It’s Monday, November 24th, 2014…but before we begin, four brief thoughts on The Obamao’s latest totalitarian pronouncement.
First, a question: are the Marxist-in-Chief’s executive overreaches eventualities the Founding Fathers simply overlooked? They obviously understood the threat posed by an imperial presidency. We’re of the mind they simply couldn’t imagine a Senate willing to cede its power and authority to a demagogue, regardless of party affiliation. We have little but contempt for the late Robert Byrd, but one thing’s for certain: he would never have stood for this unconstitutional usurpation of power by any President.
The fact every Progressive in Congress has stood passively by while B. Hussein continues his assault on the Constitution speaks volume about the state of the Dimocratic Party.
Second, a quote from Fielding Cocke on The Obamao’s latest Friday Surprise:
Finally, Obama quoted the Bible: “Scripture tells us we shall not oppress a stranger.”
Scripture also says in Proverbs 6:16: “These six things doth the Lord hate; yea, seven are an abomination unto him: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, a false witness that speaketh lies and he that soweth discord among brethen.”
It’s the last one that Barak Obama excels in.
We’d respectfully disagree; he actually excels in all seven! Fielding’s comment brought to mind the Scripture we quoted in Friday’s edition, Ephesians 6:12: “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
The Obamao definitely fits the bill for the last two.
Third, when it comes to the professionally-caring and their obvious belief America can cure poverty by importing the poor, where do they draw the line? There are well over a billion poverty-stricken individuals in India alone; are we to grant them all sanctuary in the States? If so, how? If not, why not?!? And how can America be expected to cure the world’s ills when, at least according to Liberals’ own assertions, we’ve yet to address the problems of our native-born citizens?
Lastly, in typical fashion, the GOP leadership’s response misses the mark by a mile. Both McConnell and Boehner keep stating they’re opposition to The Obamao’s overreaches are in keeping with the will of the American people. Pshaw; how ’bout because they’re UNCONSTITUTIONAL?!? Government in response to the changing whims of a majority of the electorate is mob rule; which is why the Founding Fathers based the our Republic on a constitution and the rule of law.
Now, here’s The Gouge!
Leading off the Monday edition, writing at The New Media Journal, Nancy Salvato relates how The Obamao’s pronouncements run counter to the central concept of the Constitution,…
“…The enumeration of particular powers was designed to prevent overreach of authority and the separation of powers was to safeguard against any branch or person from becoming tyrannical. Finally, everything was written into a constitution, ensuring a rule of law and not men.
Anyone watching current events through a constitutional lens has clearly identified we are experiencing great insecurity as a nation. Our borders are not safe. Law enforcement agencies are unable to protect us against potential rioters in Ferguson, Missouri, who want vigilante style justice, as opposed to following laws and procedures put in place to protect us against our own passions. Terrorists are beheading Americans on foreign and domestic soil. Our own president invited illegal aliens across our borders and now wants to provide them amnesty, blatantly dismissing the division of powers which grants the legislative branch legislative authority and the executive branch the responsibility of executing the law.
…The preamble to our nation’s rule of law clearly states that “We the People” ordain and establish our Constitution. According to the consent theory of government, the covenant between ruled and ruler ends when the ruler ceases to protect those who consented to his rule…”
Which brings to mind this quote from Thomas Jefferson:
If it comes to that, we’ll do whatever we can to ensure the latter provides far more than the former.
In a related item, the Washington Examiner reports on how the tyrants plan on enacting their latest illegitimate edict:
The Department of Homeland Security has just released new “Policies for the Apprehension, Detention, and Removal of Undocumented Immigrants.” Designed to fill in the details after President Obama’s announcement that at least four million currently illegal immigrants will be given work permits, Social Security numbers and protection from deportation, the DHS guidelines are instructions for the nation’s immigration and border security officers as they administer the president’s directive.
The new priorities are striking. On the tough side, the president wants U.S. immigration authorities to go after terrorists, felons, and new illegal border crossers. On the not-so-tough side, the administration views convicted drunk drivers, sex abusers, drug dealers, and gun offenders as second-level enforcement priorities. An illegal immigrant could spend up to a year in prison for a violent crime and still not be a top removal priority for the Obama administration.
What was it Proverbs said were the seven things the Lord hated? Oh yeah; a proud look…
…a lying tongue…
…hands that shed innocent blood…
…a heart that deviseth wicked imaginations…
…feet that be swift in running to mischief…
…a false witness that speaketh lies…
…and he that soweth discord among brethen:
Next up, courtesy of Townhall.com, Michael Barone hits on what should be the focus of meaningful, serious immigration reform, i.e., not simply a policy to increase the voting base of a particular political party:
“…A better idea is to start all over again rather than patching immigration acts that are now 90, 49 and 28 years old. The United States should follow the successful examples of our Anglosphere cousins, Canada and Australia. They reserve most immigration slots for high-skill applicants who qualify under their point systems. The result: They have more immigration than we do as a share of their populations, and they also have higher test scores and more economic growth. Conservatives might note that both have conservative governments.
America always needs high-skill immigrants. And we don’t need to tie them to specific employers. Let them make their way in what is still, despite over-taxation and over-regulation, our free enterprise system. The country will be richer for it…”
Though we agree with Barone’s central premise, we’d ask him the same question we’ve posed to the WSJ on a number of occasions: can you give us the name of one…just ONE…credible Conservative opposed to controlled, legal immigration? We know any number of Conservatives adamantly against illegal immigration, particularly the uncontrolled, open borders promoted by Progressives. But we’ve yet to hear anyone we know espouse shuttering America to access by the tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free…provided they’re willing to wait in line with everyone else!
Turning to the Whitewash segment, courtesy today of Jeff Foutch, the Old Gray Nag maintains…
“A two-year investigation by the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee has found that the C.I.A. and the military acted properly in responding to the 2012 attack on a United States diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, and asserted no wrongdoing by Obama administration appointees. Debunking a series of persistent allegations hinting at dark conspiracies, the investigation determined that there was no intelligence failure, no delay in sending a C.I.A. rescue team, no missed opportunity for a military rescue, and no evidence the C.I.A. was covertly shipping arms from Libya to Syria…”
Contrary to what the Times would have America believe, Benghazi remains a very big deal.
First, consider the Times, along with the rest of the MSM, is the voice of the Dimocratic Party, acting in a role similar to what Pravda played for the Kremlin; so everything they publish must be viewed through that lens. The issue here was NEVER whether the CIA or Military acted improperly, rather the cover-up of the Administration’s omissions. To whit:
A. Why weren’t the folks in Benghazi relieved, or any attempt made to relieve them?
B. What was Stevens doing there?
C. Why weren’t the Benghazi facilities accorded greater protection and security?
D. Why did the Administration continue to promote the video fable for so long, indeed, to this day?
E. Where was The Obamao during the 7-8 hrs. four Americans were under attack and dying?
The fact remains everyone from the President on down, including Hillary Clinton (and SHE is the key!) and Susan Rice lied their asses off in promoting a clearly concocted yarn about a video-inspired spontaneous demonstration. Why? A an attack which resulted from a “spontaneous demonstration” couldn’t be anticipated. Thus, if the video was to blame, the Administration couldn’t be faulted for failing to provide proper prior protection, not to mention declining to defend the consulate once it was under attack in what was known from the beginning to be a pre-planned act of terror.
The Times has simply thrown out a number of non sequiturs intended to divert attention from the real issues at hand.
Here’s the bottomline:
More importantly, she needs to called to account for her lying come 2016.
And in the “Color Me Nonplussed” segment, this just in from Barbwire.com:
Yet another high profile “gay” activist has been arrested for homosexual assault on a child. This time authorities caught one of the big fish (a rainbow trout?). Terrance Patrick Bean founded the “Human Rights Campaign” (HRC), which is one of the world’s largest, wealthiest and most powerful anti-Christian organizations. To this day he remains on the board of directors. HRC was developed for the sole purpose of pushing the extremist homosexual political agenda. Bean is also a major player for the DNC and a big Obama supporter.
Sounds more like a butt trout to us. What this really proves is the flocking propensities of birds of a feather:
Finally, on the Lighter Side…