There’s Some Dispute

Posted in Politics on March 26th, 2015

Dick Cheney, in an interview published in Playboy, called Obama “the worst president in my lifetime,” and that his damaging legacy will endure.

Not all agree with Cheney on this statementObama Is The Worst President Ever?

That was most certainly a boldly blunt assertion by Mr. Cheney and certain to be inflammatory. It’s definitely a statement that a large number would vehemently dispute. Only Americans and their traditional allies think so pooryl of Obama. Our enemies, both foreign and domestic think otherwise.

Related Reading:

Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance
Cheney: The Untold Story of America's Most Powerful and Controversial Vice President
America: Imagine a World without Her
Snark! The Herald Angels Sing: Sarcasm, Bitterness and  the Holiday Season (Snark Series)
Obama's Enemies List: How Barack Obama Intimidated America and Stole the Election

Works For Who Exactly?

Posted in Humor, Politics on March 22nd, 2015

But just who is it working for?
ObamaCare Is Works For Who Exactly?

Obama periodically likes to claim that the ACA aka ObamaCare is working. My question, given its near universal unpopularity as a whole, constant “issues,” and the plethora of special exemptions from- and delays in its various, convoluted provisions and edicts, is just who is it working for.

Perhaps the boy, whenever he says that ObamaCare is working, means for the thousands of new IRS agents it called for. They’re the only ones that seem to be benefiting from it.

Related Reading:

Obama's America: Unmaking the American Dream
To Forgive Design: Understanding Failure
How I Built A $37 Million Insurance Agency In Less Than 7 Years
Obama's Enemies List: How Barack Obama Intimidated America and Stole the Election
Homo sayswhaticus

Will AZ Geld Obama?

Posted in Politics on March 20th, 2015

az-castration-tools It looks rather more likely than not that Arizona will geld Obama or, at least emasculate his ability to harm Arizona through his barely quasi-legal Executive Orders or directive from his DoJ. Last week on March 10, 2015 Arizona’s House of Representatives voted in favor of House Bill 2368 (HB 2368), which bans the use of AZ personnel or monies to enforce, administer, or cooperate with any of them.

So, politically speaking in Arizona, it looks probable that Obama’s testicles will be tied off, wither and rot, and fall off.

Obama supporters and Statists, have quickly put up the spurious and ignorant argument that HB 2368 violates the US Constitution’s, Article VI, Clause 2 (the “Supremacy Clause”):

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

But even a passing knowledge of SCOTUS jurisprudence and Constitutional Law shows that Arizona’s HB 2368 in no way violates the Supremacy Clause because, supremacy or not, the SCOTUS via the “Anti-Commandeering Doctrine” set forth in their 1842 Prigg v. Pennsylvania, 1981 Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc., 1992 New York v. United States, and 1997 Printz v. United States decisions has unequivocally stated that the federal government cannot legally commandeer legislative processes of the States by directly compelling them to enact and enforce a federal regulatory program by demanding that those States’ governments to undertake targeted, affirmative, coercive duties.

Oh please pay special attention to Prigg v. Pennsylvania, as it stated that the federal government could not force states to implement or carry out the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793.

In other, simpler words, the Federal government cannot legally compel any of the States to spend their resources in the furtherance of any federal mandate, regulation, or even law. The Supremacy Clause ensures that the States can’t contravene federal edicts but the Anti-Commandeering Doctrine requires that the federal government enforce those edicts with federal resources instead of compelling the States to use theirs to do so.

Hence, in point of legal fact, Arizona didn’t need to limit HB 2368 to merely those edicts spawned within the Executive. The bill would be equally valid on resting upon proven, sound legal grounds if it had include legitimate federal laws enacted by Congress as well.

Now it just remains to be seen how many other states shall go reaching for their gelding knives or similar tools…

Related Reading:

Trust Betrayed: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the Selling Out of America's National Security
The Age of Federalism: The Early American Republic, 1788-1800
Net Neutrality or Net Neutering: Should Broadband Internet Services Be Regulated
The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America
The Complete Idiot's Guide to U.S. Government and Politics (Idiot's Guides)