Archive for the ‘Domestic Policy’ Category
Self-Appointed Important People
Margaret Thatcher, in a television interview for Thames TV This Week on February 5, 1976, said, “…Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people’s money. It’s quite a characteristic of them.” Of course, until they run out of other people’s money, they spend freely. They don’t seem to have a problem watching you and I toil for our earnings, then taking those earnings away from us via taxes and spending that money frivolously to live a lavish lifestyle. Don’t believe me?
For you Obama koolaide drinkers that still think he has your best interests at heart, I give you limousines….lots of limousines. Unlike the former Bush administration that did not grant limo privileges to its staff, Obama, under the direction of his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has given limos and military chauffeurs to most of his team of advisers. Every day, they are picked up at home and all day long they are driven around town where ever they choose. Sounds nice, huh?
Well, Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod, both advisers to the president, have been given limos for their use. So why are they so important that they need limos with military or police escorts? For starters, Valerie B. Jarrett is Senior Adviser and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement. Prior to her current position, she served as Co-Chair of the Obama-Biden Presidential Transition Team, and Senior Adviser to Obama’s presidential campaign. So she makes sure his popularity rating in the polls stays high. Based on what I’ve read recently, she’s doing a terrible job.
Then there is David Axlerod. He is best known as a top political adviser to President Barack Obama, first in Obama’s 2004 campaign for the U.S. Senate in Illinois and later as chief strategist for Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Following the 2008 election, he was appointed as Senior Adviser to President Obama. In a nutshell, he’s the Democrat’s version of Karl Rove. He should probably change his last name to Marx, but I’ll leave that for a later discussion.
Both of these people are not that important that they need limousines. Neither is that important that they need Secret Service protection. If either of these two people were to fall off the map tomorrow, this country would function in it’s usually dysfunctional manner and these two people would be easily replaced.
That being said, it’s always nice to know that America is $12 trillion in debt but has plenty of money to keep the Washington elite in limousines to make them feel special. Although I’m sure the Koolaide drinkers of Obama will make excuses for this, the bottom line is that there is no excuse for this type of wasteful government spending.
A founding member of the Duke Law Center on Law, Race, and Politics, Guy-Uriel Charles, posted a blog in which he tears into Elena Kagan’s hiring record as head of Harvard Law School. He states that of the 29 positions Kagan had a chance to fill, 28 were white and one was Asian-American. He elaborates by stating that only six were women – five white and one Asian-American.
Kagan vs. Danny Devito as The Penguin
Imagine for a moment, if you will, that the person with this atrocious hiring record were a white man and the President were a white man. Do you think the liberal lefties that occupy the Democratic side of the Senate isle would tolerate this? They would be pounding the race card so hard, the deck would crumble from within.
However, here we have a person with no courtroom experience on the bench with a track record of excluding minorities from one of the most prestigious institutions in the land, and not one of those liberals is uttering a word about it.
It’s no secret that this appointment is a payment to Obama’s liberal promise of promoting gay rights. Although no attempt will be made to flush out her sexual preference, like my Grandpa used to say, “If it walks like a duck…” Kagan will certainly add a new dimension to the court with her “qualifications”, or lack of. This will be present for years to come, as she is relatively young for a Supreme Court Justice.
What will transpire in the next few days will be interesting. Where’s Al Sharpton on this issue? Where is Jesse “boycott” Jackson? Where are all the civil rights “leaders” to speak out on this person?
The silence is deafening.
Of all the immigration rallies held this weekend, the one at Union Square in New York was the scariest…and where was CNN/ABC/MSNBC/CBS/Huffington Post? Why do they show images of Tea Party protests and focus on liberal lefties masquerading as Nazis, yet when the REAL communists show up at a pro-immigration rally, these liberal networks are nowhere to be found?
Take a look at these pictures. If these photos don’t frighten you into doing something for your country, what will? What will make you get out and join a Tea Party protest in your community? What will stop you from organizing against these criminals? Will you just sit by and let these scumbags take over your country? This land is my land..this land is your land. It isn’t the illegal infiltrator’s land. Take a stand, or take a dive….it’s your choice.
Aerial Shot Of Protest
Wanna Join?
This IS What College Teaches
Where's The Guy On The Grassy Knoll WHen You Need Him?
Death To Illegals, That's What I say!
Pot, Meet Kettle...Kettle, Meet Pot
Are They **THE** Problem?
The immigration law signed by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer a few days ago sent shock waves through a nation divided by the issue of immigration. Now, I must warn you that what you are about to read might shock your conservative sensibilities and cause you to throw things at your screen. Before you label me as just another liberal writer of tripe, I urge you to read this to the end and give it some serious thoughts.
As most know, entering this country without proper authorization from the federal government via the Department of Immigration and Naturalization is a felony. People that enter the United States illegally are felons, law breakers, criminals, scofflaws, bad guys, etc. We should throw them all in jail, right? All of the estimated 12 million of them that are here. The Arizona law is designed to do just that. Conservatives everywhere are cheering! Not me.
First, Arizona’s jails can barely hold the violent felons it has. Many of its jails have begun using tent cities in fenced yards to house prisoners. Also, my conservative sensibilities are not in tune with the cost of housing these people in jails. It’s expensive and a massive expansion of government would be required to do it, because jails are run by the government. Expanding government and higher taxes to pay for it are not in the conservative mindset.
Second, the actions by the Arizona Governor are a reaction to the lack of action by the federal government. That’s a lot of action from inaction. The feds refuse to deal with the immigrant problem, so the state enacts a dangerous law to try and deal with it. This law won’t solve the problem; it will relocate the problem as these people, in fear of prosecution, move to another state. Problem solved for Arizona, problem created for its neighbors, problem still ignored by the feds. It’s still a problem.
Washington is useless in this area. The Clinton administration ignored the problem. The Bush administration ignored the problem. President Obama, while ignoring the problem, is using the Arizona law as a springboard for winning the Hispanic votes in this country. He speaks of needed immigration reform as do the other partisan clowns in Washington. The voters are being used as pawns in a partisan game of reform chess. However, I’m not sure what needs to be reformed is what is being discussed in Washington.
Immigrants come to America to find jobs. Remember, they commit a felony when they enter, so we can arrest them and send them back. But here’s a more novel idea. Our laws state that a person (including a business, organization or local government) commits a federal felony when they:
* assists an alien whom they should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him to obtain employment,
* encourages that alien to remain in the U.S., by referring him to an employer, by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or
* knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.
Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime.
So, if the immigrants know they can’t work, why would they come here? No jobs, no immigrants. However, no federal enforcement of existing laws…ignore all of the above, which is what has been happening for the last 15 years. This, dear readers, is the crux of the problem. It’s not the immigrant, it’s those among us that harbor, employ, and assist these people…they are to blame for this problem. So while we cheer Arizona for enacting its tough laws, we listen to our partisan friends in Washington argue about reform that isn’t really necessary. All we need to do is enforce the laws on the books. But this would require good government, which partisan government isn’t.
So here’s a novel idea. While the partisan state governments are talking about suing the partisan federal government about the health care bill, maybe they can expend some of that “suing energy” filing a suit against our federal government for not living up to its Constitutional duties to defend and protect our borders. The federal government under President Obama will ask the courts to throw out the Arizona law on the grounds that it’s a federal issue that the state has no business trying to regulate. Maybe the state should ask that same court to force the federal government to do the job it is staunchly defending.
Why should Arizona use its new law that allows for the unnecessary harassment of legal citizens while searching for illegal citizens, when it can use court challenges to the new law to force the federal government to do what it refuses to do? We don’t need blathering politicians talking about “reform”. In my mind, a federal government that does what it’s supposed to do IS reform.
At least, that appears to be the motto of our President. While violence spills over the border with Mexico, Obama is more concerned with the mid-term elections. He refuses to address the gaping holes in our borders and the thousands of illegals that are committing crimes on our streets, but he has time to produce a video urging Democrats to maintain their grip on the House and Senate.
In the two-minute and 42-second video released Monday, Obama emphasizes that, “It will be up to each of you to make sure that the young people, African-Americans, Latinos, and women who powered our victory in 2008 stand together once again”.
This makes clear why he won’t address border security with Mexico…he’s afraid he’ll upset his Latino voting base. What kind of logic is that? It’s the kind that puts power before service to the American people.
Obama goes on to belch more of his socialist ideals with, “If you help us make sure that first-time voters in 2008 make their voices heard again in November, then together we will deliver on the promise of change, and hope, and prosperity for generations to come”. Let me translate that for you. “If you bring out the welfare voters again, I’ll give you more welfare”…..how’s that?
So while Obama questions the immigration laws enacted in Arizona, the illegals that the law is designed to contain have this to say about America at a rally held yesterday:
Enough of Obama and the rest of the Washington bunch. This constant attack on the States’ rights reminds me of another time in history. Arizona has a right to defend herself against a problem that the feds have failed to act on. Arizona will do it their way since the feds won’t act. But there are still many issues to solve.
I don’t advocate violence. I certainly would never suggest people lashing out with violence. However, based on Obama’s lack of ability to provide border security and the ensuing threat to our national security that this creates, I don’t see why people wouldn’t take up arms at the border and form patrols to keep the illegals out. While I know some groups have formed to patrol these borders, the time may be here to use force to repel the continuous invasion by Mexican nationals that threaten the security of our nation. This may be something for militia groups to explore. Hopefully, it would send a message to the federal government to get off their collective rears and act on this problem.
This is not about debating amnesty for those illegals that are already here. It’s not about laws that some may protest as invasive to the personal liberties of those Hispanics that are legal or natural residents. It’s about securing our borders and protecting our country, and that is something no government can argue against.
We Have A Law - Obama Won't Enforce It!
President Obama is now spouting off about a newly minted Arizona immigration law that he claims would be discriminatory against legal citizens.
Trying to interfere with States’ rights (imagine that), Obama claims that Washington’s failure to act on immigration reform is causing states like Arizona to be “irresponsible”. Obama claims that this new bill in Arizona will, “…undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe.”
Ok, Mr. President, let’s get something straight….our police departments have for years been apprehending illegal immigrants on our streets, only to have the federal government’s very own Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) decline it’s responsibility to deport these people. In the case of some states like Nevada, where concentrated efforts were made to arrest illegals, INS flat refused to come get them.
If the president want’s to talk about fairness, let’s talk about the States getting stuck with the financial burden of taking care of a problem that the feds should be addressing at the borders. The fed won’t admit that porous borders are a threat to national security; they won’t seal the borders, so the States have to deal with the fallout. What’s fair about that?
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs later explained the Justice Department will monitor “potential civil rights violations” experienced by legal residents.When asked to explain whose rights would be violated, Gibbs said, “Somebody that gets stopped who is legal resident, is a citizen. It’s clear that in the law, if you’re suspected to be (illegal) the law allows you to be stopped. You may be a citizen. That’s what he’s asked the Justice Department to look into, again, if it becomes law.”
I can see where this is going. If a police officer stops someone for a drive-by shooting or a liquor store robbery, they’ll be under threat of federal prosecution for asking the Obama-voting Democrat for something such as a driver’s license to prove that they are in the country legally. Opponents have said if the bill becomes law, enforcement would lead to a variation of racial profiling where Latinos would be questioned repeatedly to establish their legal status. Obama supports those opponents.
However, Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, has stated there’s more opposition to comprehensive changes to immigration now than there was when former President Bush failed on the issue in the latter stages of his presidency.
“I think the American people are not happy with the plans they saw before and they’re not going to be happy with the plans that might come out of the Obama administration,” Sessions said. “Right now we need to be thinking about how to create American jobs. People are out of work. There’s more opposition within the Senate and polling data shows more opposition among the American people than time the bill was brought up last time.”
Here’s a clue-by-four about immigration: Cut off the money supply. Start enforcement actions with the businesses that employ these people. Use federal agents or supply the money for the states to do it. If they can’t work, they will go home. Then the fed can seal the borders. For now, we are forced to deal with a problem that the feds refuse to deal with. Until they do, Obama needs to come up with solutions instead of criticisms. Of course, if Obama could do that, he wouldn’t be blaming Bush for things more than a year after Obama took office.
Click To Enlarge
I'll Get You...And Your Little Dog, Too!
In a move reminiscent of Chicago-style politics….or the Nazi party….Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said that groups inside the United States, including anti-government groups, could be seeking to launch violent attacks. On the day after using the anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing as a springboard for this campaign, Napolitano states, “We’ve always had groups on all sides that have held beliefs that are very strong and express them very vociferously.” All sides? I’d say she is looking at one side – the right.
Let’s not forget that controversial memo from the Department of Homeland Security issued a year ago, warning law enforcement agencies that current economic and political factors could help “right-wing extremist groups” recruit new people.
In an interview with FOX news, Napolitano bristled at even the term “right-wing,” saying it was something she didn’t want to use. When FOX News read some less-controversial lines from the assessment, Napolitano said she agrees that “the threat posed by lone wolves and small terror cells is more pronounced than in past years,” and that “the current economic and political climate has some similarities to the [early] 1990s,” which led to the Oklahoma City bombing.
What is most disturbing is that Napolitano stated that she agrees with a line from that memo, which states, “The economic downturn and the election of the first African-American president present unique drivers for right-wing radicalization and recruitment.”
Unique drivers? Basically, she is spouting the typical liberal lefty spew that all people of conservative values are racist and radicals. What’s next….concentration camps for conservatives?
So goes on to say, “”I think now, having been in the job 15 months, the goal that we need to have is to give local law enforcement tactical intelligence-based threat information that they can act upon…” Basically, arm the police with “intelligence” and let them round up those of us who refuse to be silenced.
First, “government intelligence” is an oxymoron that’s been proven by this administration. Second, President Obama’s long association with a former member of the radical Weather Underground Organization that claimed responsibility for a dozen bombings between 1970 and 1974 should make us all take notice. The former Weatherman, William Ayers, now holds the position of distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois-Chicago. Although never convicted of any crime, he told the New York Times in September 2001, “I don’t regret setting bombs…I feel we didn’t do enough.”
So what is “enough”? Using the Office of the President to appoint someone like Napolitano to go out and use the power of law to detain people who disagree with you? It appears to be headed in that direction. Be careful, fellow patriots, when you hear remarks like these given by Napolitano during a speech at the Oklahoma City National Memorial Museum: “We honor the continued need for vigilance against the hateful ideologies that led to this attack, so that we can recognize their signs in our communities and stand together to defeat them,” she said.
She is going to try and defeat you. Stand strong, fellow patriots.
Those of us who are informed and educated have the ability to see that the current Obama administration is taking us toward a socialist society. Obama and his minions have a radical agenda to transform the way America functions, taking away freedoms and handing over control of our lives to the government.
Those who are still star-struck by Obama and his lying orations refuse to believe that the president and his administration are steering toward more governmental control over our lives. For these people, convincing them has been a lesson in futility, as they will not believe anything they hear from those of higher education, experience, and intellect. As long as they continue to get their free government handout, they are content with the government running their lives. Well, here is something that might change their mind, finally.
For those who do not think our country is heading toward a socialist society, look no further than the plate of food you have in front of you. U.S. regulators are planning a push to gradually cut the amount of salt Americans consume, saying less sodium would reduce deaths from hypertension and heart disease, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday. This will lead to the first legal limits on the amount of salt allowed in processed foods, the newspaper reported. The plan is to be launched this year but officials have not yet set limits on salt.
Still not convinced? The reason these limits are being set is due to a government agency report. This report states that eating too much salt is a major cause of high blood pressure, which the Institute of Medicine, one of the National Academies of Sciences, last week declared a “neglected disease” that costs the U.S. health system $73 billion a year. That’s $73 billion that has to be cut so that some of the bogus math in Obama’s healthcare plan will pan out. If they can control what you eat in an effort to control government health care costs, they can save money to be spent on other pet projects.
This is called the social burden theory. Some activities and lifestyles are riskier than others. These activities and lifestyles end up creating more health care concerns and when treating those concerns cost the taxpayers’ money, the theory is to reduce those concerns and reduce the cost to the taxpayers. Simple, right?
Well guess what Mr. and Mrs. Welfare recipient…your food stamps will only be good for low-sodium foods and your government cheese will be of the low-sodium variety. That doesn’t sound like too bad of a trade-off, at least not if you’re not thinking about what you eat on a daily basis. Consider that a single serving bag of potato chips has more than half the government allowance of sodium, and pretty soon, you’ll realize that you won’t be able to buy anymore chips, mac&cheese, hot dogs….the list goes on.
If you’re still not convinced that Obama’s socialism will take over your life, then think further about the social burden theory. If they outlaw salt…and they will…they will then outlaw cigarettes, outlaw beer, outlaw red meat, and the list goes on. They will then look toward hazardous activities that are risky to your health. Motorcycle riding? No more. Skiing? No more. Swimming? Drowning is the number one cause of death for children in many states, so what do you think will happen to swimming pools?
The government has taken over the banking system. They are taking over the auto industry. They are now going to tightly control what you eat. If you can’t see the socialist road map being created by this, you’re not only in denial, you’re just plain stupid.
April 15th – Tax Day. On this day, hundreds of thousands of people, organized under the banner of Tea Party Patriots, will be engaged in organized protests across our great land. Black, White, American Indian, Asian, Hispanic, men, women….all with one thing in common. They, like our forefathers, are tired of being taxed and not being represented.
Yea, I know, the Tea Party site states that these people are out there to, “…express real concern against reckless government spending…”. I prefer to look at it a different, more complex way. They are being taxed and are not being represented. Wonder why I say that?
Article One of the Constitution provides that Congress consists of a House of Representatives and the Senate, establishes the manner of election and qualifications of members of each House, and outlines legislative procedure and enumerates the powers vested in the legislative branch. Finally, it establishes limits on the powers of both Congress and the states.
A key part of Article One is the term, “Representative”. We elect these people to go to Washington and “represent” us. Instead, they represent the people who have filled their campaign coffers and personal pockets. It’s no secret that the person who raised the most money during a campaign usually wins a campaign. That being said, it is the money trail that is usually represented. Why is that?
We vote them in, that’s why. We buy the bull that is fed to us in campaign ads. We, the People, have allowed this to happen. Now it’s time for We the People to change it. In November, don’t vote for any incumbent, unless some special circumstance applies. Follow the lead of groups like the Tea Party in identifying those who have stood up for your interests, not the corporate interests. Get out and vote!
