Did the Supreme Court get it wrong..?
Today the U.S. Supreme Court released some more of its rulings. This week it just happened to be Arizona – and the state’s immigration law that states everyone who wants to vote must have some proof of his or her U.S. citizenship before electing to do so.
The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states could not, on their own require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up easier.
The justices voted 7-2 to throw out Arizona’s voter-approved requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal “Motor Voter” voter registration law.
Fundamentally with all research still being sourced – we have a rather unique problem with this type ruling. First notice that it was a “voter-approved requirement” which still leaves the IX Amendment something that consequently is basically unknown to most Americans. The Ninth Amendment is referred to as a construction amendment. Basically meaning that Madison’s statement that the Amendment states but a rule of construction, making clear that a Bill of Rights might not by implication be taken to increase the powers of the national government in areas not enumerated, and that it does not contain within itself any guarantee of a right or a proscription of an infringement.
Therefore, without further adieu here is what the 9th (Ninth) Amendment is saying:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Rather, the Ninth Amendment shows a belief of the Constitution’s authors that fundamental rights exist that are not expressly enumerated in the first eight amendments and an intent that the list of rights included there not be deemed exhaustive.
“Today’s decision sends a strong message that states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements on top of federal law,” said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and lead counsel for the voters who challenged Proposition 200.
This is a clear and unobstructed view of how special interests groups collude with the federal government in matters of their wanting. Notice that it states Nina Perales, “…Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) and lead counsel for the voters who challenged Proposition 200.
We are sure that she is referring to the other forms of identification warranted by the before mentioned “Motor Voter” voter registration law. Therefore, for those interested we now move to the X (Tenth) Amendment which states:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The Tenth Amendment was intended to confirm the understanding of the people at the time the Constitution was adopted, that powers not granted to the United States were reserved to the States or to the people. It added nothing to the instrument as originally ratified.
The past decade or so has seen a widespread increase in legislation addressing voting procedures, often taking the form of laws imposing voter identification requirements. Although many states now have their own laws addressing voting procedures and ID requirements, at the federal level the Help America Vote Act, or HAVA, was passed in 2002 in response to some of the controversial issues that arose during the 2000 presidential elections.
Under HAVA, individuals who are registering to vote must provide their current valid driver’s license number, if they have one. If they do not have one, then they must provide the last four digits of their Social Security Number (SSN). If they do not have either of these forms of identification, then they will have to provide proof of identity at the polling booth when they go to vote.
Last, but not least, voters should be aware that even if they fail to provide proof of identity at the polling booth, they must still be allowed to vote under HAVA. However, their votes will be considered provisional, and will not be counted in the results unless the voter’s identity is confirmed in a timely manner. Additionally, every voter is entitled to know if his or her vote was counted or not. The law facilitates this by requiring each state to develop a system whereby provisional voters may access, for free, information as to the status of their provisional vote.
But where is the Reform?
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”
— U.S. Const. amendment XIV, § 1
Every year, 300,000 to 400,000 children are born to illegal immigrants in the United States. Despite the foreign citizenship and illegal status of the parent, the executive branch of the U.S. government automatically recognizes these children as U.S. citizens upon birth. The same is true of children born to tourists and other aliens who are present in the United States in a legal but temporary status. Since large-scale tourism and mass illegal immigration are relatively recent phenomena, it is unclear for how long the U.S. government has followed this practice of automatic “birthright citizenship” without regard to the duration or legality of the mother’s presence.
Eminent legal scholars and jurists, including Professor Peter Schuck of Yale Law School and U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner, have questioned whether the 14th Amendment should be read to mandate such a permissive citizenship policy. Nevertheless, the practice has become the de facto law of the land without any input from Congress or the American public.
This is where we see a huge disparity between the not-so-able-minded-congressional officials and the majority of the American population. Work with me here folks…what kind of sense does it make to proclaim U.S. citizenship onto people who are not within the jurisdiction of the United States? Furthermore, for those who don’t want it or anything to do with it?
Advocates of maintaining this citizenship policy argue that the plain language of the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment protects automatic birthright citizenship for all children born to illegal and temporary aliens. However, several legal scholars and political scientists who have delved into the history of the 14th Amendment have concluded that “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” means precisely what it states.
The overwhelming majority of the world’s countries do not offer automatic citizenship to everyone born within their borders. Over the past few decades, many countries that once did so — including Australia, Ireland, India, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Malta, and the Dominican Republic — have repealed those policies. Other countries are considering changes.
It doesn’t take much rocket science or even the engineering sector within the U.S.A. to fully understand that there is no apparent reason to grant citizenship – and that in and of itself – would be construed as dual citizenship (especially for the temporary tourists and visitors).
Having stated that then why else would someone even care to do it? Understanding the 14th Amendment is paramount to any desirable debate behind it. You see, unlike today’s Congressional Members who seem to want to fix procedural idiocies by literally giving part of one or one’s nation to the undeserving law breaking illegal’s. Sure they are “undocumented” immigrants simply because one needs correct identification to attain the documents.
Now if crossing the border from Mexico, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Panama, or any of the Caribbean islands or for that matter any of the other countries on Earth is beyond reasonable doubt an infraction of the rule of law in the USA; just think of the amount of crime that is committed in the document fraud business!
As for me and quite openly admitted – I truly believe that what the Gang of Eight are doing regarding immigration reform is egregious. For the first part, what precisely is being reformed?
As any responsible mature adult in this country knows – very well – that the media, given the opportunity will spin almost anything out of recognition.
Not that we here at The Contemplative Thinker have taken recent scandals and made light of them, oh contraire! However, we also believe that every newsworthy piece of information be properly scrutinized. (Notice keyword “properly.”)
We would like to caution everyone remotely interested in the George Zimmerman trial to be careful. In those types of public interest matters the big mainstream media outfits hire psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, community organizers, and more of the same of those given to mental manipulation.
What it is that we find interesting up to this point is how “impartial” many of the proposed jurors are?
From Fox News “Among those interviewed was a white man in his 20s who left the courtroom without being asked questions by defense attorneys after he gave answers to prosecutors indicating he would not be impartial. The juror, known as R-39 because potential panelists can be identified only by their numbers, said, “Murder is murder,” even if it is self-defense. Zimmerman, 29, is pleading not guilty to second-degree murder, claiming he shot Martin in self-defense.”
We all have to remember what this is and to keep that in a proper perspective. Unfortunately what we are dealing with is a person’s loss of life. Consequently therefore in order to remain objective keep the entire matter in its proper perspective – there just happens to be another human being who is involved and sees it a much different way.
In other matters… Vote for Border Security hits the Senate floor
While the Committee accepted numerous amendments, none changed the core provisions of the bill and many amendments made the bill worse. In the end, the Judiciary Committee approved the bill, as amended, by a vote of 13 to 5. The Senate will likely take up the bill on the floor in early June.
It is early, almost mid-June and the Border Security aspect of the bill was defeated. For the most part, after espousing this ideology for years now, I still do not portend to know or understand what these Senator’s do
for a living.
If I were not a level headed man, I’d start SCREAMING AS LOUD AS POSSIBLE to vote every one of them out. However, there are some newer ones of the lot that appear to be well worth of whatever they do.
Yet I feel relatively certain that the majority of the USA understands what I am referring too. How many Senator’s have died of natural causes in the last two or three years? All things being equal there does exist an
executive branch agency that does have an age rule on when one’s career must change.
The agency is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which still has rules in place for when a pilot is no longer able to fly. Help me here, isn’t that in some violation of at least Age Discrimination laws?
And finally for today…ask yourselves please – if 70 percent of the American public wants Border Security before anything else is going to be done – please help me out again…why would the Senate be so avidly against securing the border?
Therefore we leave now asking everyone who can read, to please read this!
All of the reasons that led to the defeat of the 2007 Bush amnesty remain valid today. When it comes to the economic reasons why it was defeated, those reasons are even more valid today. In 2007, there were 7.4 million Americans unemployed. Today there are 12.3 million Americans unemployed.
It’s important to realize that the 12.3 million number is understating the problem because of the millions that have dropped out of the labor work force. A more realistic estimate of under employed and unemployed Americans stands at about 23 million. It is estimated that 8 million jobs are now occupied by illegal aliens.
What possible justification is there for elected officials, who are supposed to be governing on behalf of their citizens, to support any initiative that would be cause for this trend to continue and grow? How is it in the best interests of the constituencies of the supporters of amnesty to allow 8 million jobs to remain occupied by people who broke our laws, violated our sovereignty and don’t belong here in the first place?
Not only is the employment situation much bleaker this time around, government spending is out control and threatens to bring down the entire economy. How would adding 12 million people to the Obamacare roles improve that situation? It won’t. It will worsen it by billions. State and local budgets are equally strained. Providing social benefits for illegal aliens keeps them that way. We couldn’t afford amnesty in 2007 and we certainly can’t afford it now.
Then there are the brainwashed open borders liberals, and some republicans, who spew the “but illegal aliens do pay taxes”. I’ve already seen this popping up on comment boards and forums. But just like in 2007 when they tried to spread this hollow propaganda, it is false this time around too. Yes they do pay taxes. But what they pay pales in comparison to what they cost.
It’s not just about costs or the economics of illegal immigration. It’s about the rule of law. One set of laws for everyone with no one above the law. The rule of law is a pillar upon which this country was founded.
Amnesty provides a separate set of laws for illegal aliens and puts them above the laws that the rest of us must follow. Amnesty directly erodes this pillar. Especially at a time when the current administration has trashed the rule of law time and time again with bailouts, executive orders, gun running, gun confiscation and on and on. It is clear that the political elite no longer have the consent of the governed and if you don’t know what that ultimately leads to; maybe time for a little research.
So why is amnesty being pushed by our political elite? For the democrats, they want the votes. They will get them too as they very adept at buying votes with taxpayer paid goodies. The vast majority of the illegal alien population is needy. They will vote with their pocket books and put anyone in office that promises them freebies. For republicans, it’s votes too. Somehow they’ve been convinced against logic and history that if they cave to amnesty, they will reap Hispanic votes. History, of course, does not support this.
On a different note…
In a letter to Senators Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas), ICE Union President Chris Crane says the Gang of Eight’s bill, S.744, is flawed because it places “new restrictions on interior enforcement.” Crane writes that the bill would make the current situation worse and more hazardous and urges them to reject S.744 and instead focus on Rep. Trey Gowdy’s (R-S.C.) interior enforcement bill and Rep. John Barrow’s (D-Ga.) border security and interior enforcement legislation introduced in the House.
As for us, the absolute tragedy even discussing this mess of an immigration bill is as follows: What the Hades is the Senate trying to accomplish. Far be it from me, an original Business Management with emphasis in Mass Communication as an undergraduate at university, soon only to change for Organizational Communication.
Let’s look at a “model” for addressing matters of success. Some people use Business plans, others use Marketing plans but to be successful one needs to have a plan.
First, what is the stated objective of the Gang of Eight’s Comprehensive Reform Bill? Once the objective has been publicly stated then as a must the Senator’s in the Gang of Eight must begin to set goals, and more objectives, and then as if on a timeline the narrowing and whittling away to gain on those stated objectives until completion.
We should never do anything halfway insofar as it is just wrong. Just as a reminder for tonight it is important to remember the meaning of objective. Objectives are free of bias, based on facts, observable, exist independently of mind, and at times objectives can also be goals, targets, purpose, intent, and unprejudiced.
Prior to going berserk and launching into a tirade about a few misnomers that are happening especially by the “more seasoned” portion of Congress, that being the Senate there are just a few issues we should address if we ever again have a hope of reclaiming this nation.
Issue #1 – Is the unlegislated supply of arms and machinery of war that is being doled off to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Today we read shockingly for us that,
“Damnable U.S. Senators Send Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood – 20 U.S. Taxpayer F-16 Fighter Jets and 200 Abrams Tanks: While They Crucify Our Christians! Senators Must Be Stopped!”
Lately we’ve been getting our fair share of what we refer to as “Comments of Dissention” where our readers of those nations who are suffering at the hands of radical governments or other mean of religious cleansing. Folks this is just about more than we are able to stand.
Recently whilst poll gathering and reporting we came across a stupefying statistic that we are having serious doubts about now. We read that the only measure of similarities that exist between nations, according to the United Nations, is the notion of religious tolerance, or as reported Religious Rights along with freedom for a person to worship as they wish.
Today we are well-aware of Coptic Christians being persecuted in Egypt; moreover, we now find that other Christians are being decimated in Nigeria, Sudan, as well as regions of the Congo. Now if we tie in the atrocities of violence in Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Yemen again aimed at Christians one would think that the U.S. would be a bit more discretionary on who and where these huge sums of money are being sent as well as whose side the U.S. is taking in Syria.
The following is from an article written by Jennifer Rubin, in the Washington Post:
“Amid the discussion of the feckless White House stance toward Syria and its implications for preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapons capability, we should not lose track of the human rights catastrophe.
In a cruel (maybe clueless?) bit of timing, on May 1 the White House blog recited the following:
On April 23 of last year, President Obama visited the Holocaust Museum, and unveiled a comprehensive strategy to prevent mass atrocities.
In his remarks at the Museum, the President reflected on places where the United States’ efforts had helped prevent or mitigate surges of violence and had saved innocent lives. One year later, the U.S. Government has done… the U.S. Government has done much to keep faith with this commitment. At the President’s direction, we have stood up an interagency Atrocities Prevention Board, which monitors emerging threats, focuses U.S. Government efforts, and develops new tools and capabilities. In January 2013, the President signed expanded war crimes rewards legislation, giving the State Department a new tool to promote accountability for the worst crimes known to humankind. Earlier this month, the United States supported the U.N. General Assembly’s adoption of an Arms Trade Treaty with robust safeguards against export of weapons for use in genocide, crimes against humanity, and other enumerated atrocities.
Oh, but it’s done nothing about 75,000 dead Syrians or Syria’s use of chemical weapons, itself a war crime. The White House’s passivity with regard to Syria is stunning.
Issue #2 – Why are we arming factions of rebels in different nations; furthermore, why are we (the United States) doling out substantial amounts of money, food, and other forms of aid when we should be using these entitlements as leverage.
Issue #3 — What is it with the more seasoned legislator’s referred to as the Senate, doing with the outright plagiarism of a bill (please have a look here or, please read the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.)
Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act in 1986. The act made it illegal to knowingly hire or recruit illegal immigrants, required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status, and granted amnesty to approximately three million illegal immigrants who entered the United States prior to January 1, 1982, and had lived in the country continuously.
Critics argue that the employer sanctions were without teeth and failed to stem illegal immigration. Upon signing the act at a ceremony held beside the newly refurbished Statue of Liberty, Reagan said, “The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society.
Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans.” Reagan also said, “The employer sanctions program is the keystone and major element. It will remove the incentive for illegal immigration by eliminating the job opportunities which draw illegal aliens here.” Nothing is new with the exception of the nation’s Senators being deceptive.
How many of you believe that the Obama Administration has a few problems. Let’s have a real good look at what kind of problems his administration has so far endured – and yet, let us not leave out what continues to be a lingering problem.
All things being equal from the earliest days of his first term as President of the United States (POTUS) his publicly owned residence and offices, the White House, has continually been bombarded with issues and matters that only the POTUS could take attribution.
From the early days of his involvement with the “South Lawn Beer Garden & Bistro” wherein he meddled into someone else’s affairs whilst trying to assert his corruptive culture between a normal police officer and a former university professor the president brought all of that on immaculately by himself.
Only an exhaustive research of history – long after we’re all dead and gone – will the real truth be known as to whether or not this ploy was used to defer attention away from Operation Fast & Furious, which I portend, has never been fully investigated nor have the perpetrators been prosecuted.
Anyway from Benghazi to the IRS to the phone records of journalists and everyday Americans, it’s not difficult to call up a scandal with investigations pending in Washington. We are of the firm belief that most of what is happening in Washington D.C. is a sculpted version of what the real truth is and will remain.
So now, immigration reform makes for a nice distraction.
But Obama was intent on giving the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill a push as the Senate begins to debate it this week.
Obama claimed that “This bill would continue to strengthen security at our borders”—which the bill simply does not do, despite promises from lawmakers and attempts at amending the legislation.
What the bill does do is give federal agencies more power. Heritage’s E.W. Richardson Fellow, James Carafano, has revealed: this bill lavishes billions of additional spending on the Homeland Security department with no clear requirements on how the money is spent.
At least $2 billion could legitimately be labeled the Secretary’s slush fund. You do realize of course that history has a remarkable way of repeating itself; consequently, the last time I heard of a slush fund was during the final days of the Nixon presidency – and that it was that revelation alone that brought on the Articles of Impeachment for Mr. Nixon.
The truth is, the Obama Administration has already stoked plenty of fear in Americans lately.
They fear being targeted by an all-powerful IRS.
They fear that the Administration could be digging into their phone calls.
And perhaps the most important “Trust-us” nothing to fear is the fact that the US is getting ready to support the rebel factions within Syria.
But the President and his allies in the Senate are saying, “Trust us.” They’re asking the American people to trust that their “comprehensive” immigration legislation—which would give sweeping powers to more federal agencies—will work smoothly. That granting amnesty to illegal immigrants before securing the border will have a different effect than it did last time.
What do you think?
On the “Word” Alert…
Now! Is the time that all of us who truly love our nation and care for the natural resources that so many have lost – their lives for it – now that the seediness bickering is about to rev-up to a feverish pitch, yes now is the time when we – our basic units of Americans; albeit, naturalized or legally stood your toil and immigrated to this nation and enjoy your specific rights legally – now is the time for us to make the most noise.
The great multi-tiered organization commonly referred to as a “think tank” The Heritage Foundation’s experts, scholars, and writers have put the word out – we call it the Word Alert for those words we should be hearing a lot about from our Senate in an attempt for them to debate and pass their portion of the package that goes by the name of Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR).
This is not the Gang of Eight but the entire Senate whittling away like worker bee’s in an attempt to resolve something that has been put off by our federal government – especially the Senate and House of Representatives – for far too long. Now with over 11.8 million illegal aliens in our country some people want to be lazy about any new process and grant them de facto amnesty. At the same time there are those who believe that no matter or reason why they ended up in the USA illegally, they do not believe there should be any form of amnesty whatsoever.
The Senate will begin debate on the Gang of Eight’s immigration proposal next week. Here are four words to watch out for as the Senators make their case—and warnings about what they might mean.
COST – “Cost” is one word that should come up in the immigration debate, because the Gang of Eight’s amnesty proposal has a cost that is simply too high for Americans to bear. Heritage analysis found that amnesty would cost taxpayers trillions of dollars.
Amnesty means that illegal immigrants become legal—and become eligible for Obamacare benefits, Social Security, welfare, and Medicare. But they won’t pay enough into the system in taxes to cover the cost of all these benefits, meaning the rest of the taxpayers will have to bear the burden. This simply isn’t fair to hard-working Americans. Why should any person be made a recipient of these programs when they’ve broken out rule of law to be here?
BORDER – Despite claims of security—and talk of amending the bill—the Gang of Eight immigration bill does not secure the border. Instead, it “delivers nothing new—other than the promise of spending a lot more money and running up our debt.” As James Carafano, Heritage’s E. W. Richardson Fellow, explains: “Amnesty immediately creates an incentive for illegal border crossings and overstays. Thus, the bill’s strategy would drive up the cost of securing the border.” We in particular have a real problem with this aspect of the Gang of Eight’s irresponsible etching of a let’s do now and later when we fill like it…
If memory serves correctly during the defeat of the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill (CIR) the actual promise was made by Congress to make an impenetrable US Border from the Pacific Ocean to across Texas. Now they couldn’t be bothered with it not being done; moreover, this is after Gallup’s Poll, Rasmussen’s Poll, Pew Research Centers Poll, and the Fox News Poll which all espouse between 69 to 80 percent of Americans want the border secured and finished before any amnesty or CIR bill.
AMNESTY – Heritage President Jim DeMint has said that it’s a false choice for people to say that amnesty is necessary to immigration reform. Amnesty encourages more illegal immigration, and that is not what immigration reform is supposed to do.
Furthermore, Former Attorney General Ed Meese, Heritage’s Ronald Reagan Distinguished Fellow Emeritus, reminds us that America has tried this before, and it didn’t work:
“Today they call it a “roadmap to citizenship.” Ronald Reagan called it “amnesty.” And he was right. The 1986 reform did not solve our immigration problem—in fact, the population of illegal immigrants has nearly quadrupled since that “comprehensive” bill.”
Mr. Meese should know insofar as he was part and parcel of that 1986 CIR bill that has proved to be a failure.
“COMPREHENSIVE” – Beware the word “comprehensive.” As Meese notes above, the amnesty of 1986 was also called a “comprehensive” approach to immigration reform. It doesn’t work, and it’s not what we need. We need a separate, step-by-step approach to immigration reform. An approach that works—that the American people can trust—would start with reforming the legal immigration system and enforcing the security measures that are supposed to be in place.
The Results of BIG government Please be advised that this writing is a catharsis of sorts.
There are a lot, enormous amounts of “We the People(s)” that are talking today, yesterday, and we’re sure tomorrow about the notion of keeping track of a large family. Then again there will be those given over to coaching that will be espousing I need assistant coaches to keep this mob of young athletes in order. Just about anything bigger than a normal sized youth football, baseball, or soccer team these days will need to be molded by way of militaristic means.
Let’s apply these principles to government. Unless one is trying to make a huge family, that literally can support millions if not hundreds of millions of people at any time why is the need for big government?
This is where we at The Contemplative Thinker, believe that the early colonists may have had the opportunity to view life and the realities thereof in a far different way than we do. And nowhere is that more pronounced than in the U.S. Constitution.
Specifically the entire Constitution; albeit, more so in the Bill of Rights insofar as it is there that the provisions for humanity’s assurances of protection and the deliverance of their own rights are reflected.
We need to express this issue more than everything else does on earth. How many of us can with all honesty can say that we trust our very own government? We’ve got the Department of Justice and their law apportioned outfits – F.B.I., DEA, AFT, running willy nilly around not only our own country, but put us in flux of international embarrassment when operatives on the inside are discussing with who will listen to them what straw-man operation the G-Men have running in Mexico commonly referred to as Fast & Furious.
And since when does the POTUS have the authority or where-with-all to commit troops and/or America’s Air Forces at will to where he thinks it will do him light in an election? Try the “No Flight Zone” over Libya with subsequent bombings of military targets. No, no, no now – war activities are always conducted by Congress as mandated by the U.S. Constitution.
You may want to call this person – Barack Obama – your Commander-in-Chief, but I refuse too. No CIC would allow Americans to die in Benghazi, Libya. Ask yourselves who got the most steamed at the “no-go” orders. You betcha, it was the combat troops who were on the ground ready to go help and save their buddies.
Someone please tell me here…who is it that is authorizing millions of illegal aliens into our nation through his plan of backdoor amnesty? I mean grow a set, please! Will it cost the BIG FAT GOVERNMENT MORE to ship every one of the illegals back to the place of origin? We don’t think so…all things being equal, if anyone were to look to the costs of entitlement programs, social security, and on down the line, it would cost considerably less just to send them back.
Take it easy gang…we understand that America is “the land of immigrants.” So what? We also maintained being the most mightiest nation militarily until we found ourselves in the position of having men fight in consecutive tours, or four or five six or seven of them. All the while what were those illegal “land of immigrants” doing other than having babies, working at some job the vet had planned to come back too, maybe knocking off the local 7-11 store, or even killing a family member without a valid driver’s license whilst being inebriated? All of this and more compliments of “…our inactive federal government to do its job”… Barack Obama.
So now…thanks to Malkin’s book “Culture of Corruption” which is dedicated to the whistleblowers of our nation by the way; we now have a President who is blaming Congress for activities that any normal and ethical person would have done. Short one here gang, who gave the orders to have the world’s largest news organization, the Associated Press, International (AP) an executive (?) order, court order or whatever order to allow the pursing of journalists secret email, and phone numbers to file charges that their doing something egregiously wrong that would fit into a terrorist label?
Now this expressive cliché has been around as long as anyone’s language in whatever country. “Duh, you got to hit em’ where it does the most damage…take a person’s money and they’ll do anything for ya’.” This of course brings us to the next segment of Government gone badly. The world’s largest negotiator of cash to nation’s around the world and to everyone who lives in this country – the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targets whomever they want too…just don’t tell anyone you’ll vote for another candidate other than Barack Obama.
Nothing and we mean NOTHING would ever be able to start the President from not knowing this was going on. There were so many filed complaints in Congress alone for someone not to have spoken about this issue – moreover, how do we account for the ridiculous amounts of visits to the White House by the IRS Commissioner?
Here is the pathetic summation: Does any of you remember the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) or the immediate follow-up called The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) (Pub.L. 111–5), commonly referred to as the Stimulus or The Recovery Act, was an economic stimulus package enacted by the 111th United States Congress in February 2009 and signed into law on February 17, 2009, by President Barack Obama.
To respond to the late-2000s recession, the primary objective for ARRA was to save and create jobs almost immediately. Secondary objectives were to provide temporary relief programs for those most impacted by the recession and invest in infrastructure, education, health, and renewable energy. The approximate cost of the economic stimulus package was estimated to be $787 billion at the time of passage, later revised to $831 billion between 2009 and 2019. The Act included direct spending in infrastructure, education, health, and energy, federal tax incentives, and expansion of unemployment benefits and other social welfare provisions.
Now least I forget the most monumentous being to take place on American soil. You’ve got it – Obamacare! All during the time that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 or the “Stimulus” was going on to create immediate jobs and relief programs to those most impacted, whilst at the same time “…we have shovel ready jobs now…our infrastructure and especially energy needs to be worked on”…Barack Obama.
Then what happened…Solyndra happened. Some $534 million dollars of taxpayer funds went swirling down the john. Our problem was to find out if this program had even been around long enough to receive and lose that kind of money – about a year.
Now after wittingly and knowingly in the middle of this scam – why wouldn’t the President, his DOE appointee, and V.P. Joe Biden think that the IRS would not target those groups that may or may not vote against him in 2012. So sorry folks for my own peace of mind I need to bring this notion forth. We were the ones who wrote about Barack and Michelle’s personal trainer flying out from Chicago, Ill two maybe three times per week for those intimate work out sessions; we furthermore lauded on paper the costs of flying to and from Hawaii and back during his holiday time.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong or incorrect – why does Barack Obama list his place of residence as Hawaii? He has no relatives alive there; no property owned there, and who knows if he has many friends there?
We also brought to you the overly-lavish spending that went on during Michelle Obama and the “girls” trip to Spain or Brazil. Altogether this family has cost the country far more than what he or anyone of his elite cronies combined has taken out. Suffice it to say, I love Tiger Woods, but Barack the weekend excursions to Florida to visit and playing golf with Mr. Woods must stop. Do you realize that it cost Air Force One $180,000 dollars per hour of operation?
How long is it going to take America – before you rip off the blind folds, tear out those ear plugs, and meet the man who is running this nation into oblivion? Reckless spending, ridiculous programs, reek all too much of words I don’t care to use at this time. But I will say that this person as well as his trusted mate, Eric Holder, and Napolitano must go if we are to recover. Just one last issue before we go….why when the world powers are upgrading all of their ordnance does Barack Obama still have the military budget as his lowest priority?
Happy Founding Father’s Quotes Friday! As we have seen over the course of these many months is that perhaps the most original meanings and original intent of the—National—federal government was during the process of reforming what the Founder’s had done earlier especially with regards to the States, special interest groups, the majority, and the relentless pursuit of one government –National –overseeing the acts of the several states.
What concerned Madison the most was the moral fiber or lack thereof with those elected to the national government.
“From what cause could so fatal an omission have happened,” Madison asked.
Beyond everything else Madison’s chief concerns were the state’s inabilities to comply with the requisitions of Congress, encroaching on its authority, violating treaty obligations, and refusing to grant the Union powers to pursue objects of “common interests.”
The central conviction at the heart of Madison’s analysis which he was about to debate at the First Continental Congress; namely, that experience had proved that “…neither state legislators, nor their constituents could be relied upon to support the general interest of the Union, the true public good, or their own communities, or the rights of minorities and individuals.
In other words Madison was leery of the potential “unjust legislation” which in his experience had permeated the “Representative bodies” and “the people themselves.”
He concluded therefore that although their intentions were good and superficially honorable, the reasons that people sought legislative office were for three basic reasons: “Ambition,” “personal interests” and the regard for public good.”
Experience proved the first two predominated, with woeful results. Artful legislators “with interested views” could always find ways to sacrifice “the interests, and views of their Constituents” for their own purposes, only to have their base and selfish measures, masked by pretexts of public good and with apparent expediency.”
Even “honest” representatives would often fall prey to “a favorite lender, veiling his selfish schemes under the professions of the public good.”
When preparing this article I couldn’t help but see the striking similarities between the disbelief of Madison and what still occurs in politics today, especially in the realm of “Porkulus” unmitigated spending, and tax on carbon emissions? In the final analysis, politicians have only gotten worse, right Nan, Harry, Barack, Napolitano and the lot of you.
The Obama administration is secretly carrying out a domestic surveillance program under which it is collecting business communications records involving Americans under a hotly debated section of the Patriot Act, according to a highly classified court order disclosed on Wednesday night.
The order, signed by Judge Roger Vinson of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in April, directs a Verizon Communications subsidiary, Verizon Business Network Services, to turn over “on an ongoing daily basis” to the National Security Agency all call logs “between the United States and abroad” or “wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”
The order does not apply to the content of the communications. Oh please…then why are they being collected?
The four-page order was disclosed Wednesday evening by the newspaper The Guardian. Obama administration officials at the F.B.I. and the White House also declined to comment on it Wednesday evening, but did not deny the report, and a person familiar with the order confirmed its authenticity. “We will respond as soon as we can,” said Marci Green Miller, a National Security Agency spokeswoman, in an e-mail.
Inasmuch as we would like to say the most obvious – we will not. Albeit, on the other side of the street we would be negligent if we did not mention that this type of activity – causes scandals!
As previously mentioned this four-page court order was dug-up by British journalists; furthermore, this is where the White House, the FBI, Obama administration officials, declined to report or to engage in saying anything. Therefore, what has been so true in the past with this particular president, he finds a woman spokesperson (Mother complex?) at the National Security Agency (NSA) to come forward letting us through the mainstream media know that they’ll respond as soon as they can.
We have stated this in as many writings, which it is the notion of avoidance or no information at all that beget scandals.
For several years, two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon and Senator Mark Udall of Colorado, have been cryptically warning that the government was interpreting its surveillance powers under that section of the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming to the public if it knew about it.
In other words from Senators Wyden and Udall have been informing the appropriate governmental officials that they are “outside” the parameters of the Patriot Act with the levels of surveillance as well as the means by which that information was being used.
The provision was expanded by Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which Congress enacted after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The disclosure late Wednesday seemed likely to inspire further controversy over the scope of government surveillance. Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies, a civil liberties advocacy group, said that “absent some explanation I haven’t thought of, this looks like the largest assault on privacy since the N.S.A. wiretapped Americans in clear violation of the law” under the Bush administration. “On what possible basis has the government refused to tell us that it believes that the law authorizes this kind of request?” she said.
With all due respect to Ms. Martin, who in typical liberal fashion has apparently tried to defer any debate or malfeasance toward the Bush administration? However, why is she making the attempt to change the subject when there has been a new president at the helm, now into his second term? This is how scandals break out!
Soon enough – please be aware – that all of this Patriot Act rubbish will try and be dropped into the Bush Administration when in all reality those provisions ran out years ago. They have only been resurrected by President Barack Obama during the National Defense Authorization Act.
“We believe most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted Section 215 of the Patriot Act,” they wrote last year in a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.
They added: “As we see it, there is now a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows. This is a problem, because it is impossible to have an informed public debate about what the law should say when the public doesn’t know what its government thinks the law says.”
President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.
(Please click here for information on Section 15 — it’s must reading!)