150 Democrats Vote Against Deporting Illegals Busted For Driving Impaired

By William Teach February 2, 2024 – 6:45 am

Almost three-fourths of Democrats decided that keeping criminal illegals around is OK

From the UK Daily Mail

Americans before illegalsThe House passed a bill Thursday that will enable law enforcement to deport illegal migrants caught driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

The measure passed with the support of 274 lawmakers, but a staggering 150 Democrats voted against it.

The Protect Our Communities from DUIs Act amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to ensure that illegal migrants caught driving under the influence can be deported and not allowed back into the U.S.

‘In the United States, someone dies in a crash with an impaired driver every 45 minutes,’ Rep. Barry Moore, who introduced the bill, told Fox News.

‘I lost two of my young newlywed constituents to an illegal immigrant driving under the influence of alcohol.’ (snip)

In December, an illegal migrant from El Salvador, who had previously been deported from the U.S. four times, was accused of killing a Colorado mother and her son in a crash that involved alcohol, according to local news outlet KDVR.

What is the matter with these people? They really want to keep illegal aliens, who were already deported many times in some cases, kept in the U.S. so they can endanger American citizens? It’s insane.

From a political POV, House Republicans should keep bringing up these types of bills, putting Democrats on the record when it comes to illegal immigration and crime.

Read: 150 Democrats Vote Against Deporting Illegals Busted For Driving Impaired »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Hotcoldwetdry Will Secretly Kill 14.5 Million By 2050

By William Teach February 1, 2024 – 3:42 pm

All because you took that fossil fueled trip last year instead of staying home and keeping the AC at 78

Climate change will kill 14.5 million people globally by 2050 — but mostly not directly

Climate change is triggering a global health crisis that may approach the death toll of some of history’s deadliest plagues. Unlike the 1918 flu epidemic or the COVID-19 pandemic, which were caused by the widespread outbreak of one type of bacteria or virus, climate change-fueled illness is a Hydra-headed challenge that erodes human health on multiple distinct fronts. Efforts are underway to tally this risk, and a growing body of research indicates that climate-related health threats, such as cardiovascular, diarrheal, and vector-borne diseases, have already killed millions of people — a count that will grow steeper as warming accelerates.

A recent report from the World Economic Forum, a non-governmental organization that promotes public-private partnership on global issues, and Oliver Wyman, a consulting firm, projects that rising temperatures will “place immense strain on global healthcare systems” in the coming years. Climate change will cause 14.5 million additional deaths by 2050, the report says, and spur $12.5 trillion in economic losses. Healthcare systems — hospitals, emergency rooms, doctors, and nurses — will also have to provide an extra $1.1 trillion worth of treatment by mid-century because of climate change.  (snip)

In total, the report identified six weather events most likely to trigger negative health outcomes: floods, droughts, wildfires, sea-level rise, tropical storms, and heat waves. The authors examined the direct and indirect effects of each of these events.

But, see, they won’t be able to directly blame these on Atmospheric Cancer, so, they’ll just decide to blame most deaths on “carbon pollution”, much like they were blaming a lot of deaths on COVID even though it was something like a guy who died in a motorcycle accident being listed as a COVID death because he had it. You died because a hurricane happened, which always have happened? You refused to evacuate and get out of the way? That was because of ‘climate change’. You were skiing in an avalanche prone area and died in one? Global boiling. It’s a long article that says they will blame anything they can on anthropogenic climate change.

Read: Hotcoldwetdry Will Secretly Kill 14.5 Million By 2050 »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach February 1, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is pavement cracked from too much carbon pollution heat and cold, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is bluebird of bitterness, with a post on Wednesday weirdness.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 20 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times: Illegals Coming To U.S. Because They Think They Can Stay

By William Teach February 1, 2024 – 10:30 am

It really is that simple, and, who gave them that idea? (non-paywalled at Yahoo)

One Big Reason Migrants Are Coming in Droves: They Believe They Can Stay

For decades, single young men, mainly from Mexico and later Central America, did their best to sneak past U.S. border agents to reach Los Angeles, Atlanta and other places hungry for their labor.

Today, people from around the globe are streaming across the southern border, most of them just as eager to work. But rather than trying to elude U.S. authorities, the overwhelming majority of migrants seek out border agents, sometimes waiting hours or days in makeshift encampments, to surrender.

Being hustled into a U.S. Border Patrol vehicle and taken to a processing facility is hardly a setback. In fact, it is a crucial step toward being able to apply for asylum — now the surest way for migrants to stay in the United States, even if few will ultimately win their cases.

We are living in an era of mass migration — fueled by conflict, climate change, poverty and political repression and encouraged by the proliferation of TikTok and YouTube videos chronicling migrants’ journeys to the United States. Some 6 million Venezuelans have fled their troubled country, the largest population displacement in Latin America’s modern history. Migrants from Africa, Asia and South America are mortgaging their family land, selling their cars or borrowing money from loan sharks to embark on long, often treacherous journeys to reach the United States.

It is not just because they believe they will be able to make it across the 2,000-mile southern frontier. They are also certain that once they make it to the United States they will be able to stay.

And, they will be able to stay. They’ll be flown around the nation by either the Biden admin to small towns around the country or Gregg Abbott to Democratic Party run sanctuary cities. Then they wait 8-10 years for their case to be adjudicated, at which point less than 10% will be given asylum. Once that asylum is denied they are mostly not immediately deported. They are told to get their affairs in order and leave. But, they don’t.

Most asylum claims are ultimately rejected. But even when that happens, years down the road, applicants are highly unlikely to be deported. With millions of people unlawfully in the country, U.S. deportation officers prioritize arresting and expelling people who have committed serious crimes and pose a threat to public safety.

Nearly 2.5 million people crossed the southern border in fiscal year 2023, more than live in most U.S. cities. That has made the border an ever more contentious issue, for mayors and governors grappling with large influxes of migrants, and for Republican leaders eager to lay the blame at the foot of President Joe Biden as he campaigns for reelection.

And almost none of them will be deported at any time. We do not truly know who they are, as the vetting at the border is horrible. We already know that some are Islamic terrorists and members of gangs like MS-13.

About 500 such interviews are being conducted a day — more than ever. But those represent only a fraction of the migrants who arrive — often 5,000 or more. Most people crossing the border never undergo that initial screening. They are released with a court date in a city, often years in the future.

How many are telling the judges that they came to the U.S. because they want to be a part of the U.S.? And how many just want to take advantage of our generosity?

In 2012, there were 300,000 pending asylum cases in the United States. There are that many cases now in New York state alone. All told, more than 3 million cases are languishing in immigration courts, 1 million more than just a year ago.

What the NY Times forgot to note is “why?” It was not great during the Bush years, when people were coming illegally because Bush, some squishy Republicans, and most Democrats were yammering about amnesty/pathway to citizenship. Under Obama, with Biden as VP, they talked about it more. That all enticed people. Weirdly, despite a complete meltdown in Venezuela, they were not coming in huge numbers. Under Trump, those numbers dipped because he was trying to lockdown the border and force people to apply for asylum outside the U.S.

Under Biden, they are coming in absurd numbers. The NY Times fails to note the Biden policies that entice them to come, including leaving the border utterly porous. The Times made a big mention early: the huge number of young, military age men crossing the border from around the world. That’s not dangerous at all, right? It all creates issues for U.S. citizens, not that Biden and his regime seem to care.

Read: NY Times: Illegals Coming To U.S. Because They Think They Can Stay »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Joe Biden | 15 Comments | Trackback URL

Good News: Guardrails Cannot Handle Electric Vehicles

By William Teach February 1, 2024 – 7:00 am

Well, shoot. Yet another things that shows the push for EVs is not ready for primetime

Crash tests indicate nation’s guardrail system can’t handle heavy electric vehicles

Electric vehicles that typically weigh more than gasoline-powered cars can easily crash through steel highway guardrails that are not designed to withstand the extra force, raising concerns about the nation’s roadside safety system, according to crash test data released Wednesday by the University of Nebraska.

Electric vehicles typically weigh 20% to 50% more than gas-powered vehicles thanks to batteries that can weigh almost as much as a small gas-powered car. And they have lower centers of gravity. Because of these differences, guardrails can do little to stop electric vehicles from pushing through barriers typically made of steel.

Last fall, engineers at Nebraska’s Midwest Roadside Safety Facility watched as an electric-powered pickup truck hurtled toward a guardrail installed on the facility’s testing ground on the edge of the local municipal airport. The nearly 4-ton (3.6 metric ton) 2022 Rivian R1T tore through the metal guardrail and hardly slowed until hitting a concrete barrier yards away on the other side.

“We knew it was going to be an extremely demanding test of the roadside safety system,” said Cody Stolle with the facility. “The system was not made to handle vehicles greater than 5,000 pounds.”

On the brightside, after slamming through the guardrails the vehicles did offer fantastic protection for the passengers

But the entire purpose of guardrails, found along tens of thousands of miles of roadway, is to help keep passenger vehicles from leaving the road, said Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety. Guardrails are intended to keep cars from careening off the road at critical areas, such as over bridges and waterways, near the edges of cliffs and ravines and over rocky terrain, where injury and death in an off-the-road crash are much more likely.

“Guardrails are kind of a safety feature of last resort,” Brooks said. “I think what you’re seeing here is the real concern with EVs — their weight. There are a lot of new vehicles in this larger-size range coming out in that 7,000-pound range. And that’s a concern.”

In fairness, a lot of big vehicles are a problem, but, most EVs are sedans and compact SUV size, and the guardrails won’t save you. Have fun!

Read: Good News: Guardrails Cannot Handle Electric Vehicles »

Posted in AGW Idiocy, Global Warming | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

Judge Rules PRC Cannot Force Law Abiding Citizens To Get Background Checks To Buy Ammo

By William Teach February 1, 2024 – 6:45 am

Nice to see a judge rule in favor of We The People and the Constitution

Californians don’t have to pass a background check every time they buy bullets, federal judge rules

California residents don’t have to pay for and pass a background check every time they buy bullets, a federal judge has ruled.

The Tuesday ruling by U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez took effect immediately. California Attorney General Rob Bonta asked Benitez on Wednesday to delay the ruling to give him time to appeal the decision. It’s unclear if Benitez will grant that request.

Many states, including California, make people pass a background check before they can buy a gun. California goes a step further by requiring a background check, which cost either $1 or $19 depending on eligibility, every time people buy bullets. A few other states also require background checks for buying ammunition, but most let people buy a license that is good for a few years.

California’s law is meant to help police find people who have guns illegally — like convicted felons, people with mental illnesses and those with some domestic violence convictions. Sometimes they order kits online and assemble guns in their home. The guns don’t have serial numbers and are difficult for law enforcement to track, but the people who own them show up in background checks when they try to buy bullets.

Benitez said California’s law violates the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because if people can’t buy bullets, they can’t use their guns for self-defense. He criticized the state’s automated background check system, which he said rejected about 11% of applicants, or 58,087 requests, in the first half of 2023.

“How many of the 58,087 needed ammunition to defend themselves against an impending criminal threat and how many were simply preparing for a sporting event, we will never know,” Benitez wrote. “What is known is that in almost all cases, the 322 individuals that are rejected each day are being denied permission to freely exercise their Second Amendment right — a right which our Founders instructed shall not be infringed.”

If the People’s Republik Of California was smart, and not just trying to create a massive impediment to the purchase of ammo for law abiding citizens which makes owning a firearm difficult, they would have done something like requiring a background check every so many years and not charge for it, if the idea is to keep criminals and people who didn’t purchase a firearm legally from using it for mayhem. You could be given a card like a license or have it on an app. Some might object, but, I would be good with this. It wouldn’t be a perfect system, but, it would keep a lot of criminals from getting ammo for their stolen firearms. But, the way the PRC did it was harassment of law abiding citizens.

Read: Judge Rules PRC Cannot Force Law Abiding Citizens To Get Background Checks To Buy Ammo »

Posted in 2nd Amendment | 4 Comments | Trackback URL

All Those January Winter Storms? Your Faul

By William Teach January 31, 2024 – 3:00 pm

Here we go again: the Cult of Climastrology is continuing to blame winter storms of anthropogenic climate change

January Was Awash With Extreme Winter Storms. Climate Change Likely Played a Role
In the West, Northeast, Midwest and even the South, states experienced downpours, blizzards and flash floods this month. Research suggests those events will only become more common.

Winter storm and flood alerts continue this week for millions of Americans following a weekend of flash floods in states such as Pennsylvania and Illinois, where many residents were forced to evacuate their homes as they took on water. It’s the third weekend this month when large swaths of the country have been doused with extreme wintry conditions—a trend that’s becoming increasingly more likely because of climate change, recent analyses show.

In northeastern Illinois, unseasonably warm temperatures destabilized a pileup of ice on the Kankakee River and unleashed major flooding, prompting evacuations of about 200 homes. “There’s always ice backups this time of year, but I’ve never seen it this bad,” one resident told a local news station. (snip through all those storms)

ClimaMeter, an international consortium of climate scientists, released a rapid attribution analysis last week that examined the winter storm systems that occurred Jan. 12-14 across large swaths of the United States. The report found that January saw increased precipitation largely due to climate change, with natural climate variability playing a modest role.

“Our analysis reveals that winter storms in the USA remain a tangible threat, occurring with temperatures akin to those in the past but yielding increased snow or rain precipitation,” Favide Faranda, a scientist with the France-based Institut Pierre-Simon-Laplace and a co-author of the study, said in a statement. “These findings impose additional challenges on adaptation strategies in a globally warmer climate, where winter storms still have the potential to instigate significant disruptions.”

The mid-January storms brought about exceptionally low temperatures from the Northwest to the Midwest, disrupted ground and air travel, caused power outages for hundreds of thousands of households and prompted severe winter weather alerts in more than 17 states.

If everything is caused by your cultish beliefs, it’s a cult. They’re literally blaming very cold temperatures, ice storms, and big snowstorms on heat trapping gases. Not that this is new, but, the insanity continues. They’re saying that the massive snow I watched via webcam in places like Buffalo, Watertown, NY, Vermont, New Hampshire, and others was due to the Earth getting warmer because Other People drive fossil fueled vehicles. It’s nuts. At least Scientology isn’t trying to force their beliefs on everyone.

Read: All Those January Winter Storms? Your Faul »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach January 31, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is liquor which will soon be gone due to carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is American Greatness, with a post on school choice spreading.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 8 Comments | Trackback URL

NY Times Knows Who’s To Blame For Biden’s Horrendous Immigration Policies

By William Teach January 31, 2024 – 10:30 am

This article is a little early for an election year, so, the NY Times will surely re-run it around September, as they attempt to protect Biden

How the Border Crisis Shattered Biden’s Immigration Hopes

On President Joe Biden’s first day in office, he paused nearly all deportations. He vowed to end the harsh practices of the Trump administration, show compassion toward those wishing to come to the United States and secure the southern border.

For Biden, it was a matter of principle. He wanted to show the world that the United States was a humane nation, while also demonstrating to his fellow citizens that government could work again.

If I’m getting this right, Biden mostly made the border wide open because Orange Man Bad and compassion? He’s endangering the American People, deflating wages, over-running cities with people who do not speak the language, do not share American values, and just want free stuff, as well as allowing all those terrorists and criminals from around the world for no good reason? Good grief. It’s not like the U.S. has let in lots of migrants, refugees, and those going through the legal process

But, wait, it gets better

But those early promises have largely been set aside as chaos engulfs the border and imperils Biden’s reelection hopes. The number of people crossing into the United States has reached record levels, more than double than in the Trump years. The asylum system is still all but broken.

I’m pretty sure the chaos is the result of Biden’s policies. We really didn’t have this problem when Trump was president. It wasn’t even this bad when Obama and Bush43 were president. And by more than double

Good news, it’s mostly Not Biden’s Fault per the NY Times

Some of the circumstances that have created the crisis are out of Biden’s control, such as the collapse of Venezuela, a surge in migration around the world and the obstinance of Republicans who have tried to thwart his efforts to address the problems. They refused to provide resources, blocked efforts to update laws and openly defied federal officials charged with maintaining security and order along the 2,000-mile border.

See? It’s the fault of Republicans that Biden enticed all these people to come from around the world.

But an examination of Biden’s record over the last three years by The New York Times, based on interviews with more than 35 current and former officials and others, shows that the president has failed to overcome those obstacles. The result is a growing humanitarian crisis at the border and in major cities around the country. Many voters now say immigration is their top concern, and they do not have confidence that Biden is addressing it.

He didn’t want to overcome them. He wants the border as open as possible. That fentanyl is not big deal, right? The rest of the piece really is all about protecting Biden, saying it really isn’t his fault, he’s just trying. Let’s go back to the first sentence

On President Joe Biden’s first day in office, he paused nearly all deportations.

And that’s still happening.

Read: NY Times Knows Who’s To Blame For Biden’s Horrendous Immigration Policies »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Joe Biden | 12 Comments | Trackback URL

Here We Go: Warmists Now Recommending “Microtransit” Over Public Transportation

By William Teach January 31, 2024 – 7:15 am

First they said everyone had to move out of their fossil fueled vehicles into EVs. Then they immediately said EVs were bad, so, Everyone Else should have to take public transportation. And now

To fight climate change, micromobility is a better option than overpriced transit projects

Thoughtful transit advocates have cautioned about the escalating costs of creating new urban and commuter rail systems in the United States. But the work of the Transit Costs Project and others raises a question that they have been reluctant to answer: have costs now reached the point at which it is time to put down the shovels and find other ways to provide climate-friendly mobility? With the rising popularity of micromobility solutions such as e-bikes and e-scooters, the answer to this question, in many cases, should be yes.

When considering whether an infrastructure project makes sense, it is necessary to consider both costs and benefits. For transit, benefits roughly correspond to the number of riders a project is likely to serve, but to the extent we see transit as a climate solution, we might also wish to consider the number of car trips new infrastructure replaces.

Wait, hold on a second: are they saying that government funding of public transportation projects is out of control and they waste enormous amounts of money? Weird

New York and Northern California are the epicenters of project cost escalation, but they have radically different transit usage. The San Francisco Bay Area has almost as many people as New York City, but far smaller transit ridership. While the MTA New York City Transit carried 2.3 billion passengers in 2022, Bay Area transit agencies collectively transported about one-tenth that number of riders.

Well, in fairness, the NYC subway system was implemented when the city was essentially young, and is a wonderful system (excluding lots of riders). They have a robust bus system. Not so much in SF, which is weird, since the city is jammed full of Leftists who believe in global boiling. California is also the state that is trying to build a fast train system, which exploded from $8 billion to over $120 billion, and barely anything has been built yet.

Critics argue that electric cars are not an environmental panacea because their production is resource intensive, they occupy a lot of space, and some of their components are difficult to recycle. Transit proponents would prefer to dissuade travelers from owning cars or SUVs entirely by improving the density of bus and rail networks and increasing the frequency of service.

Improving micromobility is another way to reduce car trips and encourage some to go car-free. And, since light e-bikes and e-scooters use less electricity than electric cars, they reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the extent that local power is generated from fossil fuels, in all or in part.

An individual running an errand on an e-scooter uses less resources and less space than one running that same errand in Tesla’s Cybertruck. And the e-scooter user can bring his or her ride onto a bus or train, making it a convenient first- and last-mile solution. Or, for those that prefer to rent, e-scooter and e-bike docking stations at transit stations also facilitate completing a trip without a car or taxi.

That might work well in a dense city like NYC, well, when the batteries aren’t starting fires, but, not so much in most places if you need to go anywhere. What the Warmists really want is people not being able to go very far.

Read: Here We Go: Warmists Now Recommending “Microtransit” Over Public Transportation »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove