. No talk about your Aunt Betty’s nephews cousins school play. Nothing about chores. Whatever it is, It Can Wait.
  4. Wait till commercial to ask what just happened in the game
  5. Now is not the time to ask about the rules
  6. Do NOT ask out opinion on something: you might actually get it!
  7. No matter what that thought is, see rules 1-3

Glamour Magazine also offers up 9 rules for watching with guys, including

  • DON’T WEAR A PINK JERSEY
  • RESPECT THE SPORT – “Do not criticize. If the rules don’t make sense at first, don’t give the ‘that’s dumb’ response.”
  • SHOW OR FEIGN INTEREST – you expect us to do this while you look at handbags and shoes. This is a 2 way street

And more from Eric Robinson

  • Please do not stand in front of the television if you want something.
  • If you want something, the best time to ask for it is after a nice victory from our favorite team.
  • Please don’t expect us to eat or do anything healthy on Sunday.
  • Don’t EVER say the words “You love your stupid football game more than me.”

Do you have any rules?

Read: Rules For Watching The Super Bowl »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful tree sucking evil carbon pollution out of the atmosphere, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Junk Science, which notes just how much “warming” could be added by Keystone XL.

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! Another great day in the Once and Future Nation of America. The Super Bowl will be played out, and feasting will commence. This pinup is by Gil Elvgren, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. protein wisdom discusses Obama’s weaponization of government
  2. The Lonely Conservative wonders how fracking opponents heat their own homes
  3. The Jawa Report notes Sandra Fluke contemplating running for Congress
  4. The People’s Cube features the new “Government” guitar series from Gibson
  5. Wizbang covers Obama violating US trademark law regarding MyRA
  6. The Daley Gator notes that Syria is dragging their feet on their chemical weapons
  7. Political Clown Parade discusses Obama using force to protect Americans
  8. Moonbattery covers raising the minimum wage
  9. Legal Insurrection notes that some lefties think it was racism, not snow, that paralyzed Atlanta
  10. Jammie Wearing Fools has another Obamacare “success” story
  11. Flopping Aces notes that Dems know they are in big trouble
  12. Fire Andrea Mitchell covers Mary Landrieu being in big trouble
  13. Director Blue points out that you can now panic on the economy
  14. Diogenes’ Middle Finger has giant, dog killing….slugs?
  15. And last, but not least, Cold Fury discusses what Liberals are fueled by

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

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Is Obama An “Imperial President”?

There’s been quite a bit of discussion over Obama’s use of presidential authority: signing statements, executive orders, changing rules (many of which were established by his own administration), changing parts of laws, refusing to defend laws passed by the United States Congress, and generally just doing whatever he wants. The notion of Obama being an imperial president has grown particularly since the 2014 SOTU, wherein he specifically stated he would bypass Congress unless they Gave Him What He Wanted. But, how true is this notion? Well, remember that Liberals constantly complained about George W Bush, calling him a tyrant, a king, a fascist, a dictator

(Daily Caller) Could we be in the midst of an “imperial presidency”? That’s the question the Christian Science Monitor posed in a recent cover story.

It’s generally former President George W. Bush that gets hammered for overreaching his executive authority, but the CSM article lays out evidence showing that President Barack Obama has gone far beyond his predecessor.

While Bush and Obama have issued roughly the same number of executive orders in their first five years as president, the scope of Obama’s actions are more far-reaching than Bush’s.

“It’s really the character of the actions, and their subject,” Jonathan Turley, a constitutional scholar at George Washington University, told the CSM. “In my view, Obama has surpassed George W. Bush in the level of circumvention of Congress and the assertion of excessive presidential power. I don’t think it’s a close question.”

Let’s be clear: Conservatives were not happy with Bush’s expansion of government, including through the use of the powers of the office of President. Consider, though: Bush went to Congress for both Iraq and Afghanistan. He even went to the United Nations for Iraq. Regarding Afghanistan, few would have complained had he just sent military units to attack al Qaeda and the Taliban under the War Powers Act, post-9/11. Obama, on the other hand, unilaterally attacked Libya (with apparently no plan other than bomb bomb bomb) without even the courtesy of informing Congress. Heck, he was in another nation and didn’t bother calling Congressional leaders of either party. He’s also deployed US forces, both drones, air assets, and boots on the ground, to nations around Africa, the Mid East, and Asia. He certainly has the power to do that, yet he doesn’t seem to discuss this with Congress at all.

There is no doubt that the scope of executive authority was greatly expanded under Bush, especially with the passage of the Patriot Act. But Obama has not done away with any of Bush’s expansions of executive power — if anything Obama has continued to expand the power of his office.

Obviously, the Patriot Act was passed by Congress. Yet, Obama has expanded the power of the office after complained for years about Bush’s use of that power, particularly when he started running for POTUS. NSA, anyone? Has he attempted to roll back anything? No.

He’s changed the law on illegals, ordering “prosecutorial discretion” on young illegals. Refusing to defend laws like DOMA. Pushing federal funds for abortions despite legislation that says otherwise. Refusing to follow federal law on marijuana, as states expand what they will allow. All the rules and proclamations from the EPA. He’s effectively banned any new coal plants, and has made it so many, if not most or all, of existing plants will close. And so many others, that have a negative effect on American citizens

“Obama’s not interpreting the law; he’s changing the law. He’s changing deadlines that were the subject of intense legislative debate,” said Turley, who disclosed that he voted for Obama. “President Obama meets every definition of an imperial presidency. He is the president that Richard Nixon always wanted to be.”

That was in relation to Obamacare. Really, that could be expanded to cover quite a bit of his presidency. Orders on gun control, changes to Obamacare, and so many others. And now that he’s made his unilateral presidency official during the SOTU, expect more. Mr. Constitutional Scholar doesn’t seem too interested in actually working through the legislative process. Schmoozing, wheedling, working the phones, simply just reaching out, seem to be beyond Mr. Obama. The power of the office has gone to his head.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Is Obama An “Imperial President”? »

EPA Head Wants Climate Scientists To Speak Truth To Push Obama’s Agenda

The politicization of science continues

(CNS News) Gina McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), asked scientists at a climate change conference on Thursday in Arlington, Va., to explain the science of climate change. (snip)

“I need you now more than ever to speak the truth,” McCarthy said. “I need you to stand up together with us and explain what the science is telling you.

“To tell people that science and technology improvements will allow us to take action moving forward that meets the needs of this president as he has charged EPA, which is to look at climate change as something where we can innovate and we can move forward to grow the economy, to grow jobs, to understand how we’re producing sustainable, livable communities,” McCarthy said.

Well, now, if you work for the EPA in any fashion, and its head is telling you to support the President in this manner, which way will your work take you?

Read: EPA Head Wants Climate Scientists To Speak Truth To Push Obama’s Agenda »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful spot to put up wind turbines and solar panels, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is A View From The Beach, with a post on difficult victimization rules for political elections.

Read: If All You See… »

Strange: Study Finds That Liberals Drink Lots More Alcohol

This probably has something to do with all the studies that find, again and again and again, that liberals are less happy than Conservatives

(The Week) A sobering new study published by the Journal of Wine Economics — yes, there is a Journal of Wine Economics — finds that alcohol consumption in American states rises as the population’s politics becomes more liberal.

The study by Pavel Yakovlev and Walter P. Guessford of Duquesne University in Pennsylvania shows a direct correlation between political beliefs and the demand for alcohol. The study compares sales of alcoholic beverages against the political leanings of a state’s members of Congress, as ranked by liberal organizations Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) and the AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education (COPE).

The research reveals that states with more liberal representatives like Nevada tend to consume up to three times more alcohol per head than more politically conservative states like Arkansas and Utah: (WT – including Utah most likely skews the data a bit)

The study concludes:

In this study, we show that liberal ideology has a statistically significant positive association with the consumption of alcohol in the United States even after controlling for economic, demographic, and geographic differences across states.

The article author offers two reason, per the study (I must be missing them in the paper). There’s definitely a third, that liberals are miserable people. And a forth: Liberals have no self restraint. I bet y’all can come up with a few more.

Read: Strange: Study Finds That Liberals Drink Lots More Alcohol »

White House: Not So Fast On that Keystone XL Pipeline, Cause “Climate Change”

So, the President with a carbon footprint around 41K metric tons, and a Sec of State who constantly takes fossil fueled flights all over the world, and also owns several homes and multiple fossil fueled vehicles, are telling us to hold our horses on Keystone XL

(Fox News) A new environmental assessment from the State Department that raised no major environmental concerns on long-delayed Keystone XL pipeline isn’t the last step in deciding whether the pipeline can be built, the White House said late Friday.

The long-delayed pipeline got a major boost as it cleared a major hurdle toward approval, a serious blow to environmentalists’ hopes that President Obama will block the controversial project running more than 1,000 miles from Canada through the heart of the U.S.

The White House released a statement pushing back on the notion that the pipeline is now headed for speedy approval, saying Sec. of State John Kerry and other agency heads will “closely evaluate” the report in the coming weeks.

“The president has clearly stated that the project will be in the national interest only if it does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution,” White House spokesman Matt Lehrich said.

Amazing. Kerry’s own State Dept releases a report stating that Keystone will have negligible impacts on the environment, and, from that link

The department’s long-awaited environmental impact statement appears to indicate that the project could pass the criteria Mr. Obama set forth in a speech last summer when he said he would approve the 1,700-mile pipeline if it would not “significantly exacerbate” the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. Although the pipeline would carry 830,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to the Gulf Coast, the report appears to indicate that if it were not built, carbon-heavy oil would still be extracted at the same rate from pristine Alberta forest and transported to refineries by rail instead.

One way or another, that oil will flow. Either the US can get it, or Canada will send it to China and other countries. Why would the American President and his SecState not want Americans to have inexpensive energy? Well, because they are far left hyper-partisans, for one thing. Also, massive climahypocrites.

(From Fox News link) “A decision on whether the project is in the national interest will be made only after careful consideration of the SEIS and other pertinent information, comments from the public, and views of other agency heads.”

In other words, Obama and Kerry will stonewall this for months, if not years. There’s no way they’ll approve it prior to the 2014 mid-terms, not wanting to keep the unhinged far left base from showing up to vote “D”.

Obama also said in a New York Times interview last year that there was “no evidence” the pipeline would be a “big jobs generator,” claiming it might create 2,000 jobs in the construction phase and far fewer permanent jobs.

Even if that were true, it would still be more permanent jobs than all his “green jobs” programs, quite a few which have gone bust, others which took the loans and created far, far fewer jobs than they initially stated.

Which is more important? Energy for Americans, which can help with reducing consumer costs, or the fake issue of “carbon pollution”, of which Obama and Kerry are in the top 1% of offenders?

Read: White House: Not So Fast On that Keystone XL Pipeline, Cause “Climate Change” »

Pirate's Cove