Or is it Climate Change? I'm so confused!
A fast-moving snowstorm on Sunday has reminded Boston and southern New England that while the calendar may say spring, the weather can still turn to winter.
That message will be amplified Monday morning as a second storm sweeps across the Northeast, dumping snow from Buffalo, New York, to Boston, said Dan Petersen, a meteorologist with the U.S. Weather Prediction Center in College Park, Maryland.
"It should be arriving in the Boston area by rush hour tomorrow morning and then clearing out by tomorrow evening," Petersen said.
The first round of winter-like weather left a trace of snow in New York’s Central Park. From three to six inches (5-15 cm) has fallen across parts of western New York, as well as in Connecticut, Massachusetts and parts of Rhode Island, according to the National Weather Service.
A 'scientist' doing a study of how climate change affected the range of various animals found some moved to escape the warmer climate, while others stayed where they were and still others moved into the warmer climate.
That would've made me question my original premise. But not this guy. He explains it by saying, "Climate change can be lumpy."
I guess climate change can be anything.
Posted by: Bobby ||
04/04/2016 8:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I sit here in MA watching a very attractive gentle snow, at 25 degrees.
BUT DAMN IT I SHOULD BE PLAYING GOLF!!!!!!!
Got 2" yesterday but it was mostly gone by evening, yep they're saying 3-5 today. Hope for golf Friday. 8^(
[Breitbart] Californian Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom is hitching his 2018 gubernatorial campaign to a statewide ballot proposal that would sharply restrict the sale of ammunition.
Newsom is a witless loser, but we knew that long before his comments on ammunition.
Restricting the sale of ammunition would have been found unconstitutional by the previous Supreme Court, but without Justice Scalia it's likely to skate through. You can own an AR-15, you just can't buy ammo for it...
"It seems to me the most dangerous part of the weapon is not the weapon itself, it’s the ammunition," he said April 1.
He wants anyone buying ammunition to endure a background check similar to the one that would-be gun buyers currently have to pass to buy a firearm.
According to the Press Democrat, Newsom, speaking at the Graton casino, told a story about being denied a Sudafed cold medicine purchase because he did not have a driver’s license to show at the pharmacy counter. He suggested it is strange that a person has to show ID to buy cold medicine but not ammunition.
In addition to ammunition background checks, Newsom also pledged to add new reporting requirements for licensed firearms dealers, to increase reporting of prohibited gun owners to the FBI database, and to require a license for anyone selling ammunition.
Newsom is also pushing a ban on the possession of "high capacity" magazines. He says such magazines are "disproportionately responsible for mayhem."
#6
He suggested it is strange that a person has to show ID to buy cold medicine but not ammunition.
Federal age requirement to purchase ammunition for long guns loads is at least 18 years old and 21 for Handgun loads. Some States further restrict ammo sales only to those with issued permits. Some States require stores that sell ammunition to obtain and retain signed paperwork for certain loads. Requiring background checks would be onerous and unproductive but possibly not unconstitutional. Of course, the way around all this is to reload your own ammo. That is until pencilnecks like Gavin try ban primers as WMD components.
#7
He suggested it is strange that a person has to show ID to buy cold medicine but not ammunition.
Idiot. Not when that cold medicine can be used to make methamphetamine. And who goes around without a drivers licence? Someone whose chauffeur is hired by the state? Not a good comparison, Gav. But then you're the front runner so who am I to say?
[My Private Brand] A little more than a year after a judge threw out a class-action lawsuit asserting that troubled retailer Sears knowingly led customers to believe their iconic Private Brand Craftsman Tools are still Made in the USA, the retailer continues to face public outcry.
Part of the mystique of the Craftsman brand was that the hand tools were proudly Made in the USA. But in recent years, Craftsman, like many tool brands, started manufacturing many of their products in China while continuing to run advertising that would lead customers to believe all the tools were still domestically produced.
Since 1927, Craftsman has built its brand on a credibility and reliability that was brought to life in its now legendary lifetime guarantee: if a hand tool breaks, just bring it back to the store for an immediate replacement. The problem? Made in the USA Craftsman brand loyalists are disappointed with what they feel is a violation of the brand promise. They simply do not want to replace their broken USA manufactured tool with one from China because they suffer from the not unfounded fear that the quality will be substandard to what they expect with the Craftsman name. They also resent the fact that the prices haven’t dropped to reflect international sourcing.
This is a great example of a brand promise becoming diluted and true brand loyalists rejecting the change. Yes the Brand Manager, Product Managers and Merchants at Sears should own this brand but they must never forget that the promise, which began 86 years ago, is bigger than them and owned by generations of believers. Betray your believers and destroy the brand.
Several people were so upset by the change that they started petitions on www.change.org asking Sears to stop producing the tools overseas. As of today, one petition has over 4,000 signatures.
#1
...About 25 years ago, my Dad was using a Craftsman adjustable wrench that his father had purchased in 1933, and one of the jaws broke. Dad figured, what the heck, and we went to Sears to see if they'd replace it. The hardware department manager cheerfully and quickly brought out a brand new wrench and asked only that if that one ever broke, we'd come to his store to get it replaced.
My understanding now is that IF you can find an employee in a Sears who knows what you're talking about, they may give you a buck off the replacement.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
04/04/2016 5:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
My understanding now is that IF you can find an employee in a Sears who knows what you're talking about, they may give you a buck off the replacement.
It is difficult for box stores to retain competent sales personnel. The wages are far too low and the pressure to push credit cards and warranty schemes keeps the best people out. Merchandising high quality products has become a secondary goal to selling credit.
Foreign credit purchasing foreign made products, providing a nifty profit on both ends. Once again for the hearing impaired; the Chinese are the 'what' of the Orient ?
#3
Once again for the hearing impaired; the Chinese are the 'what' of the Orient ?
The Chinese. We tend to project the typical behaviors of the exiles from China onto the elites the exiles had to run away from to get lives of their own, thinking they're trustworthy. But they're not.
[ENGLISH.ALARABIYA.NET] Republican contenders for the White House manipulating voters’ fears for their own ends by threatening to shut America’s door to Muslim visitors while subjecting American-Muslims to intensive monitoring have failed to count the cost of such an immoral, bigoted policy.
Current front-runners, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, are shamefully vying with each other to attract xenophobes and Islamophobes into their respective camps in a no-holds barred fashion.
The real shock is the result of a Bloomberg Politics/Purple strategies poll indicating 65 percent of Republican primary voters support the idea and even more concerning, 37 percent of all voters are in agreement with a ban on Muslims. Clearly, they have no clue that such an unprecedented action would shoot America in the foot in more ways than one.
Firstly, it would contravene the constitution that outlaws "religious tests". Secondly, it would create a ’them-and-us’ climate within the US and is guaranteed to alienate many of America’s traditional allies. Thirdly, it would serve as a gift to terrorist recruiters and America-haters.
And, fourthly, it is wholly impractical when most passports do not mention its holder’s faith. It is likely, too, that some, if not most, predominately Muslim states would institute reciprocal rules whereby American citizens and corporations would be deemed unwelcome.
However, if you can't say something nice about a person some juicy gossip will go well... even when those negative consequences are set aside, placing such a "Keep Out" sign with respect to all Muslims would, undoubtedly, have devastating consequences for America’s economy whose ripples would trigger yet another global economic downturn because, as is well known, when Washington sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold.
For a start, America’s tourism industry would suffer a major hit. A study conducted jointly by Singapore-based Crescent Ratings and the US firm Dinar Standard reports that Muslim travellers spend an average of $2,000 more than people of other faiths and forecasts taking into account growth that by 2020 the overall spend relating to Muslim tourism worldwide will reach more than $192 billion.
An article in the Telegraph, substantiated with statistics from Travel and Leisure magazine and the US National Travel and Tourism Office, suggests a ban on Muslims could cost the US more than $18.4 billion a year "not accounting for the necessary overhaul to border infrastructure to implement such a plan".
Posted by: Fred ||
04/04/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11133 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
And, fourthly, it is wholly impractical when most passports do not mention its holder’s faith. It is likely, too, that some, if not most, predominately Muslim states would institute reciprocal rules whereby American citizens and corporations would be deemed unwelcome.
Don't get your panties in a bundle. First, even if Trump were to become President the executive branch doesn't have the authority to enact such a ban. Second, it would be counter to both the US Constitution as well as international law. And third, it would not only be impractical to enforce but impossible. Then again, he just announced if elected he would wipe out the National debt in two terms without touching any entitlement programs. So just relax and try a cool Snake oil on the rocks. It must be good 'cause the Trumpbots are buying it by the case.
#13
The exec branch does have the right under law to limit immigration -- remember Jimmah and Iran?
Posted by: regular joe ||
04/04/2016 13:08 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Whether or not the executive has the right to limit or allow immigration absent Congressional bills passed on the subject, President Obama has shown how a determined executive can wield his phone and pen to open or close gates to favoured/unfavoured populations.
Carter's actions were within established law based on national sovereignty. Any changes to immigration enforcement based solely on religion would require new legislation. Even Emperor Obama's "deferrment" policy isn't passing constitutional muster.
#16
I'm not prepared to argue Constitutional law but since when do the rights granted by the US Constitution extend to foreigners? Does your argument mean that these barbarians can use our Constitution against us?
Somehow I always thought that being a sovereign nation means we get to decide who comes here and who doesn't and if they don't like it they can pound sand.
#18
I'm pretty sure I get to decide who comes into my house through the front door, and I know I get to deal forcefully with anyone who wants to set up housekeeping in my guest bedroom. So, pretty much settles it for me.
#19
Declare war on the Caliphate. Not IS but the concept of the Caliphate with sharia its ideology. Round up all the promoters of sharia and the caliphate and put in internment camps just like germans were in World War II.
Ban general Muslim immigration until such time as the civil war within Islam is over. Trump is right. No more diversity visas for OIC countries.
Treat immigration like the Cold War - you didn't let communists in en masse, why would you let Islamists in en masse? They want to destroy your system also.
Then drop Saudi Arabia as "ally". Ban Saudi funding for mosques, schools, university centres and general think tanks. Any propagandising, stop. Kick out their ambassador. No speaky, no trade until they embrace religious pluralism. Reciprocal rights all the way baby, and we don't need your oil now we have fracking.
#21
Also lucky for us Islamists take over the countries in which they are majority and then they have a nation state which joins the Organisation of Islamic Co-operation.
No need to mess with the first amendment, just ban immigration from OIC states and those who have family/travel there frequently or were born there. Should pretty much do it...
[DAWN] Terrorists killing children. This article should end right here. But the killings go on. When an ogre detonated his boom jacket in Lahore’s Moon Market some years ago, dozens of children bit the dust. Four years later, over 140 students were ruthlessly slaughtered at a school in Beautiful Downtown Peshawar ...capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (formerly known as the North-West Frontier Province), administrative and economic hub for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. Peshawar is situated near the eastern end of the Khyber Pass, convenient to the Pak-Afghan border. Peshawar has evolved into one of Pakistan's most ethnically and linguistically diverse cities, which means lots of gunfire. . And last Sunday many children were killed in a blast at a children’s park in Lahore. Dozens were mere babies.
But life goes on. There is always a tomorrow in which to live, as if a brutal yesterday did not happen. Repress, repress and repress that terrible memory. So many ways to do it. Become a deflector: ‘The hard boyz are foreign agents.’ Even if they are, exactly how does it make the meaningless, heartless attacks on crowds of women and kiddies any less painful?
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
04/04/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
Any fair reading of State Department and general federal government laws regarding the use of classified information by federal employees makes it is clear that Hillary Clinton violated the law--both by improperly setting up her own private server, and then by sending information through it that was classified.
...If she is not indicted by the Obama administration for violations of federal laws or conspiracy to obstruct justice, in the future it will be almost impossible to prosecute successfully any federal employee for violating government protocols about the handling of classified information.
...Federal immigration law simply no longer exists--at least for anyone from Latin America or Mexico who crossed the southern border illegally.
...Quite simply, whether federal immigration law exists depends entirely on the ethnic identity of the transgressor and the perceived political advantage of non-enforcement.
#1
Since the development of the idea that "prosecutorial discretion" went from individual to unlimited group size at the discretion of those in power, nation of laws is a farce. Rather, its using those laws that you don't like as toilet paper and those you do as tools to get your way and hurt the other side...
Makes the Oath of Office kind of an amusing little theater for many in government now....
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
