obama climate change cartoon

Carson says Syrian refugees don't want to come to US

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson finished touring Syrian refugee camps in Jordan Saturday and suggested that camps should serve as a long-term solution for millions, while other refugees could be absorbed by Middle Eastern countries.
“I did not detect any great desire for them to come to the United States," Carson told The Associated Press in a phone interview from Jordan. "You've got these refugee camps that aren't completely full. And all you need is the resources to be able to run them. Why do you need to create something else?"
Carson toured the Azraq camp in northern Jordan under heavy Jordanian security. The tour was closed off to journalists. Carson’s campaign also limited access, not providing his itinerary.
Upon finishing his tour, Carson reiterated his opposition to allowing any Syrian refugees to come to the U.S., saying he didn’t learn anything that gives him confidence in authorities’ ability to screen potential terrorists.
"What I learned is that you're going to get a different answer from everybody depending on what their slant is," he said. "I always oppose doing unnecessary things, particularly dangerous and costly unnecessary things.”
Carson also urged Americans to launch a “humanitarian drive” to raise billions of dollars that officials say is needed to improve the conditions for refugees settled across several countries in the Middle East. Carson told the Associated Press said all the refugees needed is “adequate funding.”
“They were quite willing to stay there as long as it takes before they can get back home."
Carson has often taken a harsh tone when discussing the refugee crisis, including how the U.S. handle resettling the refugees on American soil, amid concerns about terrorists foiling the vetting process.
Last week, he likened blocking potential terrorists posing as Syrian refugees to handling a rabid dog.
He also suggested Saturday that it would be best to absorb Syrian refugees in Middle Eastern host countries, which have given temporary shelter to most of the more than 4 million Syrians who have fled civil war in their country since 2011.
In a separate statement, he described Syrians as "as very hard working, determined people, which should only enhance the overall economic health of the neighboring Arab countries that accept and integrate them into the general population."
And he broadened his call for financial support beyond Americans: "The humanitarian crisis presented by the fleeing Syrian refugees can be addressed if the nations of the world with resources would provide financial and material support to the aforementioned countries as well as encouragement."
More than 4 million Syrians fled their homeland since 2011, after a popular uprising erupted against President Bashar Assad and quickly turned into a devastating civil war. Most initially settled in neighboring countries, but conditions there have become increasingly difficult.
Carson and his GOP rivals have criticized the administration’s plan to welcome 10,000 Syrian refugees this budget year.
The retired neurosurgeon has repeatedly struggled to discuss international affairs as they become a greater focus in the 2016 presidential contest.
Those close to him concede his foreign policy fluency isn't yet where it needs to be. And they hope missions like this will help change that.
"I'd say he's 75 percent of the way there," Armstrong Williams, Carson's longtime business manager and closest confidant, said last week of the candidate's grasp of foreign policy. "The world is a complex place, and he wants to get it right."

Obama to Paris for climate summit amid global terror concerns, GOP vow to pull deal money

President Obama arrives Sunday in Paris to finalize a global climate-change pact that if completed would be a legacy-defining part of his presidency. But he awaits challenges at home and abroad, including questions about who will pay for the changes and whether terrorism is a more imminent concern.
On Capitol Hill, Senate Republicans suggested last week that the GOP-led chamber must approve the Paris deal, or it will withhold billions that the U.S. has pledged, as part of the pact, to help poor countries reduces their carbon output.
“Congress will not be forthcoming with these funds in the future without a vote in the Senate on any final agreement as required in the U.S. Constitution,” Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and 36 other GOP senators said in a letter to Obama.
They also made clear that any deal including taxpayer money and a binding timetable on emissions must have Senate approval. And they argue that Obama has already pledged $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund “without the consent of Congress.”
The United Nations talks will take place on the outskirts of Paris, where 130 people were killed roughly two weeks ago in terror attacks, which has also sparked concerns about whether world leaders should now be more focused on stopping terror groups.
Obama said Tuesday at a White House press conference with French President Francois Hollande that the summit will be a “powerful rebuke” to terrorists, including the Islamic State, which has claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks.
“The world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children,” Obama also said.
Still, Paris and the surrounding area will essentially be locked down for the 12-day summit. And climate-change activists have reportedly agreed to cancel a march Sunday, after an appeal from French leaders.
“I have to salute the responsibility of the organizations who would have liked to demonstrate but who understand that if they demonstrate in a public place there is a security risk, or even a risk of panic,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told The Guardian.
About 150 heads of state are set to join Obama for talks on Monday and Tuesday as the deal nears the finish line. The goal is to secure worldwide cuts to emissions of heat-trapping gases to limit the rise of global temperatures to about another 2 degrees from now.
The concept behind a Paris pact is that the 170 or so nations already have filed their plans. They would then promise to fulfill their commitments in a separate arrangement to avoid the need for ratification by the U.S. Senate.
Such dual-level agreement could be considered part of a 1992 treaty already approved by the Senate, said Nigel Purvis, an environmental negotiator in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.
But it's not just about whether or not to ratify.
Latin America countries attending the negotiations reportedly will demand that the wealthiest countries and those that pollute the most pay for the reduction of carbon emissions.
In the United States, the talks are entangled in the debate about whether humans really are contributing to climate change, and what, if anything, policymakers should do about it. Almost all Republicans, along with some Democrats, oppose the steps Obama has taken to curb greenhouse gas emissions, arguing they will hurt the economy, shutter coal plants and eliminate jobs in power-producing states.
Half the states are suing the administration to try to block Obama's unprecedented regulations to cut power plant emissions by roughly one-third by 2030. The states say Obama has exceeded his authority and is misusing the decades-old Clean Air Act. If their lawsuit succeeds, Obama would be hard-pressed to deliver the 26 percent to 28 percent cut in overall U.S. emissions by 2030 that he has promised as America's contribution.
Opponents also are trying to gut the power plant rules through a rarely used legislative maneuver that already has passed the Senate. A House vote is expected while international negotiators are in Paris.
And Republicans running for president are unanimous in their opposition to Obama's power plant rules; many say that if elected, they immediately would rip up the rules.
The administration mostly has acted through executive power: proposing the carbon dioxide limits on power plants, which mostly affect coal-fired plants; putting limits on methane emissions; and ratcheting up fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks, which also cuts down on carbon pollution.

Trump insists he didn't insult reporter with disabilities, now wants an apology for the accusation

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said again on Saturday that he didn’t mock a New York Times reporter with physical disabilities, but this time called for an apology from the newspaper and said the reporter is taking advantage of the allegation to a “horrible degree.”
“I don't mock people that have problems, believe me,” Trump said at a campaign rally in Sarasota, Fla.
The controversy began last weekend when Trump said at a rally in Alabama that thousands of people in New Jersey celebrated terrorist-hijacked airplanes on Sept. 11, 2001, toppling of the World Trade Center towers across the Hudson River in Manhattan.
Trump used a story by the reporter, Serge Kovaleski, then at The Washington Post, that included details about authorities detaining people for such alleged activity.
After Kovaleski essentially said his reporting didn’t justify Trump’s claims, Trump attack him at a rally in South Carolina, apparently imitating Kovaleski by using awkward arm motions and saying, “Uhh, I don’t remember.”
The front-running Trump has since said he never met, or at least doesn’t recall meeting Kovaleski, even after the New York Daily News published a story Friday that appeared to show they met in the late 1980s.
“The reporter took back what he said 14 years ago,” Trump continued Saturday. “Everybody knows it's true that Muslims were cheering. … The Muslims worldwide were celebrating during 9/11. And all of sudden I was mocking somebody?”
To be sure, this is not the first time Trump has faced accusations of mocking people, which now appears to have the Republican establishment and fellow 2016 GOP candidates concerned enough to mount a concerted ad-campaign effort to stop Trump from winning the nomination.
Since announcing his campaign this summer, Trump has in part suggested that the Mexican government is sending “rapists” and “drug dealers” across the border and has called primary rivals Jeb Bush and Ben Carson “low energy.”
Still, the billionaire businessman leads the GOP primary with 27.5 percent of the vote, according to the most recent averaging of polls by the nonpartisan website RealClearPolitics.com. His closest primary challenger, Carson, trails by 7.7 percentage points, according to the website.

Lynch calls Planned Parenthood shooting crime against women

Attorney General Loretta Lynch called the shooting at a Colorado Planned Parenthood Saturday a crime against women receiving health care services.
Lynch said in a statement the attack was not only a crime against the local community but a crime against law enforcement seeking to protect and to serve, against other innocent people, and against the rule of law as well as Americans’ right to safety and security.
The nation's top law enforcement officer said federal officials stand ready to offer any and all assistance to the district attorney and state and local law enforcement in Colorado as they move forward with their investigation.
Lynch also says her thoughts and prayers are with the shooting victims, including police officer Garrett Swasey. She said Swasey gave his life in order to keep others safe.
Robert Lewis Dear, 57, a North Carolina native, allegedly killed three people, including officer Swasey, and wounded nine others after storming the Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs. Dear was wearing a trench coat and carrying a rifle.

More on this...

• What's next in Colorado Springs shooting investigation?

• Police: Shooter took suspicious items to Planned Parenthood

• Officials: 3 deaths confirmed in Colorado shooting

Dear surrendered to police following a five-hour siege that included several gun battles with police as patients and staff members took cover under furniture and inside locked rooms.
Although Colorado Springs mayor John Suthers said that authorities weren’t ready to discuss a possible motive for the attack, an unnamed law enforcement official told the Associated Press that Dear apparently made a “no more baby parts” remark following his arrest.
The official said he could not elaborate about the comment, and spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing investigation.
Planned Parenthood said late Saturday that witnesses said the gunman was motivated by his opposition to abortion
The attack thrust the clinic to the center of the ongoing debate over Planned Parenthood, which was re-ignited in July when anti-abortion activists released undercover video they said showed the organization's personnel negotiating the sale of fetal organs.
Planned Parenthood has denied seeking any payments beyond legally permitted reimbursement costs for donating the organs to researchers. Still, the National Abortion Federation says it has since seen a rise in threats at clinics nationwide.
The anti-abortion activists, part of a group called the Center for Medical Progress, denounced the "barbaric killing spree in Colorado Springs by a violent madman" and offered prayers for the dead and wounded and for their families.
The regional head of Planned Parenthood Vicki Cowart said Saturday that Dear "broke in" to the clinic but didn't get past a locked door leading to the main part of the facility.
Cowart said there was no armed security on Friday when Dear launched his attack but she defended the level of security in place at the time, saying people going to a health clinic shouldn't have to walk through metal detectors.
Those who knew Dear told the AP Saturday he seemed to have few religious or political leanings. He also was described as a longer who lived in a mountain cabin in the North Carolina woods without electricity or running water.
"If you talked to him, nothing with him was very cognitive -- topics all over place," said James Russell, who lives a few hundred feet from Dear in Black Mountain. A cross made of twigs hung Saturday on the wall of Dear's pale yellow shack.
Neighbors of Dear’s in North Carolina said the man kept mostly to himself and Russell said that two topics he never heard Dear talk about during his ramblings were religion or abortion.
Dear's cabin is a half-mile up a curvy dirt road about 15 miles west of Asheville, N.C. He also had a trailer in the nearby town of Swannanoa.
Other neighbors knew Dear but didn't want to give their names because they said they were fearful he might retaliate, the Associated Press reported.
In the small town of Hartsel, Colorado, about 60 miles west of Colorado Springs, about a dozen police vehicles and fire trucks were parked outside a small white trailer belonging to Dear located on a sprawling swath of land. Property records indicate Dear purchased the land about a year ago.
A law enforcement official said authorities searched the trailer Saturday but found no explosives. The official, who has direct knowledge of the case, said authorities also talked with a woman who was living in the trailer. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to speak publicly about the ongoing investigation.
Dear was in jail Saturday on what officials said were "administrative holds." Charges apparently won't be lodged until he appears in court Monday.

Illegal Aliens Cartoon

Americans agree with Trump: The illegal immigrants must go

Most Americans agree with Donald Trump -- the illegal aliens have to go. Head 'em up, move 'em out.
A new Fox News poll shows 52 percent of the nation favors deporting the millions of illegals back to their home countries. Republicans and Democrats support Mr. Trump’s plan.
Click here to join Todd’s American Dispatch – a must-read for Conservatives!
But the numbers among Republicans are astronomical. Seventy percent agree with Mr. Trump -- a super-majority.
So why does the Republican establishment continue to support pro-amnesty candidates?
Jeb Bush accused Mr. Trump of preying on people's deep-seated fears.
“This whole idea of preying on people’s deep-seated fears of what the future looks like is not going to work as a campaign tactic over the long haul,” he told CNN.
In remarks reported by The New York Times, Jeb asserted his long-held belief that illegals were violating American sovereignty because of an “act of love.”
"This is the world we are in, when you can’t express a pretty commonsense thing," Jeb said. "The great majority of people come here want to provide for their family."
But the truth is that Jeb's position on the illegals is at odds with the overwhelming majority of Republican voters.
And so is Marco Rubio -- who may or may not favor amnesty -- depending on which day of the week it is.
Americans are frustrated -- they see illegals taking away our jobs. They see our tax money funding sanctuary cities and funding social programs that a good many legal citizens don't have access to.
They see a government that turns a blind eye to the illegals as they murder American citizens and pillage and plunder local economies.
They see a White House that favors the illegals over immigrants who are trying to enter the United States legally.
Republican voters are sending a very clear message to their presidential candidates.
President Obama lived up to his promise to fundamentally change our nation. And now we want a president who will change it back.
Todd Starnes is host of Fox News & Commentary, heard on hundreds of radio stations. His latest book is "God Less America: Real Stories From the Front Lines of the Attack on Traditional Values." Follow Todd on Twitter@ToddStarnes and find him on Facebook.

Messy legal process could challenge Trump's mass deportation plan

Donald Trump has made some controversial campaign promises lately – including vows to monitor certain mosques, track Syrian refugees and bring back waterboarding – but the debate is still raging over perhaps his biggest-scale proposal: mass deportation of the country’s illegal immigrants.
The plan remains short on specifics, yet the current state of the backlogged immigration enforcement system demonstrates just how difficult it could be. As it stands, deporting a relatively tiny fraction of the total illegal immigrant population has clogged U.S. immigration courts.
According to TRAC (Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse), there are 459,219 cases pending, with most of them in California, Texas and New York. The vast majority are immigrants who either overstayed their permission to be here, or came into the country illegally. A smaller number involve criminal, terrorism or national security charges -- 25,561 as of September.
“To say you could just go and pick up 11 million or 12 million individuals and in just a couple of years deport them is just illogical, it’s just not possible,” said Maurice Goldman, an immigration lawyer in Tucson, Ariz., which according to TRAC has over 1,000 pending cases in its immigration court. TRAC is a project by Syracuse University that compiles up-to-date federal law enforcement records.
Politically speaking, Trump’s proposal continues to get mixed support, at a time when candidates and voters are focused largely on security issues in the wake of the Paris attacks.
In a recent Fox News poll, 52 percent said they favor Trump’s idea of deporting illegal immigrants, while 40 percent opposed it. But when specifically asked how they felt about “identifying and deporting millions of immigrants who are living in the U.S. illegally,” just 41 percent called it a “smart idea” that should be “seriously considered.” Thirty percent called it “silly” and “impossible,” while 24 percent said the idea is “wrong and shouldn’t be done even if it were possible.”
Trump may have mastered the art of the deal – but on the matter of mass deportation, the adage that politics is the art of the possible can’t be overlooked.
The government still is deporting thousands -- according to the latest DHS data, the government deported 438,000, 418,000 and 387,000 in 2013, 2012, and 2011 respectively -- but each case typically takes a long time to process.
Today, the average wait time for a case in the immigration court -- which can end in deportation -- is 643 days. In 2008, it was 438 days. Goldman, describing one of his own clients, a man who came to the U.S. illegally in 1992 and was brought before the court in 2010, said wait times can be much longer. It was five years before his client’s case was “administratively closed,” meaning he won’t be deported this time but his charge is still “pending.” He can be put back before a judge at any time.
The backlogs, too, have been steadily rising since 1998, the first year represented in the TRAC assessment. At that time, during the Clinton administration, there was a backlog of 129,505 cases. In 2008, a year before President Obama took the Oval Office from President George W. Bush, there was a backlog of 186,108.
Trump, though, has been resolute about not only building a U.S.-Mexico wall but the deportation plan. During the Nov. 10 presidential primary debate, Trump advocated mass deportations like those pursued by President Dwight Eisenhower, otherwise known as “Operation Wetback,” in 1954.
According to historians, hundreds of thousands of people were removed under that operation, including Mexican-American citizens, who were forcibly rounded up and sent over the border to Mexico. The months-long federal operation has been described as inhumane and generally ineffective in stopping the number of Mexicans coming over the border.
Still, Trump defends his plan, recently telling Fox News he would do it humanely.
"I've heard it both ways. I've heard good reports, I've heard bad reports," Trump told "The O’Reilly Factor" earlier this month about the mass deportations under Eisenhower. "We would do it in a very humane way."
Speaking with Fox News' Bret Baier, Trump dismissed the logistical concerns.
"If we do this job right, there shouldn't be a big court situation. Nobody knows legal situations better than Trump," he said. "They have to go back."
But critics say that while Trump could tweak federal regulations to streamline the process, he would have to change the law to pursue a strategy to avoid the immigration courts entirely. Currently, the government can fast-track deportations for violent criminals, but most immigrants, illegal and legal, have a constitutional right to due process as upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.
There’s where the trouble lies in mass deportation. “The immigration courts are so underfunded, and that is why there is such a terrible backlog,” said Wendy Feliz, spokeswoman for the American Immigration Council. “[Judge positions] go unfilled, and even if they were filled, they still wouldn’t be sufficient.”
Doug Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum, a fiscally conservative policy group that assessed the cost of mass deportation in a study earlier this year, told FoxNews.com that sending 11 million people home would “harm the economy in ways it would normally not be harmed.”
His group estimates it would cost upwards of $620 billion to apprehend, detain and deport every illegal immigrant. “We would need more courts, more detention facilities, more police -- it would change the climate of America.”
“I am 100 percent sympathetic with those who do not like illegal immigration,” he said. “But what strategy you have for dealing with illegal immigrants is important. I’m not a fan of this one.”