Friday, November 21, 2014

Obama: Kneel Before Zod – Obama’s Amnesty Speech

The following article by Ben Shapiro was posted on Breitbart.com last night shortly after president Obama’s official announcement of his constitutional power grab (executive amnesty speech).  I read it with my jaw wide open most of the time as I realized that I had some of the same thoughts that Mr. Shapiro expressed while I was watching the speech.  I said some of the same thoughts, not all; this young man Shapiro is literally brilliant, and he definitely knows how to say what’s on his mind.

This article is not the shortest chapter in the book, but you’ve got to read it.  And let me know what you think (comment) if you’re so inclined. Thanks.

The following article by Ben Shapiro was posted on Breitbart.com last night shortly after president Obama’s official announcement of his constitutional power grab (executive amnesty speech).  I read it with my jaw wide open most of the time as I realized that I had some of the same thoughts that Mr. Shapiro expressed while I was watching the speech.  I said some of the same thoughts, not all; this young man Shapiro is literally brilliant, and he definitely knows how to say what’s on his mind.

This article is not the shortest chapter in the book, but you’ve got to read it all.  And let me know what you think (comment) if you’re so inclined. Thanks.

 

by Ben Shapiro 20 Nov 2014, 6:55 PM PDT

On Thursday night, President Obama delivered his address to the nation on his executive amnesty. It was historic, both in its scope and in its dishonesty: the speech represented a closely-woven and incredible tapestry of falsehood, exposited with a straight face by the greatest liar in modern American history. To those versed in immigration and constitutional law, watching Obama lay out his program felt like watching a madman describe, with preternaturally perfect sincerity, how the moon was constructed of cheese: you know the argument is untrue, but it’s incredible to watch its dogged exposition.

Obama opened with a glowing talk about the wonders of immigration – generalizations with which virtually [all] Americans agree, as is his wont.

Then the lies began. Posing as an immigration hardliner, Obama stated that he felt for “families who enter our country the right way and play by the rules,” and who “watch others flout the rules” (of course, Obama was mere moments away from rewarding those who flout the rules and punishing those who play by them). He then explained that businesses exploited cheap immigrant labor (of course, Obama was about to announce wage pressure downward in the form of amnesty). He summed up with this incredible sentence:

All of us take offense to anyone who reaps the rewards of living in America without taking on the responsibilities of living in America.

Well, no. Not all of us, given that the Democratic Party draws its voting base from those who wish to reap the rewards of living in America’s generous welfare state without taking on the responsibilities of doing so.

Obama continued with his fibs about how he had secured the southern border, citing a drop in illegal border crossings – a drop caused almost entirely by Obama’s weak economy (Obama himself dated the immigration drop to 2007, when President Bush was in office). He pooh-poohed the “brief spike in unaccompanied children being apprehended at our border,” and said that “the number of such children is now actually lower than it’s been in nearly two years.” The notion that there has been a decrease in unaccompanied children crossing our border, according to FactCheck.org, is false.

This all prefaced Obama’s big power grab. In true dictatorial fashion, Obama laid out how the legislative process had failed – and then noted that he had to do what he had to do.

Now, I continue to believe that the best way to solve this problem is by working together to pass that kind of common sense law. But until that happens, there are actions I have the legal authority to take as President – the same kinds of actions taken by Democratic and Republican Presidents before me – that will help make our immigration system more fair and more just.

Obama has no such legal authority. He knows it. Obama’s executive amnesty is different in scope and kind from anything before it. Neither Ronald Reagan nor George H.W. Bush pursued their amnesty programs in the complete absence of Congressional legislation. No president has ever legalized some 7 million illegal immigrants, as Obama has done over the past three years. This is unprecedented. Read more at breitbart.com.

 

Ted Cruz: Midterms Were ‘Referendum on Amnesty,’ Obama Just Ignoring

Go Ted go, but we’re fighting an uphill battle on a treadmill – Especially with the House and Senate lead by Boehner and McConnell.

Published on Nov 19, 2014 by FastNews!!

Senator Ted Cruz joined Megyn Kelly tonight to rail against President Obama‘s planned action on immigration. And Cruz argued Obama’s acting particularly despotic, not just because he’s taking executive action without the approval of Congress, but because he is flagrantly ignoring the message the American people sent in the midterm elections.

Cruz argued that the midterms were actually a “referendum on amnesty” and that Obama is discarding the will of the people and becoming an “unaccountable monarch.”

Cruz also pointed out that 1) Obama has said elections have consequences when they go his way, and 2) several Democrats who supported his immigration plan in the Senate were voted out. He again proposed that the Republican-held Senate should threaten to block every single Obama nominee if Obama attempts to act on his own.

The Straw Man Interview

From friend and GTP member Jim Sharp:

theconversation.com

Tonight, I had the pleasure of interviewing Straw Man. Mr. Man has been the object of much criticism from President Obama and the Democratic Party. He’s been in hiding until recently, for his own safety. Now, vindicated by this latest election, he’s agreed to speak with me tonight.

ME: Good evening, Straw Man, and welcome.

You’ve endured numerous vitriolic assaults, over the years. From the classic “You want to throw granny over the cliff,” to “You want old people on social security to choose between heating and eating dog food.”

They say you don’t care about the environment; that you’re for “dirty air and dirty water.” And, of course, that you’re a “climate-change denier.”

Many say you want little children on welfare to starve. Then there’s your supposed “war on women,” your hatred for gays and minorities. And, of course, you hate puppies … the list goes on.

My question to you, sir, is how you do it? – How have you weathered these withering politics of personal destruction?

STRAW: Well, thank you, Serv. At first, I really let this stuff get to me. I got defensive – quiet and introverted. I went around mumbling to myself, asking myself, “How did it come to this?” How did someone like me – who wants everyone to live a good, productive life, to be a good citizen, to experience the blessings of liberty – come to be so misunderstood, even despised?

Nothing in my life prepared me for that. Finally, I started to realize – it’s not me, it’s THEM! THEY hate me for the very things I stand for. It’s their job to deconstruct my life. They were trying to make me feel bad. They wanted to get people to hate me. It’s a power grab. I learned not to take it personally.

Now, finally, other people are starting to see that too – my critics were SO over-the-top that people began to sympathize with me. They look in the mirror, and see me. My critics SO over-reached, and SO exposed themselves, that now I’m starting to feel safe to be seen again in public, even to speak out.

ME: You’ve been disavowed even by your supposed friends, the Republicans. Aren’t you afraid of being back-stabbed?

STRAW: I know, I know – the Republicans wouldn’t come out and defend me. Some did, here and there, but they certainly didn’t make a concerted effort. It’s not that they hate me; I think they were just afraid to say anything, for fear of being laughed at or criticized.

Some people tried to protect me – the Tea Party and such; conservatives, and some corporations. I appreciate that. But they were silenced, as much as possible, by the Obama Democrats. For some reason, his corporations were considered okay, but my corporations are “dark,” – not to be trusted.

Thing is, the Obama Democrats, they NEVER talk to me. They never even consider my real point of view! They couldn’t tell you what my real point of view is! They exaggerate and stereotype all my positions!

It’s what they have to do to make themselves feel special.  Read more at the405media.com.

FBN’s Melissa Francis: I Was ‘Silenced’ at CNBC for Questioning Obamacare

Opinion:  The person who most disrespects the office of the president is the one who occupies that office.

As quoted in the NY Post, a CNBC rep said, “That’s laughable, but we take notice, because as the fastest-growing network in prime time, we’re always on the lookout for high quality comedy writers and actresses.” (Hat tip: bizpacreview.com)

Francis appeared on The Kelly File on Fox News on Monday night and discussed this debacle further:

 

 

 

Amnesty, The King and His Pawns

After all he’s said over the years, Obama would never do executive amnesty, now would he?

Sorry, no crown, he doesn't want us to know he's king. Photo credit: donkeyhotey.com

.
Watch Obama Make the Case Against Executive Amnesty

No Surrender on Immigration

Who will protect the nation, if not us?

By Sen. Jeff Sessions * Nov. 10, 2014
.
On Election Day, Americans roared in protest against the President’s open-borders extremism. They rallied behind candidates who will defend the rule of law and put the needs of American workers and families first.Exit polls were unequivocal. More than 3 in 4 voters cited immigration as an important factor in their vote, believed that U.S. workers should get priority for jobs, and opposed the President’s plans for executive amnesty. These voters were right and just in their demands.
But President Obama made clear that he would attempt to void the election results—and our laws—by moving forward with his executive amnesty decree. Read more at politico.com.

 

 

Gruber’s Obamacare Comments Expose What’s Wrong With Liberalism

At the end of the day, liberals not only believe that they’re smarter than the public, but that they have a better sense of what’s good for the people than Americans themselves.”

Photo credit: Libertarian Today

MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, a leading architect of President Obama’s healthcare law, is under fire for recently surfaced comments in which he conceded that to pass Obamacare, supporters relied on “the stupidity of the American voter” to hide its actual effects.

My colleague Tim Carney has already written about how the comments are just the latest reminder of how the law was built on a foundation of lies. But there is a broader message in all of this — that Gruber’s comments get to the heart of what’s wrong with liberalism.

Read more at washingtonexaminer.com.

Let’s Work Together

Attribution: Michael Ramirez, Investors.com

Trey Gowdy on Gruber Comments – Stupidity of the Public

In this video clip from Tuesday’s The Kelly File, Congressman Trey Gowdy and Megyn Kelly weigh in on MIT professor and Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber’s remarks on the deceit used to pass the Affordable Care Act and what he refers to as the “stupidity” of the American public.  After this latest scandal broke both Gruber and the White House tried to walk things back by saying that he was speaking off the cuff.  Kelly refuted this argument by showing another video where Gruber also demonstrated his contempt for the “stupid” public.  It kind of makes one wonder when the professor will run out of cuffs.  Kelly then played a clip from December, 2009 where then senator, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and strong Obamacare advocate Max Baucus referred to professor Gruber as a “credible and unbiased source.”  It pains me to mention that professor, or should I say architect Gruber, was paid almost $400,000 by the White House (you and I) for his work on Obamacare.

Kelly brought on Congressman Trey Gowdy a Republican from South Carolina in the second half of the video.  When asked his reaction to the Gruber affair he opened by saying:  “I can’t get past the irony to get to the arrogance.  The most ‘transparent’ administration since the continents shifted had to rely on artifice and deception to pass its signature piece of legislation. You can’t make that up. He had to lie to people, and then he justified it … So I can’t even get past the irony of that to get to the arrogance of him calling our fellow citizens stupid,” said Gowdy.  He closed out his comments on this scandal by saying:  “… So my fellow citizens have to keep in mind, fool me once, shame on you, ever fool me again, shame on us.”

Gowdy is chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi and Kelly did not miss this opportunity to ask him about the committee’s progress. He responded:  “We have a very robust investigative plan that will kick off in December, and Megyn, I can tell you my goal was to have an investigation where witnesses who had never been talked to before felt comfortable coming forward because of the seriousness of our investigation and that is precisely what is happening.  So it is not with a lot of fanfare, and there aren’t a lot of public hearings, but trust me when I tell you we are making tremendous progress.”

Seven Reasons Net Neutrality Is A Dumb Idea

by Ben Shapiro 10 Nov 2014

On Monday, President Obama announced that he would be pushing the Federal Communications Commission to begin enforcing “net neutrality” – a policy by which internet service providers would be forced to load all web sites at the same speed. While the internet works just fine as is, President Obama believes we’re mere moments away from the system breaking down barring massive government intervention:

We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas. I believe the FCC should create a new set of rules protecting net neutrality and ensuring that neither the cable company nor the phone company will be able to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what you can do or see online.

If this sounds suspiciously like the language President Obama used with regard to health insurance in his pitch for Obamacare – unlimited access and zero scarcity, as dictated by the government – that’s because it is. Free market economics generally create higher supply, lower price, and better service. But President Obama believes that markets inevitably fail.

Here are the top seven reasons government-enforced net neutrality is an awful idea:

We Already Have Net Neutrality. As a result of competition between internet service providers in the marketplace, ISPs generally do not discriminate against highly-trafficked websites. If they did – holding a figurative gun to the head of those websites by throttling back speed to those websites – consumers would dump those ISPs in favor of others. Competition ensures that companies do not have the leverage to discriminate against particular websites.

Read the other six reasons on breitbart.com.

Election 2014: Judge Jeanine Pirro Spikes the Ball

Judge Jeanine Pirro celebrates the results of the 2014 election, reveling in the historic reversals of Democrat fortunes across the country, as well as the rejection and repudiation of the president’s make-believe “war on women”. The endless repetition of that lie simply didn’t work for the Democrats. Bummer. What do they do when that tactic fails?

Astonishingly, the president seems to be claiming a mandate based on the 2/3 of voters who didn’t bother to show up at the polls! This is delusional. This is surreal.

For the next two years, the bow wave of bipartisan bills that Harry Reid buried in his desk are going to be showing up on President Obama’s desk. We’ll soon see which is the real “Party of No”.

It’s over, Mr. President, says the Judge. The American people now see right through you!

Article at westernfreepress.com.

Surprise Surprise – NYT: GOP Establishment Gears up for Civil War Against Tea Party

Look folks, we went into this with our eyes wide open (at least those of us who are still breathing).  We all knew this was going to happen.  But wouldn’t you rather be fighting an army of cry babies (Boehners) than an army of Harry Reids?  So let’s get to work! – ADB

By Jeremy Peters, New York Times Nov. 8, 2014  (story below graphic):

Photo credit: Breitbart News

WASHINGTON — As most Republicans were taking a victory lap the morning after the elections, a group of conservatives huddled anxiously in a conference room not far from Capitol Hill and agreed that now is the time for confrontation, not compromise and conciliation.

Despite Republicans’ ascension to Senate control and an expanded House majority, many conservatives from the party’s activist wing fear that congressional leaders are already being too timid with President Obama.

They do not want to hear that government shutdowns are off the table or that repealing the Affordable Care Act is impossible — two things Republican leaders have said in recent days.  Read more at nytimes.com.

Return of the Zombie Congress

The midterms are over, but the fight has just begun. Hold Republicans’ feet to the fire.”The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” – Thoms Jefferson

Jim DeMint / @JimDeMint / November 05, 2014

Photo: Gage Skidmore/Creative Commons

With the midterm elections just behind us, Americans might think they can finally stop worrying about politics for a while. Not so fast! Now is when they need to be more vigilant than ever.

Although dozens of politicians were replaced with fresh faces on Election Day, the losers don’t have to vacate their offices for two months. That means they can keep on voting in a “lame duck” session of Congress.

While “lame duck” is the standard parlance in D.C., I prefer the more colorful term “Zombie Congress,” popularized in recent years by George Will and others. It more aptly conveys the peril of the situation. Zombie legislators are those unhappy senators and representatives who have been voted out of office, yet still stagger dutifully back to Washington for a month or so before Christmas break.  ‘Tis the season when they are most dangerous.

Unlike their B-movie counterparts, these zombies don’t seek brains, though they could probably use some. With no electorate to appease, the newly politically “deceased” members have no incentive to restrain their more base urges to feast upon the hard-earned tax dollars of the living.

Unfortunately, lame duck sessions have become more common in recent years and have been used to rush through liberal policies while most Americans are focused on the holidays. Obamacare was rammed through the Senate on Christmas Eve in 2009. Other lame ducks were used to pass bailouts, debt limit increases, big spending bills, special-interest tax breaks and even an ill-advised arms treaty with Russia.

Lame duck lawmakers could use this year’s post-election session to push through a costly omnibus spending bill … with total impunity. Those who want to further burden Americans by taxing their Internet purchases also are contemplating the chance to ram through the misleadingly titled “Marketplace Fairness Act.” The “fairness” here means you send more money to the government!  Read more at dailysignal.com.

Some Say This is an ‘Election about Nothing’ No, It’s An Election About Everything

At long last, the conventional wisdom about the 2014 midterms is here: It’s an election about nothing.

Obama votes early in Chicago, October 20, 2014. NEWSCOM

Nov 3, 2014, Vol. 20, No. 08 • By STEPHEN F. HAYES

The Washington Post may have been first in declaring the coming midterms “kind of—and apologies to Seinfeld here—an election about nothing.” But the Daily Beast chimed in: “America seems resigned to a Seinfeld election in 2014—a campaign about nothing.” And New York magazine noted (and embraced) the cliché: The midterm election “has managed to earn a nickname from the political press: the ‘Seinfeld Election,’ an election about nothing.”

Soon enough this description was popping up everywhere—the New Republic, the Los Angeles Times, the Christian Science Monitor, Bloomberg, Politico, and many others. The 2014 Midterms, the Seinfeld Election.

Others posited something even worse. “The 2014 campaign has been the most boring and uncreative campaign I can remember,” wrote New York Times columnist David Brooks. That wasn’t harsh enough for Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post, who went further. The election isn’t just “boring,” he wrote, “it’s vapid and inconsequential.”

The big television networks seem to agree. The signature newscasts of ABC, NBC, and CBS have barely found the upcoming elections worthy of notice. According to the Media Research Center, ABC’s World News Tonight didn’t run a single story about the midterms between September 1 and October 20. Over that same seven-week period, NBC and CBS evening newscasts ran just 11 and 14 stories, respectively. (It probably goes without saying that the networks found the prospective Democratic triumph in the 2006 midterms much more compelling. Over the same time period that year, NBC ran 65 stories about the midterms, CBS ran 58, and ABC ran 36.)

We have a different view.

Not only is this election not about nothing, it is being fought over exactly the kinds of things that ought to determine our elections.

It’s about the size and scope of government. It’s about the rule of law. It’s about the security of the citizenry. It’s about competence. It’s about integrity. It’s about honor [Bold type, mine].

Read more at WeeklyStandard.com.

Can Obama Reboot?

Does he even want to?

By GLENN THRUSH and CARRIE BUDOFF BROWN  -  November 02, 2014

Barack Obama is antsy. His aides can see it when he alights from Air Force One from the all-too-occasional campaign trips he has taken this fall. There’s a sigh, an unhappy-camper body language when he finds himself back in the depressing slipstream of Ebola confabs and national-security-crisis-of-the-day meetings. The vibe, according to people in his orbit, is not so much of being checked out as of being fed up.

“[I] do like campaigning. … It’s fun,” Obama said on Thursday, speaking wistfully at a rally for Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mike Michaud in Maine. But the Michaud event was the exception, not the rule. “There have been $2 billion in ads shitting on the president and no one to defend him,” a senior administration official told us. “He is very fired up to get this campaign behind him, to run through the tape.”  Read more at politico.com.

Next Page »