No Executive Amnesty

So the Scofflaw-in-Chief is going to commandeer the American airwaves tonight and jabber about how, through executive overreach, he’s going to countermand and overthrow the laws duly enacted by Congress by granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.

NOTE: Obama’s handlers and overseers, along with many of his remaining followers, object to the word “Amnesty” but not to the meaning of his acts in this matter.

What Obama’s executive amnesty really means is:

  • The boy will once again prove himself a liar by not drawing a distinction between conscious and inadvertent violators of America’s immigration laws as he repeatedly claimed we must do.
  • He’ll  cause yet another surge of illegals from Central and South American countries, just as his previous suspension of enforcement action against the so-called Dreamers in June of 2012 did.
  • The boy’s reported plan would legalize as permanent U.S. residents many tens of thousands of illegal alien criminals – ones that are criminal far beyond merely being violators of immigration law. Like his previous actions, Obama’s amnesty would include: murderers, rapists, kidnappers, and a host of other criminals whose offenses the Obama Regime doesn’t consider “serious.”
  • His actions, if allowed to stand, will cost the American taxpayers tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars a year since most the recipients of the boy’s amnesty will be uneducated, unskilled, poverty-stricken individuals who will instantly qualify for any and all means-tested social programs on the books.

Thankfully but not unexpectedly, Congress – with the stereotypical exception of the lame-duck democrats in the Senate – are not taking Obama’s attempt at gross executive overreach and infringement of the constitutionally mandated Separation of Powers lying down. They are already moving to defund those parts of the federal bureaucracy which would be needed to implement Obama’s planned executive amnesty.

This is, in my opinion, a moderately good response but it is difficult to fully realize and contains more form than function due to the bureaucracies in question having a backlog of various supplies and means to implement, in the near-term at least, Obama’s atrocity. I believe that America would be better served if Congress thought less about “No Executive Amnesty” and much more about “No Amnesty For The Executive.”

No Amnesty for the Executive
No Amnesty For The Executive

Instead of merely defunding those portions of the ICE that would allow Obama to legalize these illegal aliens, Congress should also defund all portions of the US Secret Service that do not direct pertain to safeguarding the payment and financial systems of the United States.

Let we, the People, who are the true law of- and keepers of justice in the land, decide whether or not to extend amnesty to Obama. 😉

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

Pelosi On Hamas

Nancy Pelosi - Eugenicist, Racist, Socialist, TraitorDemocrat House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi actually told Candy Crowley on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, July 27th, 2014 that the United States should consider seeing the Hamas terrorist organization the way the government of Qatar does, as a “humanitarian organization.” That’s right; according to Pelosi, Hamas shouldn’t be considered a terrorist organization, they should be considered a humanitarian one.

Pelosi’s decompensation and delusional behavior would be funny were it not for the fact that the withered cunt is House Minority Leader and is only slightly twisting the views of virtually all the Liberals and Progressives.

To be fair, however, this was CNN she was working with. Contradicting the picture that they’ve so painstakingly made of Hamas wouldn’t be in the cunt’s best political interests.

CNN's Portrait of Hamas
CNN’s Portrait Of Hamas

My fellow Americans, please keep it firmly in mind that, as we come into the 2014 midterm elections, every single vote for a Democrat – at any level of government – is a vote for: Muslim Terrorism, the Caliphate, Islamism both here and abroad, antisemitism, and the next Sho’ah. Those who cast their votes in this manner should be treated by we, the People as exactly what they are and with extreme prejudice.

Also keep firmly in mind the fact that every vote not cast against a Democrat is also a vote for: Muslim Terrorism, the Caliphate, Islamism both here and abroad, antisemitism, and the next Sho’ah. In this instance, your vote is your voice and, if good men and women stay silent, evil will be victorious once again and the souls of the silently complicit will fair little better than those who actively supported evil.

Better by far for each of us to stain our hands with the blood of the guilty than to stain our souls with the blood of the innocent.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

2014 QDR Rejected

As legislated by Congress in the 1997 NDAA, the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) is a study by the United States Department of Defense (DoD that analyzes strategic objectives of- and potential military threats to the US. The Quadrennial Defense Review Report is the main public document describing the United States’ military doctrine, strategies, and capabilities.

For the first time since its inception the QDR report has been rejected. Rep. Howard McKeon (R-CA) Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee found that Secretary of Defense, Charles Hagel’s 2014 report to not meet the legal requirements for such documents.

I appreciate the work that has gone into this QDR. A rigorous analysis and debate that takes place every four years as the review is put together should be immensely valuable to planners and senior commanders. Unfortunately, the product the process produced this time has more to do with politics than policy and is of little value to decision makers. For that reason, I will require the Department to re-write and re-submit a compliant report. In defiance of the law, this QDR provides no insight into what a moderate-to-low risk strategy would be, is clearly budget driven, and is shortsighted. It allows the President to duck the consequences of the deep defense cuts he has advocated and leaves us all wondering what the true future costs of those cuts will be.

— Rep. Howard McKeon (R-CA)
Chairman, House Armed Services Committee

Chairman McKeon’s issues with the 2014 QDR were three-fold: the law requires the QDR to identify resources not included in the Pentagon’s 5 year spending plan yet the report didn’t do so; the 2014 QDR was too shortsighted, looking out only 5 years, instead of the 20 years required by law; and this QDR accepts additional and elevated risks when the law requires the QDR to offer a low-to-moderate risk plan.

Essentially, while the QDR should have been an opportunity for Defense Secretary Charles Hagel to lay out his vision to refine defense strategy and to tell how the Defense Department will adapt the joint force to support that vision, it was instead a political document and, therefor, the House Armed Services Committee rejected it as fundamentally not meeting the legal requirements placed upon this accounting.

Personally, I think this was the right course of action and one that was overdue but not at all surprising in the need for it. As Chairman McKeon has noted, the QDR has become less and less compliant as time goes has gone by. It was past time to fix this issue.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | |

Impeaching Holder

Holder Contempt - I've got a noose with the boy's name on it. It's a shame I'll never get to use it.Rep. Pete Olson (R-TXs) and 10 other House Republicans have drafted four articles of impeachment against Holder. They plan on introducing these articles of impeachment as early as today, though the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) won’t commit to moving forward with any of the resolutions of impeachment.

Yet Rep. Goodlatte has little or argument with the content of these resolutions. He’s just unlikely to act upon them.

Under Attorney General Holder’s watch, there has been a lack of leadership and a politicization of the Justice Department. Scandals from the Fast and Furious gunwalking operation to the seizure of reporters’ emails and phone records in national security leaks investigations have undermined the Department’s credibility and the American people’s trust. Attorney General Holder has also politicized the rule of law by refusing to enforce laws he doesn’t like.”

The only way to restore credibility at the Department of Justice is through an improvement in the quality of leadership. President Obama should make a change in the leadership of the Department of Justice to restore the confidence of the American people in our nation’s top law enforcement agency.

This combined with the expected utter lack of support from Speaker John Boehner (“R”-OH) means that the efforts to impeach and remove Attorney General Eric Holder from office are most likely doomed from the start and that Holder will remain protected from the consequences of his myriad high crimes and misdemeanors.

A Moral And Philosophical Divide

Perhaps prophetically, the House is divided morally and philosophically on the matter of Impeaching Holder or Obama.  The House Republicans fall into two camps: those who adhere to the philosophy of Deontology and those who follow the dictates of Consequentialism. With the Senate, still being firmly in the hands of the Democrats, very unlikely to convict Holder no matter what he has done there is no point beyond doing the right thing for its own sake for the House to indict him.

Obviously, the deontologists want to do the right thing because it’s the right thing to do and the fact that nothing will come of it doesn’t really come into the picture insofar as they’re concerned.

Conversely but equally obviously, the consequentialists want to do the right thing but only if doing so will produce a beneficial and ethical result, which any attempt to impeach Holder won’t do since, even of the House indicts, the Senate won’t convict.

With such a fundamental philosophical and ethical divide, the House is unlikely to take any action against Holder.

The Politics of Hate and Othering

Of course, one must not make the mistake of attributing too much devotion to people, especially professional politicians. Most people don’t have a strong tendency towards letting their ethics and morality cause them to put themselves at risk. This is even more true of professional politicians since they want to keep their jobs.

This tendency towards amorality in favor of survival is exacerbated by Obama’s success, with the aid of the ever-complicit Lamestream Media, in the politics of division, hate, and othering. He’s has both successfully redefined bipartisanship and labelled any GOP dissent from his agenda as obstructionist, classist, and racist. That inherently has a chilling effect on many Republican politicians – as Obama and his handlers meant it to.

This has, from what little we’re allowed to know about him, has always been Obama’s preferred modus operandi. He divides people, gets his side to think of the opposition as the Other, and gets them to vote against them rather than to vote for him.

~*~

So, for both philosophical and materialist reasons, I sincerely doubt that the impeachment of Eric Holder will move forward at all. Most likely it won’t even be heard or debated by the House Judiciary Committee Chairman.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

A Test Of Loyalty

Obama - a cult of personality and race, not substance or characterThe upcoming Congressional vote on whether or not to give Obama permission to embroil America in Syria’s civil war may well come down to a test of loyalty for his followers and fellow travelers within the beltway.

Many, even among the Democrats in Congress, can find no earthly reason for the US to engage Assad’s government aside from protecting Obama’s nonexistent credibility.

Congresswoman (D.C. Delegate) Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) made this point bluntly clear in a recent interview.

Del. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON (D-DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA): I happen to believe there has to be a response. I do, I do believe in crimes against humanity need to be addressed, and I am, I can’t believe that the only way to address it is a slight bombing which will somehow punish somebody or deter somebody. I don’t know if there’s some way other than a military way to address this.

BILL PRESS, HOST: You’re kind to join us this morning, Congresswoman. Let me just ask you one final question before we let you go. If, as you said, if the vote were held today, the president would probably not win it. If he doesn’t win it, a week from now, do you think the president will be justified in taking action on his own, you know, unilaterally with Congress having voted against it?

HOLMES NORTON: No, oh boy, no. I think it’ll be like the red line trap. He said if the red line you cross it. I think once you say, “I’m going to Congress,” you can’t say, “Okay, I’m going to do it anyway.”

PRESS: Yeah, yeah, I don’t…

HOLMES NORTON: So I think he’ll be in real trouble if he then does it anyway. No president has done that.

PRESS: It’s not an easy decision for any of you, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton.

HOLMES NORTON: Oh, and I’d like to say, Bill, that if he gets saved at all, I think it’ll be because, it’ll be because of loyalty of Democrats. They just don’t want to see him shamed and humiliated on the national stage.

PRESS: Yeah, right.

HOLMES NORTON: At the, at the moment, that’s the only reason I would vote for it if I could vote on it.

That pretty much sums up the overall position of Congress. The only reason that Obama might get Congressional permission for his latest foreign adventure is that many don’t want to maim or destroy the boy’s cult of personality, irrespective of the what the costs of maintaining it are to our nation.

I’m afraid, however, that I don’t share Del. Holmes Norton’s confidence that Obama would abide by “No” vote by Congress, especially if the House votes “no” and the Senate votes “yes” or even comes close to voting in favor it. There’s always the possibility that the House could vote against a US military strike and Obama could go forward with it anyway. Obama and some others have already argued that the boy would have the constitutional authority to order strikes without Congress’ authorization, though how they come up with idea beggars reason.

Remember also that Obama is still begging for foreign authorization for striking Syria in aid of Al-Qaeda and the other jihadis rebelling against Assad’s government. As with Libya, this is all the boy’s ever felt he needed to send in American troops.

Tags: | | | | | | | | | | | |