Monday, October 20, 2014

The Reason Not To Vote For Udall and Lujan

From Newsmax
With some lawmakers predicting a sweeping executive order on immigration from President Barack Obama after the Nov. 4 elections, one federal agency is already making plans to hire a vendor to crank out up to 34 million blank green cards to accommodate an expected surge in immigrants in 2016.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has published a draft solicitation for a contractor capable of producing 4 million cards a year for five years — and 9 million in the early stages — that would allow immigrants to live and work in the country, Breitbart reports.

One estimate suggests 34 million cards will be printed in total.

An official from the government agency told MailOnline on Monday a plan was developed "in case the president makes the move we think he will," even though the agency's Document Management Division isn't yet committing to buying the materials.

Another official cautioned the plan was only a "contingency" in case immigration reform legislation passes in Congress, stressing to MailOnline it wasn't in anticipation of an Obama executive order.

The president was rebuffed by Congress to enact immigration reform — which Republicans have decried as an "amnesty" for millions of illegal immigrants, including hundreds of thousands of unaccompanied minors who poured into the United States through the southern border with Mexico this summer – and has vowed to go it alone.

The executive action's timetable has since shifted to after the crucial midterm elections.
The latest draft solicitation "seems to indicate that the president is contemplating an enormous executive action that is even more expansive than the plan that Congress rejected in the 'Gang of Eight' bill," Jessica Vaughn, an immigration expert at the Center for Immigration Studies, told Breitbart.

The green cards – officially known as Permanent Residency Cards – and Employment Authorization Documentation cards are used for participants in Obama's controversial Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Known as "DREAMers," the program's participants came to the United States illegally as children.

A total of 862,000 people have been approved for such documentation by USCIS through June.

But according to the draft solicitation, "the guaranteed minimum for each ordering period is 4,000,000 cards. ... The estimated maximum for the entire contract is 34,000,000 cards."

On CNN's "Inside Politics" Monday, moderator John King said the unilateral executive action promised by Obama for after the midterm elections will kick off confrontation, not compromise, from Republicans driven by anger and frustration in their conservative grass-roots voter base.

"Well, if you believed perhaps there would be room and motivation for a deal after the 2014 midterms — think again," King said.

"I was so struck by conversations in Colorado, in Kansas and Iowa — just pure frustration; a belief among conservative Republicans that this problem is getting worse.

"What does that tell you? It tells you there is no prospect for any compromise legislation during the final two years of the Obama presidency," King said.

"If the president uses his executive power as promised, Republicans will be pushing the grass-roots for confrontation, not compromise. An issue we thought after 2014 Republicans would try to deal with, will be with us until 2016 and beyond."

There is little doubt that Obama is determined to take action.

"There appears to be little political space for House Speaker John Boehner and Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell, who could well be majority leader in January, to negotiate any deal that would be acceptable to Obama," CNN reports.

"When the president takes executive actions, as he promises to do after the election unless there is some legislative breakthrough, it is clear the conservative grass-roots will demand confrontation, leaving the issue front and center as we head into the 2016 presidential cycle."

Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Fundraising For Evil

From the Patriot Post
Columnist Thomas Sowell: "Obama understands how high the stakes are, which is why he is out fundraising all across the country -- seemingly all the time -- even though he has no more elections to face himself. Obama came to power saying that he was going to fundamentally change the United States of America -- and he intends to do it, even after he is gone, by giving lifetime appointments as federal judges to people who share his view that this country’s institutions and values are fundamentally wrong, and need to be scrapped and replaced by his far left vision. If only Obama’s critics and opponents understood this momentous issue as clearly as he does!"

Friday, October 10, 2014

Who Would Think They Wouldn't Always Be Truthful?

From the Patriot Post
Columnist Jonah Goldberg: "[T]he White House has been caught covering up a scandal involving a Cartagena hooker. ... Why did the White House go to such lengths to conceal the event? [White House official Jonathan] Dach broke no laws in Cartagena, the alleged tryst took place in a so-called 'tolerance zone' where prostitution is legal. Surely the White House isn’t against tolerance. ... The underlying scandal is fairly minor. But if the White House would falsify records and lie to the public about this, is it really so hard to imagine that it would deceive the public -- and Congress -- about larger issues like, say, Benghazi? ... The president loves to denounce a cynical system where politics comes before the public good. He rails about a system where fat cats live by a different set of rules than the little guy, and money buys special treatment and access. But the way he operates runs completely counter to all that. Which is why the only person to come out of this scandal in an honorable light is the Cartagena hooker."

Thursday, October 2, 2014

October Meeting

Just a reminder that the October 912/TEA Party Patriots meeting will be held in the Totah Theater at 7 PM on October 7. Elections are coming. Get involved. The monthly program will feature local candidates for Q and A.

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Obama and Islam

By Bert Prelutsky from the Patriot Post

As you may have heard, when Obama finally got around to announcing that he thought the Islamic State was almost as dangerous as John Kerry, Joe Biden, Chuck Hagel and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, had been insisting it was for several weeks, the first thing he did was tell us that the enemy was neither Islamic nor a state.

One could argue whether the area the terrorist group controls, an area the size of Belgium, is really a state. But, then, one could argue whether Belgium, a place the rest of us have only heard of because it was the birthplace of Agatha Christie’s fictional detective, Hercule Poirot, is a state.

What is not open to debate is whether an outfit that calls itself the Islamic State is or isn’t Islamic. The argument Obama made was that “ISIS is not Islamic because no religion condones killing innocents.” The problem is that Islam doesn’t consider Christians or Jews as innocents; it regards them as infidels whose very existence is an affront to Allah, and killing them is therefore nothing less than a religious obligation.

Making matters worse, Obama seriously went on to describe Yemen and Somalia as proof that his foreign policy has been a rousing success. That would be like Ben Affleck bragging about “Gigli” or the French pointing to the Maginot Line as proof of their military prowess.

The question that occurs to me, as it has ever since 9/11, when George W. Bush decided his mission in life was to take the heat off Muslims by constantly insisting that “Islam is a religion of peace,” is why our leaders feel compelled to lie about our enemies.

Even when Major Hasan murdered and maimed more than 30 people at Fort Hood, the current administration insisted that in spite of his being a self-proclaimed jihadist who screamed “Allah Akbar” as he slaughtered his victims, it was just another unfortunate example of workplace violence and had nothing to do with Islamic terrorism.

What is it about Islam, which can best be described as a wolf in wolf’s clothing, that has our commanders-in-chief mincing words and pussyfooting around the truth? Just for the record, Voodoo is practiced by about 60 million people worldwide. If it was practiced by a billion, would our presidents feel obliged to speak respectfully of a belief system that involves the sacrificing of goats, sheep and dogs, and the drinking of animal blood?

When you get right down to it, Voodoo has far more to recommend it than Islam. For one thing, they go in for a lot of dancing. For another, although I definitely disapprove of slitting the throats of dogs, it beats slitting the throats of women, children and American journalists, and personally, I’ll take a good old-fashioned zombie over a jihadist any day of the week. For one thing, unlike the Islamic propagandists in CAIR, they don’t get dressed up in Armani suits and go on TV, trying to fool people into thinking they’re civilized human beings. For another thing, zombies always shuffle, making it easy to out-run them.

If there’s one thing to be grateful for when it comes to the Islamic State, it’s that it’s run by dummies. I mean, they had a safe haven in Syria and they were marching through Iraq the way that Sherman zipped through Georgia, and not only was nobody in Europe or the Middle East raising a finger to stop them, but Obama was dismissing them as the junior varsity. It was nothing but clear sailing until the arrogant bastards decided to start videotaping their beheadings. Obviously, their intention was to terrify the world into a paralytic state, but, as they should have known, that is always the state of the world when it comes to confronting evil.

However, rather than leave bad enough alone, they did something so barbaric, so in keeping with the demented cult dreamed up by Muhammad 14 centuries ago, that once people quit vomiting, even Obama, who speaks softly and carries a limp wrist, figured he better do something.

But as usual, Obama, to whom a declaration of war in the Middle East would be absolute proof that his foreign policies have all been a pile of mush, had no real idea what to do. After all, it doesn’t look good when, on August 8th, you’re telling everyone that arming the Free Syrian Army is a nutty notion because they’re all just a bunch of “doctors, farmers and pharmacists,” and, on September 10th, your big plan calls on them to do our fighting in Syria.

So far as I’m concerned, it is always a rotten idea to trust Muslims to fight on your side. We saw how well that worked in Afghanistan, where Afghan soldiers killed nearly as many American soldiers as the Taliban did; and again in Libya, where we trusted our so-called allies to provide security for our consulate in Benghazi.

Still, when one hears Obama pooh-pooh citizen soldiers, one has to wonder if he and his speechwriters are totally unaware of American history or if he’s merely expressing his contempt for the rag tag group of doctors, farmers and pharmacists, who somehow managed to send the Redcoats back to England with their tails between their legs?

Friday, September 26, 2014

Let's Hear the Immigration Plan Now

From the Patriot Post

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA) challenged Barack Obama to release his immigration plan before the election. "If it was a good plan that he was thinking of doing, why would he wait until right after the election?" Scalise asked. "It really raises a lot of red flags and it makes you wonder just how bad is the president's approach going to be on immigration, if he wants to shield it, hide it from the voters until after the election." It's critical that there be a plan, Scalise added, because of the current terrorist threat. "It's not only about immigration, this is a national-security issue," he said. "You don't want to have a porous border where anybody can just come across and nobody knows who is coming in." Worse, there are Americans fighting within the ranks of ISIL who won't need to cross the Rio Grande to get here.

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

If You Are Not Concerned You Should Be

Hopefully you know who Dinesh D’Souza is. I am a supporter. His case fits in with the whistle blowers in the VA and State Department and the actions of the Justice Department in this Administration. All of this supports the case that we need a conservative administration in power at all time so that the Press will do their expected jobs and expose all government abuse. When the liberal press is in love with and in bed with a liberal Administration, we the people are in trouble and should expect it to continue.

Following are excerpts from a NewsMax article.

U.S. District Judge Richard Berman in Manhattan sentenced D'Souza, 53, to eight months in a community confinement center during five years of probation after the latter pleaded guilty to violating campaign-finance laws. In May, D'Souza pleaded guilty to illegally reimbursing two "straw donors" who donated $10,000 each to the unsuccessful 2012 U.S. Senate campaign in New York of Wendy Long, a first-time Republican candidate whom he had known since attending Dartmouth College in the early 1980s.

The January indictment was widely attacked by conservatives and liberals alike as a form of retribution for D'Souza's 2012 film. D'Souza's movie, "2016: Obama's America," remains a top-grossing documentary, with a take of more than $33.4 million. He released "America: Imagine the World Without Her," in July, which has so far grossed over $14.4 million.
"He never should have been prosecuted for this at all, just probation would have been the appropriate sentence in this case, no confinement anywhere" Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax. "He's not dangerous. He's not a bad person," Dershowitz said. "He's very controversial. I disagree with most of his political views, but I don't think we should be using the criminal law to imprison people or confine people who have made an honest mistake, which is what he did — and he fessed up to it.
"It's not going to do anybody any good, I guess that's my first thought," David Mason, a former commissioner of the Federal Election Commission,  "My second thought is that the judge certainly exercised good sense in rejecting the prosecution's call to put him in jail for a one-time thing like this — which was bad judgment, but frankly didn't hurt anybody. I don't know why or how his case even came to the prosecutor's attention, because in the world of campaign finance this is very small, and it's completely insignificant. So how, why this particular case came up and the prosecutor decided to pursue it, I don't know. We have campaign-finance limits, and people can disagree with them or not, but if we have rules, people have to follow them and you have punishment to deter people from violating them. In this case, because of the amount involved and because of the type of race it was and other circumstances, a civil penalty — which would've been a fine that he would've paid to the FEC — would've been more than enough," Mason said. "Prosecuting this as a criminal case was overkill." He has told Newsmax that cases involving small amounts of campaign-financing issues are usually resolved at a low level.