They find a new low

Just when you think they can't sink any lower. . .

GOP lawmakers look to penalize refugee resettlement charities

• By Howard Fischer Capitol Media Services
• Feb 3, 2017 Updated Feb 4, 2017

PHOENIX -- Unable to block the federal government from sending refugees to Arizona, six Republican lawmakers want to penalize the charities that help them resettle here.

Sen. Judy Burges of Sun City West, who is leading the effort, told Capitol Media Services she wants to "have a discussion'' about how refugees wind up in Arizona and what costs are incurred by the state.

Well, for a start, I'd say that stopping charities from helping them will add to the cost to your state, but I'm guessing that's not really your point.

 Also, that's not how you have a discussion. You don't threaten to punish the people who disagree with you as a discussion starter.

State Sen. Judy Burges

The potentially more far-reaching part of her legislation would impose a fine on charities of $1,000 a day for each refugee it helps place in the state. And if a refugee is arrested, the charity would be financially liable for the cost of arrest, prosecution and incarceration of that person.

Burges conceded that she is using that approach because, realistically, it's the only option available to her to stem the flow of refugees.

 

When the United states accepts refugees, the United States decides where to resettle them. And, as you should have learned over the last several months of asshole Republican governors trying to keep refugees from their states, individual states do not get to decide whether or not the new arrivals can live in their state. Punishing charities won't change that, it will just make the refugees' lives even harder.

But as other states that have taken similar steps have found, approval of SB 1468 would not stop the refugees. All it would do is mean the federal government would continue to send people to the state, only without cooperation and coordination with the state.

And there is nothing that stops refugees from moving to Arizona once they're in the country legally.

Except the fact that it's Arizona.

The measure concerns Ron Johnson who lobbies for Catholic Charities, one of the groups involved in helping refugees resettle in the state.

"Obviously we're all concerned with proper vetting and national security,'' he said.

"But that's not something we do with Catholic Charities,'' Johnson explained. "Once they're here, we help them: find a job, find a place to live, learn the language, all kind of good things that help them be a part of society so they're not dependent on the government.''

 But of course, the cost to the government of AZ is not really what concerns people like Burges. Pretending to worry about costs is a more polite way of saying 'we don't want them durn furriners in these here parts."

 And if punishing catholic Charities for actually acting Jesusy is what it takes, well these fine upstanding Christians are willing to do just that. As long as it hurts brown and black people most.

"To punish the Good Samaritans that are trying to help them is a bit misplaced,'' Johnson said. "These people are already here.''

Burges was unsympathetic.

"I've talked to Ron Johnson myself,'' she said. "And I know that they get millions of dollars to administer these programs.''

 

Yes. I'm sure that's it. Catholic Charities is just raking in all that sweet sweet government cash, that's why they're doing this. Just like all those climatologists are pretending global warming is real so they can get their greedy hands on some of that sweet sweet grant money. That's probably it ecxactly. No one ever does anything good to help people without an ulterior motive!

"She's probably talking nationally,'' Johnson responded, noting there are more than 80,000 refugees being resettled this year.

"I won't deny that helps keep these program running,'' he continued. But Johson said it would be wrong to say that Catholic Charities is somehow making money on the programs.

"There's also local donations to help make ends meet,'' he said.

Burges said she wasn't saying that groups that work with refugees are in it for the money.

"As a charitable organization, they feel it's their responsibility,'' she said. But she said the state needs to have some say over who comes here.

No. No the state doesn't. That's not how this works. At least not yet.

Two Republican U.S. senators from Texas last month introduced legislation designed to let governors block the federal government from resettling refugees in their states.

 

 As crafted by Ted Cruz and Ted Poe, the State Refugee Security Act would require the federal government to notify a state at least 21 days before a refugee is resettled there. A governor, at his or her "sole discretion,'' could veto the move absent "adequate assurance that the alien does not present a security risk to the state.''

 No. States do not get to overrule the Federal Government. Here's a little light reading you might want to take a minute to peruse:

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

 It's from a little document you may have heard of called the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. You know that document you all claim to love and revere so much. States do not get to overrule the federal government.

 Also, I know you like to pretend that refugees just walk up to the US embassy and get flown over here no questions asked, but they do actually go through a very long, very strict vetting process. The fact that they are being brought here to the United States, THAT IS your assurance that they do not pose a threat. There is no better assurance. A refugee is about a million times less likely to pose a threat than the guys hanging around the shooting range thumbing through issues of Soldier of Fortune and listening to Alex Jones. But of course safety isn't really your concern either, is it?

I really really hate Groundhog day

I hate Groundhog Day way more than I can possibly rationalize. I should really have much more important things occupying the hatred centers of my mind like, I dunno, the current President, maybe? But for some reason this annual insult to our national intelligence really gets under my skin.

So today we present a look back at some of our previous Groundhog Day observations.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Can Someone Please Explain To Me

Why in the hell this

is still going on in this day and age?
Surely there isn't anyone out there who actually believes that the weather is dependent upon whether or not a particular rodent sees its own shadow. And does anyone really think that you can even tell whether he has seen it or not? How does the rodent tell you, how does he communicate this information to you? By returning to his hole? I know if I got up, went out my front door and saw Creepy McMoustache and a bunch of slow-witted ninnies popping flashbulbs in my face, I'd turn around and go back to bed too. But I wouldn't expect anyone to see my actions as a foreboding omen of weather to come.

And it's bad enough that the top-hatted nincompoop battalion

goes through this absurd charade year after year, but media outfits like Reuters, the AP, and even National Geographic cover the nincompoopery as if it were a legitimate news story. Seriously! Look:

Ker Than

for National Geographic News

Updated February 2, 2010

Don't pack away those winter clothes just yet: This morning famed groundhog forecaster Punxsutawney Phil saw his shadow. . .

Way to go, National Geographic!

msnbc.com news services

updated 12:45 p.m. ET, Tues., Feb. 2, 2010

PUNXSUTAWNEY, Pa. - The world's most famous groundhog, Punxsutawney Phil, emerged before chilly revelers in western Pennsylvania on Tuesday to see his shadow, a sign his handlers say means winter will last another six weeks.

What a story! MSNBC, your place for politics! And rodent shadow coverage!

I guess the media has plenty of time to cover retarded nonsense like this, because there's just not that much going on right now. We're only involved in two wars. That's not very many. That should occupy like what, one reporter per war? And maybe a reporter or two to look at the economy, there's not a whole lot to report on there. And there are hardly any allegations of torture coming out at the moment, and only two political parties combining to fuck up healthcare reform. So sure, ther should be plenty of reporters left to cover the fuzzy animal falderal.

Or maybe it's just that there's only one time per year that reporters get to use the phrase "Gobbler's Knob." Yeah, really.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Stop the Presses!

This breaking news just in:

Punxsutawney Phil Isn't Always Right

By Alyssa Newcomb | ABC News Blogs – 11 hours ago

Wow, way to go, ABC! Way to nail down that scoop! The behavior of a random rodent is not really all that predictive of the future? Well blow me down!

An analysis by the National Climatic Data Center found there is no correlation between Phil's predictions and the actual weather.

The National Climatic Data Center? Please tell me that isn't a government agency. . . ah, crap! They have a .gov web address! Seems like the National Climatic Data Center ought to have bigger fish to fry than determining whether some ridiculous bit of nonsensical folklore involving a rodent might somehow have some shred of veracity in it. (hint: no, it does not)

The well-fed, revered groundhog also has a penchant for seeing his shadow. Ever since the tradition began in 1887, Phil (and his ancestors) saw their shadows 99 times, while predicting an early spring only 16 times. There was no record for nine of the years.

Of course he always sees his shadow! He's not blind. Assuming that it is actually possible to somehow determine what the little guy is actually seeing or not seeing,  wouldn't you just assume that he would see his shadow? And the 16 times he supposedly didn't see it, wouldn't that just be an indication that it's time to break in a new groundhog, because this one's losing his eyesight?

But thank God we have a free press in this country so we can read hard-hitting investigative stories like this. ABC News, give this lady a raise!

Tuesday, February 2, 2016

It's the stupidest day of the year

Everything about Groundhog day is mind-bogglingly stupid.
For starters, where in the world did anyone get the idea that whether or not  a certain small fuzzy animal sees its shadow  is somehow predictive of anything? What is that even based on? I'd Google it, but I'm sure it's stunningly stupid and  I just don't care enough. Also, how in the hell would you know whether this particular cute fuzzy animal has seen its shadow or someone else's shadow or a blade of grass, or. . . how could you possibly know what an animal has seen or not seen?

And yet, every year, these idiots dress up in formal wear and watch this rodent pop up out of some hole and pretend that they're doing meteorology.







Which is bad enough, but every year every goddamm news agency in the country sends reporters, actual reporters who probably went to journalism school to report on this stupid waste of everyone's time. And they're not allowed to report what actually happened. They're not allowed to say:

Dateline: Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania.
A strange ritual occurred today in this quiet little town as a douchebag in a top hat held aloft a large rodent while pretending that it had some effect on the weather patterns of North America. People who had gathered around for some reason that this reporter could not fathom began to cheer inexplicably as if they had witnessed some sort of actual event. No word yet on whether the top-hatted imbecile has been committed to a mental asylum, but he clearly seems to be a danger to himself as well as not doing the local woodland creatures any favors.

No, they have to go on camera and, with a straight face, talk about how we're going to have a longer or shorter winter this year based on some idiot's idea of what a cute fuzzy animal may or may not have seen. And they have to act like there's something to it. "Well, Bill, it looks like old man winter's going to be around a few more weeks since this overgrown chipmunk seems to have seen its own shadow. reporting live from Pennsatucky, I'm Joan Smith. Please give me a reason not to slash my wrists right here on the air."


I mean, I get why they go on the air and pretend that there are radar sightings of a flying sleigh on Christmas Eve. That's to make children happy. But no child gives a fat fuck about Groundhog Day. Even the smallest child isn't stupid enough to think that a fuzzy animal has any bearing on the climate. So who is it for? There can't possibly be adults who enjoy pretending that an oversized squirrel can predict the future, can there?

Also, the groundhog's name is "Punxsutawney Phil." Who came up with that? If you're going to give the animal a name that starts with "P" to go along with Punxsutawney, why not use a name where the "P" is pronounced as a "P," not an "F?" Why not Punxsutawney Pual or Punxsutawney Pete or Punxsutawney Pat? How hard is that?

Also, what is "Gobbler's Knob?"

A crowd gathered at Gobbler's Knob early this morning, awaiting the emergence of the groundhog named Punxsutawney Phil. After a tap of a cane on Phil's tree-trunk cage, his door was opened, and the animal emerged.

The town is Punxsutawney, PA. Why do they say it happened at "Gobbler's Knob?" What is Gobbler's Knob? Never mind, I'm pretty sure I don't want to know.

Gobbler's Knob is a pretty stupid name for a town or a neighborhood or geographical location, but it's probably the least stupid thing about Groundhog Day, the stupidest day of the year.

So everything is just insane now.

Soulless Trump flack Kellyanne Conway was apparently upset at the media.
I know, a dishonest right-wing hack upset at the media? Who'da thunk it?

I went on three network shows and spoke for 35 minutes on three network Sunday shows. You know what got picked? The fact that I said ‘alternative facts,’ not the fact that I ripped a new one to some of those hosts that they never cover the facts that matter.

Yeah, it's like think of all the times I didn't say "fuck" in Church.
But the one time I shout out "Halle-fuckin-lujah," and that's all anyone remembers from the whole Christmas pageant!

Yeah, Kellyanne. The one thing that everyone remembers from your appearances on TV was your stunningly amoral defense of lying. No one found your ten millionth chorus of "blame the media" to be all that memorable. Quell surprise!

Then she really starts to go off the rails

Not one network person has been let go. Not one silly political analyst and pundit who talked smack all day long about Donald Trump has been let go. They are panels every Sunday, they are on cable news every day.
Who is the first editorial writer? Who is the first blogger that will be left out, that embarrassed him at outlets. We know their names. I’m too polite to mention their names, but they know who they are, and they are all wondering who will be the first to go. The election was three months ago. None of them have been let go.

Okay, here's a better question Why haven't any of the pundits, columnists and various talking heads who predicted a quick and easy victory in Iraq been fired? Why do they still get to be on every show every day? The quagmire should have been easy to predict. In fact, many did predict just that, but they weren't welcome on TV then, and they still aren't because there is no punishment for being wrong and no reward for being right.
That should really be a much bigger concern if you actually do give a crap about media integrity or whatever it is you're pretending to care about. 
 Failing to predict Il Douche's victory is a bit different, considering how improbable that victory was. Firing journalists for getting this one wrong would be like firing sportswriters for failing to predict Villanova's win over Georgetown in 1985.

What you seem to be angry about is that journalists had enough misplaced faith in the American electorate as to assume that they would never elect an unqualified, unstable buffoon of a fascist to the highest office in the land. I think we can cut them a bit of slack on that one. Especially as long as Bill Kristol is still employed.

If the mainstream media were a thriving private sector business that actually turned a profit, which is not true of many newspapers, 20% of the people would be gone. They embarrassed, they failed to protect their shareholders and the board members and their colleagues.

 Um. . . none of that makes sense? How did they fail to protect all those people? Never mind, you were on a roll. A manic, demented roll. Don't let me stop you.

And yet we deal with him every single day. We turn the other cheek. If you are part of team Trump, you walk around with these gaping, seeping wounds every day, that’s fine. I’m here every Sunday morning. I haven’t slept in in a month.

Oh My Gawd! Okay, that may be the first true thing I've ever heard you say, that you haven't slept in a month. Speed kills, Kellyanne!

The rest of that paragraph, though. . . hoo boy!
First of all who is this "him" that you deal with every day?

Probably

And when has anyone on "team trump" ever turned the other cheek? Do you even know what that expression means?
And the gaping seeping wounds you have, those are called "witch's teats." They're what you get when you sleep with the Devil.







Insane example # 2:

Orange Julius Caesar has an insane piece of insane anecdotal evidence to back up his insane claims about voter fraud.

WASHINGTON — On Monday, President Trump gathered House and Senate leaders in the State Dining Room for a get-to-know-you reception, served them tiny meatballs and pigs-in-a-blanket, and quickly launched into a story meant to illustrate what he believes to be rampant, unchecked voter fraud.

Mr. Trump said he was told a story by “the very famous golfer, Bernhard Langer,” whom he described as a friend, according to three staff members who were in the room for the meeting.

I don't know how famous this Langer is, I had never heard of him before this.

The witnesses described the story this way: Mr. Langer, a 59-year-old native of Bavaria, Germany — a winner of the Masters twice and of more than 100 events on major professional golf tours around the world — was standing in line at a polling place near his home in Florida on Election Day, the president explained, when an official informed Mr. Langer he would not be able to vote.

Okay, so a German citizen was told that he could not vote in an American election. If this story were true, which it obviously isn't, that would be a good indicator that the system works and those attempting to vote illegally are rebuffed.

 Now, the story is just started and I already know it's not true because they wouldn't come up to this guy while he's in line and tell him that he can't vote. If he was going to be told he can't vote, it would happen when he got to the front of the line where he would have to fill out a form and show ID. No election official is going to look at a potential voter waiting in line, say "hmm, something's hinky here, I smell sauerkraut," and just walk up  to him and say "nice try, Fritz, but you can tell the Kaiser that we're a little too smart for him down in Florida!"

Gottverdamt! How did he know?

Ahead of and behind Mr. Langer were voters who did not look as if they should be allowed to vote, Mr. Trump said, according to the staff members — but they were nonetheless permitted to cast provisional ballots.

"Did not look like they should be allowed to vote? What even does that mean, he asked as if he didn't know that meant brown skin.
 Also, if you know anything about how elections work - and obviously, Hair Furor does not -  you would know that provisional ballots are never ever ever counted. Theoretically they could be under the right circumstances, but in real life they never are. If these fraudulent Hispanic voters were given provisional ballots, that's the poll workers' way of getting them to leave without making a scene. They were not actually casting their votes.

But somehow in Cheeto Mussolini's mind, this is proof positive that foreigners, the wrong kind of foreigners, mind you, not the good Germanic kind, are being allowed ton such large numbers that they swayed the popular vote so. . . um. . . I don't know the guy's fucking crazy.





Oh, and the Times was not able to get ahold of Langer, but they did talk to his daughter who had this to say about that:

“He is a citizen of Germany,” she said, when reached on her father’s cellphone. “He is not a friend of President Trump’s, and I don’t know why he would talk about him.”

Stray Thoughts

A couple stray thoughts left over from yesterday:

1. From now on, every time Sean Spicer answers a reporter's question, that reporter should be obligated to follow up with "just to clarify, is this an 'alternative fact' or an actual fact?"

 

Also, it's impossible to find a picture of Spicer where he doesn't look like he's about to be thrown out of a bar. " You wanna take this outside pally? No, YOU"RE 86ed!"

2. This is how I imagine Trump naming his kids:

You shall be Donald Junior, for you will carry on my legacy of greatness. Bigly!

  You, I shall call "Ivanka," because even as a newborn, I'm pretty sure you're going to be smoking  hot and that name sounds like an exotic porn star. .. um, I mean, Ivanka as a tribute to your mother's homeland. Yes, that's it.


Your name shall be Tiffany. The name of the finest, classiest most precious jewels in all the world, for that is what you are. Because I made you, so obviously you must be the best, right?



   You shall be known as "Barron," for you shall have wealth and power that you did nothing to earn.


And you. . . I dunno, Eric? You look like an Eric I guess. Yeah, Eric's fine.

Random thoughts about he who must not be named.

Some deep thoughts, cheap shots and bon mots as Scott Ostler likes to say, about the Rump:          



1: I don't know whether Trump has a piss fetish or not, but it would explain why he was so creeped out by Hillary taking a restroom break during the debate.
I mean, if Trump sees urination as a sexual act (and it's fine if he does, no kink-shaming here) it might make sense that he was bothered by the thought of a septuagenarian engaging in it.To him, it would be as if she was backstage using a vibrator. He might say something like "I know what she was doing back there. Don't say it, it's disgusting. Now if she was a
-year-old Russian hooker, then sure. That'd be hot. But an old lady doing it? Yuck!"

I dunno, it's a theory.

2: I think this is the narrative to push if we want nice things:
" Trump says he's going to provide health care for all, but I don't think he can pull it off. No way can he get that past Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. Those guys know what they're doing, they'll always be two steps ahead of him. I just don't think Trump is a skilled enough leader to get single-payer health care done."

Could work. Maybe. We definitely have nothing to lose at this point.

3: No one should ever interview Kellyanne again. Unless they begin with this one question: Can you explain to me the difference between "alternative facts" and lies? And then don't let up. Don't let her change the subject, don't let her spew nonsense, just keep asking "but how is that not a lie? Why would that not be lying? Isn't that just a lie?" etc. Do it for the full hour or until she storms off set. And then never have her on TV again. She has NOTHING of value to say.







4.   I'm already sick of this theme, the whole "see, this is why Trump got elected, it's your fault" b.s.




So, basically you guys put a preening, incompetent, unqualified narcissistic into the most powerful office in the world and it's our fault because we hurt your little feelings? Seriously?

All right, let's go over this from the top.
"It happened because you banned super-sized sodas."
Well, that's bullshit. Super-sized sodas were only banned in one city, New York, where none of you red-state rednecks were ever going to go anyway, by the Republican mayor Mike Bloomberg. And we all agreed that this was stupid. This was the one issue in the last decade that we could all, liberal and conservative, young and old, agree on - that banning large sodas was fucking stupid. But one Republican mayor did that and no one outside of the 5 buroughs was affected at all so what the fuck is your problem anyway?

"Because you branded people who oppose same-sex marriage as 'homophobic'"
Is there another term you'd prefer? If you think that gay marriage is somehow a threat to your hetero marriage, that is an irrational fear of the gay. In other words, that is homophobia. It's pretty much the dictionary definition of homophobia.
And if you don't think that gay marriage is a threat to hetero marriage and you still oppose it just on the basis of I don't know, because it makes you uncomfortable? then maybe homophobic isn't the right word for you. Maybe "giant asshole" would be a better term.


"Because you treated owning a gun and never having eaten quinoa as signifiers of fascism."
What? What in holy Hell are you even talking about? When has anyone ever called you a fascist for not eating some trendy food that, honestly, most of us have never tried. I know I haven't. And if you want to know what the "liberal elite" think about America's quinoa fascination, just Google "problem with quinoa." You'll see plenty of articles like

Can vegans stomach the unpalatable truth about quinoa?

Ethical consumers should be aware poor Bolivians can no longer afford their staple grain, due to western demand raising prices

And

What your organic market doesn’t want you to know: The dark truth about quinoa

As the gluten-free food grows in popularity, some are raising questions about the human costs of its production

So I don't know who you think is condemning you for not eating it. As for gun ownership and it's relation to fascism, you lost me there too. Many of us don't like guns. Most of us are okay with law-abiding citizens owning normal pistols or rifles for home protection and/or sport. What we object to is people toting around military-style assault weapons or automatic pistols with extended magazines that can kill large numbers of people in a very short time and don't really serve any other purpose. And we object to loopholes in the law that allow criminals and the mentally ill to bypass background checks and get their hands on firearms. And when we raise these objections, it is YOU guys who generally accuse US of being fascists and trot out easily debunked canards about Hitler and gun control.

"Because you turned 'white man' from a description into an insult."

That just never happened. You need to turn off FOX. They are lying to you.

"Because you used slurs like 'denier' and 'dangerous' against anyone who doesn't share your eco-pieties."

Okay, do you even know what a slur is? A simple descriptive term is not a slur. People who deny the obvious reality of the changing climate are deniers. Just as on a baseball team, one who pitches is a pitcher and one who hits is a hitter, so one who denies is a denier. That's just the definition of the word. And describing deniers as dangerous is not a slur either, since your denial contributes to our lack of action to prevent climate change, your willful ignorance is in fact a danger to us all. And I'm not sure what you mean by "eco-pieties," but if you mean that I'd rather not see Miami completely underwater or hurricanes in Atlanta, then yes, I am possessed of "eco-piety." I'd be a dman fool not to be.


"Because you treated dissent as hate speech and criticism of Obama as extremism."

No, that's what FOX told you we did. What we actually treated as hate speech was shit like this:



And what we called extremism was the constant threats of sedition, secession and political violence.





"Because you talked more about gender-neutral toilets than about home repossessions."


No, that's what Limbaugh told you we did. What actually happened was this:

Did you think these people were demonstrating about restroom policy?
And when Obama did say that maybe there ought to be some way of helping out the people who were losing their homes, you guys started dressing up as Paul Revere and demanding your country back.


"Because you beatified Caitlyn Jenner."

No, that's what Bill O'Reilly told you we did. What we actually did was say "oh, Bruce is transitioning into a woman? Well, that's courageous of him to do it in public. Oh, wait, he's a publicity whore from a family of publicity whores and she's using her transition to get her own TV show. Oh, well, what else is on?"

"Because you policed people's language, rubbished their parenting skills, took the piss out of their beliefs."

Rubbished? Took the piss? Oh fuck me, you're not even American. Why don't you devote your energy to blaming liberals for the Brexit?

"Because you said criticizing Islam is Islamophobia."

No, that's what Sean Hannity told you we did. What we actually said was Islamophobia was this:








Anyway, it goes on for a bit, but if I'm understanding you correctly, you elected a racist because you were offended about being called racist. You elected an Islamophobe because you were bothered by being called Islamophobic. And you elected a monstrously unqualified, emotionally unstable sex offender because we hurt your little feelings? Fuck you. Fuck all of you. When Trump destroys this country, you're going down in flames right along with the rest of us. But at least you'll get the satisfaction of having stuck it to them damn liberals or whatever. Fuck you.