Last Call For Hell Freezing Over

Meanwhile, in a late Both Sides Do It 2015 Hall of Fame submission, Sen. Ted Cruz, the prime beneficiary of the "At least he's not Trump" theory of GOP nomination, went on NPR this morning to tell liberals that all those climate scientists are all stupid and wrong, not like Ted Cruz.

CRUZ: So let me ask you a question, Steve. Is there global warming, yes or no? 

INSKEEP: According to the scientists, absolutely. 

CRUZ: I'm asking you. 

INSKEEP: Sure. 

CRUZ: OK, you are incorrect, actually. The scientific evidence doesn't support global warming. For the last 18 years, the satellite data - we have satellites that monitor the atmosphere. The satellites that actually measure the temperature showed no significant warming whatsoever. 

INSKEEP: I'll just note that NASA analyzes that same data differently. But we can go on. 

CRUZ: But no, they don't. You can go and look at the data. And by the way, this hearing - we have a number of scientists who are testifying about the data. But here's the key point. Climate change is the perfect pseudoscientific theory for a big government politician who wants more power. Why? Because it is a theory that can never be disproven. 

INSKEEP: Do you question the science on other widely accepted issues - for example, evolution? 

CRUZ: There is a fundamental difference, which is in the name of global warming, you have politicians trying to impose trillions of dollars of cost on the world. In the I-95 Corridor, among the Washington elite, global warming is very popular because it makes you feel good about caring for the world. But I'll tell you, you know who I'm concerned about? I'm concerned about the single mom waiting tables right now, who for seven years of the Obama economy has been trapped in stagnation. Her wages have been stagnating. It's harder and harder to make ends meet. And what the Washington elites are trying to do is double her energy bill. 

INSKEEP: Do you question other science, like evolution? 

CRUZ: Any good scientist questions all science. If you show me a scientist that stops questioning science, I'll show you someone who isn't a scientist. And I'll tell you, Steve. And I'll tell you why this has shifted. Look in the world of global warming. What is the language they use? They call anyone who questions the science - who even points to the satellite data - they call you a, quote, "denier." Denier is not the language of science. Denier is the language of religion. It is heretic. You are a blasphemer. It's treated as a theology. But it's about power and money. At the end of the day, it's not complicated. This is liberal politicians who want government power. 

INSKEEP: You know that your critics would say that it's about power and money on your side. Let's not go there for the moment. But I want to ask about this. I want to ask about facts. 

CRUZ: But hold on a second. Who's power - but let's stop. I mean, if you are going to... 

INSKEEP: Energy industry, oil industry, Texas... 

CRUZ: If you're going to toss an ad hominem. 

INSKEEP: OK, not meaning to be an ad hominem. But you know. You know there are economic interests on all sides of this. 

CRUZ: If you're going to toss an ad hominem, then let's actually respond because there's not a moral equivalency. You say it is about power and money. I'm trying to keep power with the American people. I'm trying to keep power with the single mom waiting tables not to drive up her energy bills. I'm trying to keep power with the teenage immigrant, like my dad was, washing dishes. Now, how is that about power and money other than keeping Washington out of their lives and making it easier for people to achieve the American dream? That's who I'm fighting for.

I like Steve Inskeep.  I listen to him daily.  But Cruz just stomps the hell out of him here and Inskeep does nothing to try to stop him.  Inskeep tries to ask Cruz about facts and seconds later is apologizing to Cruz for making an ad hominem argument, and then Cruz immediately goes on to make an ad hominem argument.

If you want to know why Republicans are winning the battle for hearts and minds in America over global warming, and dragging everyone else down into the depths of cynicism and apathy so that nothing gets done, this interview is a perfect example.

Inskeep not only accepts Cruz's idiotic framing, he apologizes for trying to bring the interview back to facts and ends up on trial himself in the court of Ted Cruz's bonkers opinions.

Amazing stuff here, this is a professional Gish Gallop done by a talented liar, and Inskeep, a veteran journalist and interviewer with decades of experience, is completely helpless.

Multiply that by millions of interaction over years and you see why and how we have America a country where we're calling scientist liars and Republicans can stand bravely against a global conspiracy instead of being laughed off the planet.

Yes, Presidents Can Bar All Immigrants From A Country

As Temple University law professor Peter Spiro explains over at the NY Times, the President does indeed have pretty overwhelming authority in determining who can enter the country as an immigrant, and setting criteria for that.  And should a Republican reactionary (you know, any of the GOP 2016 candidates) end up in the White House, they will have broad powers to do just that.

The court has given the political branches the judicial equivalent of a blank check to regulate immigration as they see fit. This posture of extreme deference is known as the “plenary power” doctrine. It dates back to the 1889 decision in the Chinese Exclusion case, in which the court upheld the exclusion of Chinese laborers based on their nationality. 

Unlike other bygone constitutional curiosities that offend our contemporary sensibilities, the Chinese Exclusion case has never been overturned. More recent decisions have upheld discrimination against immigrants based on gender and illegitimacy that would never have survived equal protection scrutiny in the domestic context. Likewise, courts have rejected the assertion of First Amendment free speech protections by noncitizens.
Nor has the Supreme Court ever struck down an immigration classification, even ones based on race. As late as 1965, a federal appeals court upheld a measure that counted a Brazilian citizen of Japanese descent as Asian for the purposes of immigration quotas. 

In the context of noncitizens seeking initial entry into the United States, due process protections don’t apply, either. This past June, the court upheld the denial of a visa for the spouse of an American citizen based on the government’s say-so, with no supporting evidence. 

The courts have justified this constitutional exceptionalism on the grounds that immigration law implicates foreign relations and national security — even in the absence of a specific, plausible foreign policy rationale. The 1977 Fiallo case, for instance, involved a father seeking the admission of his out-of-wedlock son from the French West Indies — hardly the stuff of national interest. 

Indeed, contrary to the conventional understanding, President Trump could implement the scheme on his own, without Congress’s approval. The Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president the authority to suspend the entry of “any class of aliens” on his finding that their entry would be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.” President Obama has used this to the better end of excluding serious human rights violators.

In other words, Presidents have long had this power.  The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, later amended in 1965, has given the President power to exclude immigrants for national security reasons.

Expect Republicans to demand that President Obama issue blanket denials of all immigration from "terrorist" countries, something that of course would be horrific and would most likely generate major reprisals and economic sanctions, an issue that would suddenly disappear on January 20, 2017 should a Republican president be sworn in.

Or, you know, maybe we'll just stop taking immigrants from certain countries because we'll have elected an awful, fascist Republican to the White House.

America: A One Act Play

Looking forward to things like this happening over and over again the next forever here in The Donald's America. Coming to a city near you:

Two Austin women said over the weekend that they had experienced anti-Muslim hate speech at a local cafe, and that other customers sat in silence as they were “humiliated.” 

KTBC reported that the two Muslim women, Leilah Abdennabi and Sirat Al-Nahi, said that they had hoped to enjoy Sunday lunch at Austin’s popular Kerbey Lane Cafe. 

“My friend and I just experienced Islamophobia in Austin,” Abdennabi wrote in a Sunday Facebook posting. “This is the first time this has happened to me in Austin.
Leilah, a Chicago-born Palestinian-American, explained that she found her friend “crying and upset” inside the restaurant. 

“Apparently while I was parking some man next to her said something’s about things about my driving and that I should just ‘go back to Saudi Arabia’,” she wrote. 

The man went on to ask if Al-Nahi “had a gun” and then said that she should “just shoot him,” the women recalled. 

“I literally couldn’t believe he said that and I asked him to repeat what he had just said,” Al-Nahi added in a separate Facebook post. “I couldn’t believe what he said and I guess I hoped someone would have the humanity to acknowledge it because their silence hurt just as much as his words.” 

The women said that the restaurant’s host eventually made a “pathetic attempt to deescalate the situation” by seating the man, but the damage had been done. 

“They chose to seat the racist guy who just made a girl cry right in from them, rather than us,” Al-Nahi wrote. “When we spoke to management, they basically said they were sorry it happened, but they can’t do anything.” 

Abdennabi said that the pair decided to leave because they no longer felt welcome. 

“As we were leaving I told the people watching ‘Just so you know, we were told racist things and this restaurant doesn’t feel the need to address it because who cares about us?'” she noted. “Another white guy shouted ‘Nobody.'” 

“We left,” Al-Nahi added. “Because it was true.”

The cast changes from time to time, but America was born from racism and it thrives today, we just find new groups to hate, punish, hurt, and oh yeah, kill.

StupidiNews!

• Afghan officials say eight civilians and all three gunmen were killed in a Taliban attack on Kandahar's airport on Tuesday evening.
• The FBI will launch a new system to track victims of police violence after admitting British newspaper The Guardian had better data than the agency on the number of civilians killed.
• A new study finds that a record number of American renters are paying 30% or more of their income for rent, and more than 11 million are paying 50% or more.
• Manufacturing giant Dow Chemical is in talks with rival DuPont to create the world's second largest chemical company in a possible $115 billion mega-merger.
• A bipartisan Senate bill requiring tech firms to report online terror activity is being taken off the back burner in the wake of recent attacks in Paris and San Bernardino.