Democrats Overwhelmingly Voted Against Bill That Would Deport Illegals Who Attack Police

By William Teach May 17, 2024 – 7:00 am

No one is actually surprised, are they?

148 Democrats Vote Against Bill to Deport Immigrants Who Attack Police

Americans before illegalsA bill requiring the deportation of immigrants who attack police officers passed the House on Wednesday but not before 148 Democrats voted against it.

The bill passed with a 265-148 vote, with an astonishing number of Democrats opposing it. Fifty-four Democrats crossed the aisle to vote with the Republicans to pass the bill, according to Fox News.

The Detain and Deport Illegal Aliens Who Assault Cops Act (HR7343) was sponsored by Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ), who introduced it as part of the GOP’s efforts to highlight National Police Week.

“There is no reason that an illegal alien who attacks our law enforcement should remain in our country; that shows zero respect for our rule of law or our institutions, and they will not be positive contributors to society,” Van Drew said when he filed the bill.

All the Usual Suspects you’d expect to vote against it, such as The Squad, did. Some of the Dems who did vote for it are not the hardcore left and/or believe in border security, such as Rep. Cueller. Others had to because they have tough election fights coming up in November. Many of those are in border states and states that have been inundated with illegal aliens, particularly in their districts.

The question no is, what does the Senate do? Will Schumer hold a vote on this? Does he simply table it? If the Senate does vote, will enough Democrats vote for it to pass? If so, will Biden sign it?

It’s actually a pretty simply bill which would deport any illegal alien or migrant claiming asylum who attacks any law enforcement officer, as well as fire fighters, school officers, and resource officers.

Read: Democrats Overwhelmingly Voted Against Bill That Would Deport Illegals Who Attack Police »

Posted in Democrats, Illegal Immigration | 7 Comments | Trackback URL

Doctors Suggest That Hotcoldwetdry Might Possibly Maybe Be Making Migraines Worse

By William Teach May 16, 2024 – 4:53 pm

This is cult science at its best

Are migraines getting worse?
Doctors suggests that climate change, which causes more erratic and severe weather conditions, may be a trigger for more intense migraines.

Migraines are increasing in frequency and intensity among Americans: Could climate change be a reason?

Although the number of Americans who have migraines has remained stable for the last 30 years, their impact on people’s daily activities — including missing social events or being less productive at school or work — has become much worse, according to a recent study.

The report, published in early May in the journal Headache, analyzed 11 studies among U.S. adults from 1989 to 2018 on both episodic and chronic migraines. Researchers found the prevalence of migraines in the past three decades has remained stable, but found Migraine Disability Assessment Scale scores, which measure how migraines affect a person’ daily activities, jumped from 22.0% to 42.4% since 2004, the study found.

So, there aren’t more, just, soft people are saying they are much, much worse? It couldn’t have anything to do with other factors, like increased weight and obesity, lower exercise, more looking at smartphones, TVs/tablets/computers, especially close up and without proper eyewear, poor diets, more caffeine drinks, often with much higher content, and, hey, you never know, perhaps the increased usage of things like THC could be affecting this.

The Mount Sinai researchers note that the observed increase in the frequency and negative impact of migraines on work and home productivity may be due to increased social awareness of migraines and less stigma around the debilitating condition. Another factor could be environmental changes such as climate change. Erratic and severe weather conditions are known triggers for migraines, Cohen said.

“As extreme weather events, like hurricanes, become more frequent and intense, they could be contributing to an increase in migraine attacks and their severity,” he said.

They either are or aren’t. This isn’t science, it’s spitballing. They can put this forth as a hypothesis, and then do testing, but, this is like saying that that school causes leaves to fall, because school starting leads to Fall (I wish I could find the old blog post on this, which pulled from the now defunct Everything I Know Is Wrong Blog). It’s just spitballing and doomsaying. When they’ve done actual research following the scientific method, let us know.

There is some evidence that thunderstorms and barometric pressure can trigger headaches, but it’s unclear if “regular” air pollution — such as bad air from wildfires — is a migraine trigger, Collins added.

These weather changes may trigger a migraine by disrupting the balance of chemicals in the brain, like serotonin, according to the Mayo Clinic. Weather-related triggers include bright sunlight, extreme heat or cold, sun glare and high humidity.

Why talk about science when they do not have answers?

“Worsening climate conditions (including rising temperatures, extreme weather patterns, and escalating pollution) are likely to lead to effects of two types: heightened attack frequency in people who already have migraine, and an upsurge in the overall occurrence of migraine,” the scientists from University College London wrote.

That’s pure prognostication.

Read: Doctors Suggest That Hotcoldwetdry Might Possibly Maybe Be Making Migraines Worse »

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

If All You See…

By William Teach May 16, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is a horrible, water intensive lawn, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 90Ninety Miles From Tyranny, with a post on the 90 Miles mystery box.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 14 Comments | Trackback URL

Haverford Colleged Sued By Jewish Students Over Hostile Learning Evironment

By William Teach May 16, 2024 – 10:30 am

When Jewish students sued Columbia people wondered if more would follow. Haverford is now in the crosshairs, and I hope Jewish students sue many more schools. Heck, even non-Jewish students should sue over the issues and threats at U.S. colleges

Jewish students sue Haverford University for creating a hostile environment

Students filed a lawsuit on Monday against Haverford College for violating the civil rights of Jewish students by creating a hostile environment toward Jews and for holding double standards on conduct against them compared to other ethnic and religious groups.

The suit filed to the Pennsylvanian Eastern District Court by five plaintiffs contended that the college administration had acted contrary to Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by creating conditions in which Jewish students could not fully participate in classes and programming without fear of harassment.

Jewish students said that they could not speak Hebrew in public, engage in mannerisms that would identify them as Jewish and that they had to hide their beliefs and identities to avoid harassment. Haverford allegedly took no action to address the conditions of faculty and students that engaged in intimidation of Jewish students or for their support of terrorism.

The article lays out many, many, many of the issues cited in the lawsuit, such as tearing down Jewish linked posters, very negative statements, teachers celebrating the Hamas massacre of Jewish music festival attendees, and

Student groups repeatedly engaged in blood libel tropes. In late March, they held a class teaching how “Israel uses COVID[-19] as a tool for settler colonialism in Palestine” and “how the Israeli state intentionally debilitates Palestinians through the spread of COVID.” Haverford Students for Peace on May 9 published an Instagram post with bloody hands reaching for a donut entitled “Say not to blood donuts,” demanding that the college not purchase donuts for a commencement breakfast from Federal Donuts because the owner donated to Israeli causes.

The suit also mentions many instances of double standards, despite a clear policy that disallows hate speech and direct attacks on individuals and groups.

Another Haverford professor, Gina Velasco, allegedly posted on her Facebook page “F*** Israel” and “F*** Zionism,” but the suit notes that while action was not taken against anti-Israel professors, Haverford investigated tenured Jewish Israeli Professor Barak Mendelsohn for social media posts on the relationship between anti-Zionist and anti-Jewish attacks. (snip)

The suit alleged a trend of double standards in favor of some ethnic groups, while Jews and Israelis were disfavored. A January march in which it was alleged there were antisemitic slogans and calls for the state of Israel resulted in no repercussions for the students that attended it because it was off campus. Still, in the past, there were examples of Haverford revoking acceptance of the school after it had been discovered that an aspiring student had made anti-LGBTQ and anti-black statements on social media.

Pretty big double standard. The Jewish students say they have met with university officials over the issues, and the administration really did nothing, so, both administration and other students have made the Jewish student lives terrible. Here’s hoping they make a lot of money, and that many other schools are sued.

Read: Haverford Colleged Sued By Jewish Students Over Hostile Learning Evironment »

Posted in Current Affairs, Israel | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Bummer: Climate Cultists Admit Thinking It Will Matter In The 2024 Elections Is “Wishful Thinking”

By William Teach May 16, 2024 – 7:00 am

A whole bunch of climate activist “journalists” gathered with some other Warmists, and it wasn’t pretty

Election 2024: How Will Climate Change Matter

Recently, I was invited to speak at the Society of Environmental Journalists conference on a panel entitled “Election 2024: How Will Climate Change Matter?”

You can watch the full panel discussion here, but the short version of my answer to the question posed by panel’s title was “not as much as you might wish.”

Here’s what I mean:

Given the scope and urgency of the climate crisis, advocates and activists can be forgiven for wishful thinking. But the idea that climate change will be a pivotal issue in the 2024 election is just that: wishful thinking. And to the extent that the issue does influence votes, it could be a wash at best. As we’ve seen in recent years, where people stand on climate change is increasingly determined by partisan affiliation. If you lean left, you probably care about climate and support strong-ish action. If you lean right, you probably think concern about climate is overblown and consider climate activists and their ideas extreme. Given that the country is more or less evenly divided ideologically, the polarization of climate change is a huge problem.

Wendy Wendlandt, president of Environmental America, makes some good points about what they would need to do, but, misses a few things: Doing Something about ‘climate change’ is a lot more popular in the 1st World when things are going well. Not so much when you had a world wide pandemic, regardless of whether it was overblown. And then have inflation that is hitting the average citizen hard in the wallet. When you have two big wars going on, one which could easily get much, much, much worse and spread, being Ukraine against Russia.

She also misses that it’s hard to get people to do stuff when they refuse to do it themselves. If I want people to stop smoking, well, even though I only have about 6-8 a day (I have low power nicotine pouches mostly. It’s my only vice), how can I convince people? If I want to convince you to stop blowing stop signs, well, I don’t, so, I’m practicing what I preach. Same with using signals.

Then there’s this

Winning all of these campaigns still won’t be enough if our society is stuck in the old paradigm. We can’t keep growing our economy in the same old ways, producing and consuming more stuff in the same old ways, without making the planet a hotter, more dangerous and biologically poorer place. Shifting the paradigm is an even heavier lift than building bipartisan support. That’s why our arguments for action need to poke holes in the old paradigm and open the path just a little wider for new ways of organizing our society.

Hmm, so, you want to convince Other People to basically move to a different economic model, limiting people’s choices? And a new way of organizing our society? Who will enforce this on the peasants? She doesn’t say. Most Warmists refuse to actually say.

Read: Bummer: Climate Cultists Admit Thinking It Will Matter In The 2024 Elections Is “Wishful Thinking” »

Posted in AGW Socialism, Global Warming | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

Mexico Trying To Protect Biden By Interdicting Illegals On The Way To U.S. Border

By William Teach May 16, 2024 – 6:45 am

Who thinks that if Biden wins in 2024 this agreement with Mexico will end and the U.S. will once again see an onslaught of illegals?

Mexico is stopping nearly three times as many migrants now, helping keep U.S. border crossings down

Mexico is stopping nearly three times as many migrants who have crossed its southern border as it was a year ago, a trend that U.S. officials say has helped blunt the surge in crossings of the U.S. border usually seen at this time of year.

Biden administration officials also point to the increased help from Mexico in slowing migration as proof that their relationship with their southern neighbors is more effective than the Trump administration’s.

Former President Donald Trump has derided President Joe Biden’s record and claimed that his administration was more successful at controlling the border.

Early last year, Mexico interdicted roughly 100,000 migrants at its southern border or inside Mexico per month, while the U.S. was apprehending over 193,000 migrants monthly at the U.S.-Mexico border. This year, more migrants are being stopped inside Mexico than in the U.S., with over 280,000 being interdicted in Mexico and 189,000 in the U.S. in March, according to figures obtained by NBC News.

Um, there were 400K overall in 2020. 851K in 2019 when Democrats were trying to cause problems, and Trump wasn’t just letting them go around the nation. 397K in 2018. 304K in 2017. Even with Mexico helping out Biden, that’s still over 2.3 million a year. That’s nothing to brag about.

The high numbers of migrants stopped in Mexico show how chaotic the U.S. border could become if Mexico cannot sustain its interdiction efforts. Another spike in border crossings could hurt Biden in the coming election.

2.3 million a year should hurt Biden in the coming election

(MyFox8) Mexico says it will help the United States keep migrant crossings under 4,000 a day at its Southwest border – a move aimed at reining in a years-long humanitarian crisis bedeviling both countries.

Mexican officials are holding talks with seven “migrant expelling” countries in the Western Hemisphere to discuss lawful pathways to the United States, economic assistance, jobs in Mexico, repatriation flights and a possible loosening of U.S. sanctions on Venezuela and Cuba.

4,000 a day. And you get to pay for that. Ship them all to Delaware. That’s 400,000 more than the population of Delaware. Of course, it’s more than 4,000 a day, as we see from the first numbers. And Mexico is looking for ways to spike those numbers if Biden wins.

Read: Mexico Trying To Protect Biden By Interdicting Illegals On The Way To U.S. Border »

Posted in Illegal Immigration, Joe Biden | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

Hotcold Take: Astronomers Train Their Sights On ‘Climate Change’

By William Teach May 15, 2024 – 3:07 pm

Isn’t their job to kinda look out from the Earth? I mean, I guess if we’re saying “Astronomers study planets, stars, and other celestial bodies”, the Earth is a planet, but, Mirriam Webster states “the study of objects and matter outside the earth’s atmosphere and of their physical and chemical properties.” That would preclude the Earth. But, this is an insidious cult which puts its tentacles into everything

Alarmed by Climate Change, Astronomers Train Their Sights on Earth

On the morning of Jan. 18, 2003, Penny Sackett, then director of the Australian National University’s Mount Stromlo Observatory outside Canberra, received a concerning email from a student at the facility. Bush fires that had been on the horizon the day before were now rapidly approaching. The astronomers on site were considering evacuating, the student wrote. (snip)

All but one of Mount Stromlo’s eight telescopes were destroyed that day, along with millions of dollars in equipment that engineers had been building for observatories around the world. The fires also destroyed 500 homes across greater Canberra, and killed four people.

The incident was an early warning for astronomy: Wildfires, exacerbated by climate change, were becoming a problem for their field. Since then, several other observatories have been damaged or threatened by fires and other extreme weather, and changing atmospheric conditions have made ground-based astronomical research more challenging.

Apparently, lightning only happened after fossil fueled vehicles were invented. And could have been contained if they had gone after the fires more quickly.

Such incidents have drawn attention to Earth’s plight, and a growing number of astronomers are rallying to fight climate change. In 2019, professionals and students founded a global organization called Astronomers for Planet Earth. Astrobites, a journal run by graduate students in the field, held its third annual Earth Week in April. Also last month, a group of astronomers released “Climate Change for Astronomers: Causes, consequences and communication,” a collection of articles detailing the researchers’ personal experiences with the climate crisis, its impact on their work and how they might use their scientific authority to make a difference.

Sounds less like science and more like sociology

Other astronomers are raising awareness in the classroom, incorporating Earth’s climate into their research, or have left science altogether and become full-time activists.

Yup, a cult.

The modern scientific understanding of greenhouse gases is built in part on studies of Venus, a planet choked with heat-trapping carbon dioxide gas. At more than 800 degrees Fahrenheit, Venus is hot enough to melt lead — as well as the few probes that have managed to land on its surface.

Here we go again: what caused this on Venus, and why is that different from man-caused global warming?

Peter Kalmus, a climate scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, began his career searching for gravitational waves in the universe.

“I started feeling a lot of anxiety that I wasn’t committing my talents to doing something to stop global heating,” said Dr. Kalmus, who stressed that he spoke for only himself, not his employer. After a few years of research in astrophysics, he pivoted to studying the physics of clouds and, later, to using climate models to examine the risks of extreme heat. (Dr. Kalmus has also become an outspoken climate activist who has been arrested for his protest tactics.)

Cult. Anyhow, this is a very long piece describing the antithesis of science.

Read: Hotcold Take: Astronomers Train Their Sights On ‘Climate Change’ »

Posted in Climate Cult, Global Warming | 17 Comments | Trackback URL

If All You See…

By William Teach May 15, 2024 – 1:00 pm

…is warm weather bamboo which will soon grow in Siberia, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is 357 Magnum, with a post on reality intruding on CNN.

Read: If All You See… »

Posted in If All You See | 5 Comments | Trackback URL

NC Senate Advances Bill With Increased Penalties On Those Who Wear Masks While Committing Crime

By William Teach May 15, 2024 – 10:30 am

All those pro-Hamas demonstrations where lots were wearing masks caught the attention of the NC General Assembly

North Carolina Senate panel advances anti-mask bill

A COVID-era change that allowed people in North Carolina to wear a mask for health reasons moved a step closer to being removed from state law Tuesday.

Senate Judiciary Committee Republican voted in a voice vote with Democrats objecting to advance a law to enhance penalties for people who wear masks while committing another crime or for those who block traffic. House Bill 237 now moves to another Senate committee.

But the bill also removes a provision that exempts people who wear masks for health and safety reasons that was added in 2020 during the coronavirus pandemic.

And it was that part of the legislation that attracted the most opposition from Democrats on the panel and public speakers.

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Buck Newton, R-Wilson County, said the bill is not intended to “prosecute granny for wearing a mask in the Walmart — unless she was sticking steaks in her bag.”

The bill comes after pro-Palestinian demonstrations and protests at the UNC-Chapel Hill campus in previous weeks. Many of the protesters wore masks throughout the demonstrations.

It had been against the law for people to wear masks in public, except for times like Halloween or for approved parades and demonstrations. Also, for certain jobs where it’s necessary. Likewise, if it was freaking cold. This whole “immunocompromised” thing? How often did you really see someone wearing one in public before COVID? Those few who did were wearing ones that actually made a difference. It wasn’t performance art like now. It certainly wasn’t a bunch of Brave protesters hiding behind COVID so they could hide their faces against consequences of being pro-Hamas and showing their Jew hatred.

Newton said his message to people who need to wear masks for health reasons or concerns was to wear them. But Sen. Natasha Marcus, D-Mecklenburg, said lawmakers had a obligation to write clear laws.

“We make sure that the bill says what we mean for it to say,” she said. “And, to be clear, this bill, by crossing out Section 6, says it’s not legal to wear a mask if you’re doing it for the safety of yourself and others, and that is an outrageous change to make. It’s not appropriate. You say, well, this wasn’t a problem before COVID. The world is different now.”

Yeah yeah yeah. Performance art. It’s mostly only COVID wackos who wear them now, and, if you follow them around you’ll see them remove them when the performance is over. And, really, if someone is wearing one for real reasons, they mostly will not be out in public. The few who do will pretty much be left alone by police. They don’t have time for that. But, stores can tell people to remove them if they so choose.

The bill would also create a new crime specifically for protests that block roads — a tactic some recent Black Lives Matter and pro-Palestinian protests have engaged in during demonstrations in Durham, Raleigh, Chapel Hill and across the nation.

Don’t forget the climate wackos.

Liz Barber, with the ACLU of North Carolina, called Tuesday’s anti-mask bill part of a “broader attack on democracy.” She said the provision was unconstitutional because it imposed different punishments based on the content of speech or protest.

Good grief. These people. So tiresome.

Read: NC Senate Advances Bill With Increased Penalties On Those Who Wear Masks While Committing Crime »

Posted in Bat Soup Virus, NC News, Unhinged Tools | 9 Comments | Trackback URL

Climate Kiddies Plan To Try And Sue In California Again

By William Teach May 15, 2024 – 7:15 am

A better idea would be for them to live the net zero life they demand for Everyone Else, and convince all their climate cult friends to do the same

Judge dismisses California kids’ climate lawsuit. They plan to try again

After a federal judge dismissed a landmark climate lawsuit filed by 18 California children against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the youth plaintiffs plan to amend and resubmit their allegations, their attorneys say.

The children — who have lost homes in wildfires, suffered health problems from breathing polluted air, missed weeks of education due to climate change-related school closures and been forced to ration tap water due to unprecedented droughts — sued the EPA for allegedly violating their constitutional rights by allowing pollution from burning fossil fuels to continue despite knowing the harm it poses to kids.

Except, the EPA is not a dictatorial federal agency, and doesn’t have the statutory authority to act as one. CO2 is not a pollutant.

Judge Michael Fitzgerald of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California this month ruled the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to bring the suit because they did not show how the remedies they sought — including a declaratory judgment that their constitutional rights have been violated — would mitigate those harms.

“Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate how a declaration regarding Plaintiffs’ rights under the Constitution and the legality of Defendants’ conduct, on its own, is likely to remedy these alleged injuries,” he wrote. The ruling granted the plaintiffs permission to amend their complaint by no later than May 20.

Too bad Judge Fitzgerald didn’t ask the kiddies if they were practicing what they preached, and if they were traveling around in fossil fueled vehicles.

The co-executive director of Our Children’s Trust, an Oregon-based nonprofit law firm that represents the plaintiffs and has filed similar suits in other states, called the order unjust and said attorneys would be filing an amended complaint.

“When presented with a constitutional violation, there is no reason for a federal judge to throw up his hands and say nothing can be done,” Mat dos Santos, general counsel of Our Children’s Trust, said in a statement. “In doing just that, this order tells children that judges have no power to hear their complaints. Courts do, in fact, have that power.”

They keep saying “constitutional”, but, they never actually point to the part of the constitution, other than a vague notion

The children who filed Genesis v. EPA are asking the federal court to hear and weigh their evidence, then ultimately issue a declaratory judgment that the EPA has violated their fundamental constitutional rights to equal protection of the law and their fundamental rights to life.

The filed suit doesn’t actually explain how this violates “equal protection of the law”. And there is no fundamental right to life (which is interesting, because the same people astroturfing these suits surely believe in abortion on demand). They further assert that they have a fundamental right to a life-sustaining climate. They seriously try to cite things like Article II, but, it gets pretty squishy and more along the lines of “The EPA must Do Something because we say so!”

Read: Climate Kiddies Plan To Try And Sue In California Again »

Posted in Collapsing Science, Global Warming | 8 Comments | Trackback URL
Pirate's Cove