by baldilocks

Colorado also says no. Credit: NPR.org
Colorado also says no. Credit: NPR.org

At least half of the governors in the United States have refused to take the Syrian refugees and “refugees” or called for a halt to the resettlement which the federal government, meaning President Obama, is intent upon seeding in cities all around the nation. But, it appears that these governors have no legal leg on which to stand, since it is the US Congress that establishes “an uniform Rule of Naturalization” and, back in 1980, the Democratic Party-majority 96th Congress passed the Refugee Act, which, of course, was signed by Democrat President James E. Carter. (I would say something cutting about Democrats here, but I’m sure that the Act seemed like a good idea at the time. However, it is important to know which party did what.)

And of course, President Obama knew this going in, or at least his advisers did. So, in spite of state executive orders, like the one accomplished yesterday by Governor Bobby Jindal (R-LA), the die is likely cast.

So what can we expect?

My friend, Everett Powell, says this:

The one thing the Feds can’t do is force the states to provide services and support for Obama’s refugee program – which by all accounts makes it EXTREMELY difficult for them to continue the resettlement.

I suspect what you will see done is vast numbers of people just being dumped at bus stops and train stations in the States resisting for the sake of creating images for a media campaign of people suffering sleeping in the streets. We are entering winter and there will be such a caterwauling out of the White House about cruel uncharitable Christians and GOP barbarians as the world has never seen.

That is certain, but there is something else to expect. If the mean, horrible Red and Reddish states (like Michigan) will not provide services for these people, they will migrate to those which will, like California and other states which are already overloaded with people on various forms of welfare. This will speed up the financial reckoning for these states–and for the country–something which is already in view.baldilocks

And even if there is not one terrorist among the new arrivals, this will bring chaos.

As was planned; as in Europe.

(Thanks to Jeff Bishop)

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. (Her older blog is located here.) Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2012. Her second novel, tentatively titled, Arlen’s Harem, will be done in 2016. Follow her on Twitter.

Please contribute to Juliette’s Projects JOB: HER TRIP TO KENYA! Her new novel, her blog, her Internet to keep the latter going and COFFEE to keep her going!

Or click on Da Tech Guy’s Tip Jar in the name of Independent Journalism—->>>>

The other day I came across this Judicial Watch article: Feds Send Man to Jail for Overfishing as 6,000 Drug Convicts are Freed.

On the one hand (emphasis added),

It’s part of the administration’s criminal justice reform movement to reduce jail time as a way of ending racial discrimination and enforce the overreaching federal regulations of a bloated government. Back in 2010 President Obama signed a measure that for the first time in decades relaxed drug-crime sentences he claimed discriminated against poor and minority offenders. This severely weakened a decades-old law enacted during the infamous crack cocaine epidemic that ravaged urban communities nationwide in the 1980s.

As part of the movement the U.S. Sentencing Commission lowered maximum sentences for drug offenders and made it retroactive. Last week the administration started releasing the first wave of 6,000 drug convicts who will get out of jail early. In all, about 50,000 prisoners are eligible for early release and federal authorities claim they’re all “non-violent” offenders whose sentences were too long in the first place.

What do the prosecutors have to say?

Federal prosecutors have warned that drug trafficking is inherently violent and therefore the phrase “non-violent drug offenders” is a misnomer. The nation’s prosecutors also caution that reducing prison sentences for drug offenders will weaken their ability to bring dangerous drug traffickers to justice.

On the other hand,

Last week the New York fisherman got sentenced to seven months in prison, a $603,000 fine and three years of supervised release following incarceration, according to a Department of Justice (DOJ) announcement.

Say again?

Anthony Joseph, a commercial fisherman from Levittown, New York, was sentenced to seven months in prison for federal violations by systematically underreporting fluke (summer flounder) he was harvesting with his dragger.

Commercial fishing licenses in NY state start at $259 and go up from there, depending on vessel size. The regulations are quite specific, and the fine was proportionate to the offense,

with the knowledge of Joseph, the vessel exceeded its relevant federal and New York State quotas for fluke for at least 158 trips.  These illegal overages totaled 302,000 pounds of fluke worth approximately $626,000.

It seems to me that the prosecutors in the Joseph case are making sure fishermen understand that violations will not go unchallenged; they are sending a message.

At the same time, I realize that there is a clear need to review and amend mandatory-sentence laws, and that many young, first-offender men and women have been jailed unjustly. They should not be in jail.

However, ignoring prosecutors’ objections while issuing a mass release of as many as 50,000 convicts under the guise of standing against “overreaching federal regulations of a bloated government” from an administration that uses the IRS to target conservative, Republican and pro-Israel non-profits, sends a whole different message.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics, news, and culture at Fausta’s Blog.
————————————–
HELP PETE MEET HIS ANNUAL GOAL! Subscribe, and hit the tip jar!

One of the constants of the left is that if one of their own falls it certainly isn’t the fault of the left or anything resembling it. It’s an aberration, a person disturbed or the person really wasn’t a leftist after all.

But if you really want to find the ultimate it spinning Niki at the Liberty Zone has found it:

I shouldn’t be amazed at the continued racism, prejudice, and utter appalling lies perpetuated by the SJW crowd. After all I’ve written about them enough on this blog. Every time I finish an essay, I promise myself to ignore these nits hereafter. I don’t want to give them any additional publicity or clicks.

The story she is talking about is pretty basic, a rather well-known Astronomer and professor at liberal Bastion USC Berkeley Geoffrey William Marcy was found to have violated the sexual harassment policy of the college

Amid growing outrage less than a week after a sexual harassment scandal burst into the news, renowned astronomer Geoff Marcy has resigned his post at UC Berkeley.

But his resignation, announced by campus administrators Wednesday, did little to quell anger over the school’s light punishment after an official investigation found he had been subjecting students to unwanted groping, kissing and massages for nearly a decade.

The Berkley statement is of interest:

 

It is important to understand that as Berkeley’s leadership considered disciplinary options, we did not have the authority, as per University of California policy, to unilaterally impose any disciplinary sanctions, including termination. Discipline of a faculty member is a lengthy and uncertain process. It would include a full hearing where the standards of evidence that would be used are higher than those that are applied by the Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination (OPHD) in the course of its investigations. The process would also be subject to a three-year statute of limitations.

 

The statute of limitation explains why this is not criminal matter.

Now the idea that a Berkeley Professor used power to take sexual advantage of students in his care is a legit story and one that’s repeated in public schools & colleges nationwide.

What was the cause? The abuse of power? A predatory nature? Because he could? No the blame for this Berkley professor can be laid at the door of that infamous womanizer…Captain Kirk…

In hindsight, those early episodes seem undeniably cheesy, but at the time they were far more serious – not only about the starship Enterprise’s mission “to boldly go where no man has gone before,” but also about the importance of Captain Kirk meeting hot alien babes on all of the strange planets they found.

if you think blaming Kirk is maximum crazy it’s not:

But condemning the behavior of the university and the professor wasn’t good enough for the “writer” of the dreck I cited above. No, she just had to take the opportunity to smear the SJWs’ favorite punching bag, the Sad Puppies, with that tainted brush, because Sad Puppies = anyone the SJWs hate.

The mental acrobatics and irrational contortions that she obviously had to go through to reach this conclusion are making my eyes cross! You see, the Sad Puppies, in the addled shit show of a mind of this particular imbecile, want to bring back the good ole days of science fiction, which are replete with misogyny, degradation of women, and the SJW morons’ favorite boogieman: the domination of old white men.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

This college professor while pretending to be a good liberal professor at Berkeley was made a sexual harasser late in life because of the horrible influence of William Shatner’s portrayal of Captain Kirk and Furthermore this just shows that the Sad Puppies Hugo Awards guys want to create a world we’re science fiction will be all about grooming people to think sexually assault women while pretending they are orion slave girls.

And you thought medical marijuana wasn’t harmful.

Of course even funnier is the demonstration of my crazy uncle principle as said opinion apparently produced a plethora of agreements and affirmation. It’s a wonder they haven’t launched a class action suit against Shatner.

I wonder if Bill Clinton & Bill Cosby were big Trek fans?

There are people in the world who need to be laughed at publicly, this person is one of them.

Via Sarah Hoyt at Instapundit

Update: Related, perhaps not being able to cope with the opposite sex is a berkeley problem.

“One time, I agreed to meet with this guy at 8 or 9 at night. Before we met, I said to him, ‘This is the work I do, I know the chief of police … so, don’t try and get creepy; I know all my rights.’ And five minutes later, he was like, ‘Actually, I’m really not OK with how you just assume I’m a bad guy. And I get very bad vibes from that, so we shouldn’t hang out anymore.’”

“I was in a rage. He was a total fuckboy about consent,” she said.

I guess this berkeley co-ed is lucky this guy sounds like a closet Shatner fan to me. I think Stacy can see her future

****************************************************************************

The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 and to date we’re only at $4200

Given that fact I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

There are a lot of things today that need to be laughed at.

Today too many people are so disconnected from reality, so fearful of the wrath of the left or ignorant that they allow things that should produce mocking laughter automatically actually threat these things seriously.

So this is the first in a semi regular series called “Are you kidding me” where we will point at a story and laugh at it.

Today: Hillary Clinton Cries “Sexism

Hillary Clinton has found a new wedge issue against Sen. Bernie Sanders. The topic is gun control, but the angle is gender. Clinton is framing Sanders as a sexist who accuses women of shouting when they try to speak up.

It didn’t take long for this sexism charge to produce stories with even Jake Tapper asking Senator Sanders about to answer her over it.

Are you kidding me?

Seriously, Hillary Clinton, the wife of Bill “you’d better put some ice on that” Clinton is crying “Sexism” because Bernie Sanders says shouting on Guns won’t get it done.

I noted this to a Hillary supporter pointing out that Bill Clinton opened for her and Katy Perry at her big rally and wondering what would happen if say, Josh Dugger opened for Mike Huckabee at an event?. Her reaction.

No I’m not insulting I’m just informed enough to know that if Hillary Clinton is opining on sexism the proper response for any person with any actual knowledge of the Clinton and perspective on what sexism is: is to point at Hillary and laugh.